Off topic but while we're on the subject of knocking the RAF I can't resist pointing in the direction of this article in last week's Sunday Times for an example of just how 'in touch' some members of the junior service really are: Are they trying to make themselves look bad or what? Is this some kind of reverse psychology recruiting method that I haven’t heard of?As I read this the mental image I was forming of fthe author was this. Be sure to watch the video.
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
So good I have to share
A witty student added this aside to an ongoing discussion on air power in our 'Strategic Dimensions... 'course. I think all will get a kick out of it:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Interesting article this. This RAF officer does comes across as rather self-absorbed, but then is that not in the nature of such articles? Iraq as "fat camp" - maybe there IS a under-exploited angle here re: recruitment. Overall, tho' I thought this was refreshing for it's honesty. Do pilots not indeed think they are top of the heap (and are they not so in the RAF)? Hence the jibe at pencil pushers. And even tho' this woman landed in the RAF almost by accident, she is doing the job in Iraq.
Being a veteran of great many night flights in and out of Basrah and other operational airfields, and with many more to come, what might be going on inside the head of the pilot was something that I just didnt want to know.
As a related issue, it is interesting to note that the RAF have just 'lost' a C130 in Basrah. Apparently the first of the new J variants to be lost worldwide. Here's some links (for opinions, see the last one from the Army's website, ARRSE):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6356789.stm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_C-130_Hercules_crashes
http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/t=58318/start=0.html
Hmm, that address to ARRSE doesnt seem to work. Try going to www.arrse.co.uk and follow the clickies to 'FORUMS' and 'CURRENT AFFAIRS, NEWS AND ANALYSIS'. The thread is called 'Scratch One C-130'.
I've got to agree with Theo here. I didn't really know what to think of this article, whether it was supposed to be positive or negative. The main idea that I got from it was that she is there doing her "job," in the occupational sense. I don't feel as if she is embraces a "duty concept." And maybe that's ok because she seems to be accomplishing her mission just fine.
At the same time, however, military officers are supposed to be professionals and have a sort of intrinsic motivation to want to serve their country and do their duty.
But another point I'd like to mention is if the nature of war and its political purpose impacts how an officer views their role -- like they're doing their duty or just another day on the job. Wonder if her attitude may have been a bit more patriotic back in 2003.
Overall, I think this article is truthful in that not every soldier wants to be a hero or win medals. Many just want to do what they've been trained to do (whether their duties involve a plane or a pencil) so they can get home again. It's not trying to glamorize war or the people who fight them.
Maybe I'm being unfair? I also had the sense that she was doing her job. The strongest part of it is when she says '... when I’m flying, no emotion interferes: I remain cool, detached and professional. It’s on the ground I run round like a hot potato.' But, frankly what sticks in the mind here is how detached and self-absorbed the author is.
Possibly the intention of the student who posted to this article on the course was to highlight something of an ‘in joke’ rather than anything that would be obvious to all. Indeed, a number of the assertions made in the article caught my eye when I reviewed it this evening. Here’s a selection of extracts with my own comments:
‘If we got shot down and captured we’d immediately be identified as RAF crew and tortured, as we’d have the most information.’
I seriously doubt that this would be the case. I don’t know what they do with RAF air crew instead of officer training but this is not Bomber Command any more.
‘The first time I made a night approach into Basra, rockets were exploding on the runway.’
This is deceptive as it gives the impression that she was under fire. In fact, as hinted at later, aircraft never land when an airbase is under fire, they all carry enough fuel to divert and would be instructed to go away and come back when it is safe to do so.
‘You hear a “whooo” before a rocket lands, then the ground shakes and the tent sucks in and you’re frozen as you feel the vacuum after the blast.’
This is complete and utter Bravo Sierra. You don’t hear a ‘whoo’, the ground does not shake, the tent does not ‘suck in’ and, most importantly of all in this message, C130 pilots are based at RAF Lyneham in Wiltshire and not Basrah on the Shatt al Arab. Indeed, why do we think it is that the RAF C130J that landed heavily at Basrah last week had to be destroyed in-situ rather than attempt a repair and recovery from such an austere and C130 unfriendly location.
Nick old chap - don't you know, you're supposed to roll w/ the story. Geez...you shld never be let loose in an Irish pub. You'd put the locals off their pints you wd.
Theo
Yeah, yeah, I know. What intellect I have is frustrated by lack of exercise. Lengthy weblog posts are my only means of escape. Be careful; though frustrated, my personality is a fragile one, its host has access to light weaponry and together we especially don't like Mondays.
Nick
I know this topic is old but I cannot resist pointing towards this article in Sat's Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/03/03/npilot03.xml
'Female Officer in "sickening" newaper diary prompts deluge of angry criticism'
Post a Comment