Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

M355 - Motion on Britons stranded in Egypt watch

Announcements
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    And the taxpayer should pick up the bill, why?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    They won't pick up the bill if the airlines pay for the costs, will they?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Wellzi)
    They won't pick up the bill if the airlines pay for the costs, will they?
    If the airlines are picking up the cost why not use the airline's aircraft?
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    If the airlines are picking up the cost why not use the airline's aircraft?
    That's what is happening now. All our people will be back by Monday. They are doing this so they can say UKIP did something (or could be seen trying to do something) ready for the next election. They don't care about the feasibility it's all the appearances in this motion.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    That's what is happening now. All our people will be back by Monday. They are doing this so they can say UKIP did something (or could be seen trying to do something) ready for the next election. They don't care about the feasibility it's all the appearances in this motion.
    That sounds familiar, Aph
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I think everyone planning to vote no to this needs to evaluate the danger Britons find themselves in, a British jet belonging to Thomson has had to dodge a missile on its way to the city. Investigators are now 99.9% certain a bomb brought down the plane which raises very valid questions about the state of Egyptian security. The UK has already raised concerns about security at the airport 10 months ago, the armed security officers form Britain sent to Egypt to guard British planes when on the ground reveal concerns about airport security in Egypt are high. Sending military jets with systems to guard against missiles, and UK security personnel to conduct proceedings is a safe way to bring home stranded Britons at no cost to the taxpayer. Britons face a delay of ten days because Egypt is allowing eight British planes a days compared to Russia's 49 planes a day; there are not many more Russians in the city than Britons.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    I think everyone planning to vote no to this needs to evaluate the danger Britons find themselves in, a British jet belonging to Thomson has had to dodge a missile on its way to the city. Investigators are now 99.9% certain a bomb brought down the plane which raises very valid questions about the state of Egyptian security. The UK has already raised concerns about security at the airport 10 months ago, the armed security officers form Britain sent to Egypt to guard British planes when on the ground reveal concerns about airport security in Egypt are high. Sending military jets with systems to guard against missiles, and UK security personnel to conduct proceedings is a safe way to bring home stranded Britons at no cost to the taxpayer. Britons face a delay of ten days because Egypt is allowing eight British planes a days compared to Russia's 46 planes; there are more Britons stranded in the city than Russians. When some children stranded have already missed a week of school before or after half term, an extra ten days will put them behind further.
    dodged months ago, somewhat that miraculously military aircraft are immune to? Last time I checked flares and the likes don't work against a lot of missiles.
    99.9% certain, also known as 90% if not reading the fail
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    dodged months ago, somewhat that miraculously military aircraft are immune to? Last time I checked flares and the likes don't work against a lot of missiles.
    99.9% certain, also known as 90% if not reading the fail
    After reading more news agencies U.S. officials are 99.9% certain a bomb brought down the aircraft, and Egyptian officials are 90% it was a bomb. This reaffirms the evidence MI6 intercepted about bomb plots on aircraft leaving the city; Russia, Britain, and other European countries suspending flights to the area, and all flights to the area taking a large detour to avoid the area. Military aircraft are manoeuvrable than commercial aircraft but the benefit of military aircraft is not the flare but the detection equipment that can detect an incoming missile: if the Thomson pilots did not see the missile the aircraft would have been destroyed.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    After reading more news agencies U.S. officials are 99.9% certain a bomb brought down the aircraft, and Egyptian officials are 90% it was a bomb. This reaffirms the evidence MI6 intercepted about bomb plots on aircraft leaving the city; Russia, Britain, and other European countries suspending flights to the area, and all flights to the area taking a large detour to avoid the area. Military aircraft are manoeuvrable than commercial aircraft but the benefit of military aircraft is not the flare but the detection equipment that can detect an incoming missile; if the Thomson pilots did not see the missile the aircraft could have been hit. Ignoring the Egyptian figure which suffers form Egypt playing down the crash to limit damage from lost tourism, the actions of suspending flights to the area by Britain and Russia are unprecedented during early days of an investigation if a mechanical fault is suspected; it is safe to act on the assumption a bomb was involved.
    Never heard of these systems on military aircraft suitable for such an operation capable of detecting unguided missiles, nor of these aircraft being particularly well suited for significantly higher maneuverability than a commercial aircraft
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    No, for the reasons mentioned above.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Never heard of these systems on military aircraft suitable for such an operation capable of detecting unguided missiles, nor of these aircraft being particularly well suited for significantly higher maneuverability than a commercial aircraft
    The videos of C130s in air displays all over the world doing barrel rolls, C17s performing complex maneuvers is evidence of their high maneuvrability; the 757s and A320s of the commercial airlines cannot do the same. The AN/AAR-47 system which is widely used is capable of detecting guided and unguided missiles; it is common for system to be capable of detecting both.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    The videos of C130s in air displays all over the world doing barrel rolls, C17s performing complex maneuvers is evidence of their high maneuvrability; the 757s and A320s of the commercial airlines cannot do the same. I am surprised you have not heard about the commonly used AN/AAR-47 system that can detect guided and unguided missiles.
    Which according to my research is not used, at the very least not widely, by our forces.

    And then what are we envisioning, giving then a near 10 hour flight home? Giving then a several hour flight to somewhere nearby, and then making them wait ages there for another flight home?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Which according to my research is not used, at the very least not widely, by our forces.

    And then what are we envisioning, giving then a near 10 hour flight home? Giving then a several hour flight to somewhere nearby, and then making them wait ages there for another flight home?
    The system is widely used by NATO, it is equipped to USAF C17s, I would be surprised if RAF C17s did not have the system equipped when the aircraft were delivered. I would be very surprised if RAF C17 aircraft did not have basic missile approach detection systems fitted when other RAF transport aircraft do, some Iraqi aircraft use the AN/AAR-47 system, and Australian aircraft have the systems.

    The C17s can carry 27 more people than an A319s and four more passengers than the 737s flown by the commercial airlines with passengers stranded for ten days; the C17s have the range to return passenger directly home to the UK. Evacuating Britons is logistically possible, practical with the capability already possessed, cost-effective as airlines will cover the cost as an alternation to using their own aircraft, and can be successfully done before the ten day delay is over. The only reason existing not to help out is a diplomatic one but the Egyptian government is weak which is shown in its current struggles battling Sinai insurgency, and its security services accepting bribes while manning a security checkpoint at an airport in a tourist area.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    The system is widely used by NATO, it is equipped to USAF C17s, I would be surprised if RAF C17s did not have the system equipped when the aircraft were delivered. I would be very surprised if RAF C17 aircraft did not have basic missile approach detection systems fitted when other RAF transport aircraft do, some Iraqi aircraft use the AN/AAR-47 system, and Australian aircraft have similar systems.

    The C17s can carry 27 more people than an A319s and four more passengers than the 737s flown by the commercial airlines with passengers stranded for ten days; the C17s have the range to return passenger directly home to the UK. Evacuating Britons is logistically possible, practical with the capability already possessed, cost-effective as airlines will cover the cost as an alternation to using their own aircraft, and can be successfully done before the ten day delay is over. The only reason existing not to help out is a diplomatic one but the Egyptian government is weak which is shown in its current struggles battling Sinai insurgency, and its security services accepting bribes and playing candy crush while manning a security checkpoint at a tourist destination.
    The other reasons now are that by the time it would come into force it would barely be needed. Of course, what we also have on here is that by the time it is voted on it should be a non issue, and even if the government were to act now, wait, there is no government in terms of positions yet, still.

    And as I said, according to my research the only definite users were US forces.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    This is in cessation.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: November 11, 2015
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.