Edinburgh Tattoo flypasts to be banned??
The following users liked this post:
It has occurred to me in the past and recently, what will the new Labour government's position be on the likes of RIAT? and other airshows? Should the same mindset which now complains about mental health being at risk from a sedate flypast over Auld Reekie, start looking around for something of tradition and which "promotes the arms industry" and presents far more robust flying for public consumption, to ban? We are currently living through an era in which nuerotic mawkishness has seized the souls of many people, this is the very thing which the liberal left love to weave their concerns around. Somebody in Edinburgh some years back joined the protest against the flypast for the Tattoo by complaining that she thought WW3 was underway. This sort of nonsense is entirely confected of course, I believe the modern description is gaslighting!
FB
FB
The following users liked this post:
Further to DR's post here's more about the history about ball being dropped from theNelson Monument at 1300Z daily, a practice which preceded the One O'Clock Gun.
Jack
Jack
Further to DR's post here's more about the history about ball being dropped from theNelson Monument at 1300Z daily, a practice which preceded the One O'Clock Gun.
Jack
Jack
ninja, many thanks for the link, they thought of absolutely everything back in 1861. Raised the question as I was thinking of the navigator setting the ships chronometer, would not see the ball drop on a misty day.
Further to DR's post here's more about the history about ball being dropped from the Nelson Monument at 1300Z daily, a practice which preceded the One O'Clock Gun
So as an OOW on a foggy day in, say, Victoria Dock, I would simply hack 11 seconds before I heard the gun. Another skill we have lost in the digital age.
Lived South of Edinburgh many years ago right in the heart of the Low Flying Zone. Very close to a very obvious IP for the Otterburn ranges.
The locals used to rage at the low flying wheras in my case, I loved it. Especially during Mallet Blow Exercises.
One of the lousiest reasons why they wanted it banned, was due to the fear that a low flyer could crash into the then recently constructed Torness Nuke.
Some time later, a plan was submitted to construct a windfarm on the high ground just South of Edinburgh.
The complaint then was that it might endanger the low flying aircraft and restrict their training !!
Same old Same old !!
The locals used to rage at the low flying wheras in my case, I loved it. Especially during Mallet Blow Exercises.
One of the lousiest reasons why they wanted it banned, was due to the fear that a low flyer could crash into the then recently constructed Torness Nuke.
Some time later, a plan was submitted to construct a windfarm on the high ground just South of Edinburgh.
The complaint then was that it might endanger the low flying aircraft and restrict their training !!
Same old Same old !!
Lived South of Edinburgh many years ago right in the heart of the Low Flying Zone. Very close to a very obvious IP for the Otterburn ranges.
The locals used to rage at the low flying wheras in my case, I loved it. Especially during Mallet Blow Exercises.
One of the lousiest reasons why they wanted it banned, was due to the fear that a low flyer could crash into the then recently constructed Torness Nuke.
The locals used to rage at the low flying wheras in my case, I loved it. Especially during Mallet Blow Exercises.
One of the lousiest reasons why they wanted it banned, was due to the fear that a low flyer could crash into the then recently constructed Torness Nuke.
Was tha criteria definitely met .
Seen the size of the hole an F111 made 16 or so miles away near Lauder !
Bigger Airframe obvs !
Specially reinforced concrete versus a soft aluminium tube designed to withstand internal, not external pressure? The engines would be the things to worry about if anything.
Exactly.
Alternatively; when I hear the bang I start a stopwatch. At 49 seconds I hack my chronometer on 13.01.
As a further alternative, since no ships are within under one second anyway, why don't they fire the gun at 12.59, and issue a map with concentric circles indicating the interval after the gun by which to delay one's hack.
Alternatively; when I hear the bang I start a stopwatch. At 49 seconds I hack my chronometer on 13.01.
As a further alternative, since no ships are within under one second anyway, why don't they fire the gun at 12.59, and issue a map with concentric circles indicating the interval after the gun by which to delay one's hack.
The following users liked this post:
F-4 impact was more onerous in terms of point of impact energy IIRC, on the reactor building, but 747 had a greater effect on surrounding station infrastructure because of fire damage from fuel load.....but its 40+ years ago, so my memory isn't quite what it was in terms of the exact details.....as I was only a trainee at the time, but I do remember the discussions about it.
Ironically, one of the original structural designer Engineer's at the time, his son had just joined the RAF Regiment, and a few years later sailed south with the Task Force with the Rapier units.
Ironically, one of the original structural designer Engineer's at the time, his son had just joined the RAF Regiment, and a few years later sailed south with the Task Force with the Rapier units.
Exactly.
Alternatively; when I hear the bang I start a stopwatch. At 49 seconds I hack my chronometer on 13.01.
As a further alternative, since no ships are within under one second anyway, why don't they fire the gun at 12.59, and issue a map with concentric circles indicating the interval after the gun by which to delay one's hack.
Alternatively; when I hear the bang I start a stopwatch. At 49 seconds I hack my chronometer on 13.01.
As a further alternative, since no ships are within under one second anyway, why don't they fire the gun at 12.59, and issue a map with concentric circles indicating the interval after the gun by which to delay one's hack.