It's alright mate, we think the same about you.
lol
This is the current interior for the VIP section of the Voyager -
The aircraft compartment that the PM, Queen, people representing the UK to foreign dignitaries etc currently uses is just a bog standard "1st class" compartment from any airline - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...m-force-one-vip-jet-for-ministers-and-royals/
.
Be great if they go full blown on the red, white and blue theme. I'm thinking of union jack printed seats, carpets and flags on the ceiling.
I would love to know which countries base their international trade agreements on the colour scheme of the guests plane.
" Shall we open up our beef industry to the United Kingdom sir?"
"What colour is their plane"
" It's grey sir"
" Are you crazy man!? Cancel the deal immediately and start trade negotiations with Jamaica, they had a fun looking plane!"
" Shall we open up our beef industry to the United Kingdom sir?"
"What colour is their plane"
" It's grey sir"
" Are you crazy man!? Cancel the deal immediately and start trade negotiations with Jamaica, they had a fun looking plane!"
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 8,977
Symbols are part of soft power, when any UK official gets off it and has their photo taken there is the flag on VIP transport. It implies that the UK is a top tier nation. You can debate the truth or not of that but projecting the symbol is all about making it true.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 12,765
- Location
- Leicestershire
Alternatively, "they have a plane that looks as though it's never been cleaned or maintained so they clearly have no idea how to look after things. This may mean they do not pay attention to us in future deals if they treat things shabilly. "
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 12,765
- Location
- Leicestershire
The kids are off school and worked out how to use their parents accounts?
At least that would be a correct and honest interpretation......
the idea is probably every time it lands somewhere it will make headline news like americas presidential plane.
I doubt it though, it will probably end up being mocked in most countries
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2003
- Posts
- 10,142
- Location
- Europe
Feels like it costs the same when I paint my boat.
1l of topcoat is about £100 plus another £100 for the converter, and £50 for the thinner. That only covers 6m2
Before that you've got the all the prep-work, and the costs again for the epoxy primer.
Two coats of everything, plus all the accessories.
Still. If I was PM I'd be flying all long distances in hyper sonic planes. Perhaps bring back a fleet of Concorde for use. They could be leased out when not in use. It doesn't make sense spending 8h flying to Washington when you could do it in 3h. Do your business and be back the same day.
1l of topcoat is about £100 plus another £100 for the converter, and £50 for the thinner. That only covers 6m2
Before that you've got the all the prep-work, and the costs again for the epoxy primer.
Two coats of everything, plus all the accessories.
Still. If I was PM I'd be flying all long distances in hyper sonic planes. Perhaps bring back a fleet of Concorde for use. They could be leased out when not in use. It doesn't make sense spending 8h flying to Washington when you could do it in 3h. Do your business and be back the same day.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 10,695
- Location
- Shropshire
America is not "at home" to flights from the UK at the moment....
Good to see a bit of national pride though, I would genuinely like to see a Royal yacht brought back, too.
In that case the plane should be decorated with Gucci belts
Seriously, though, I agree that it's about soft power. Symbols might be a bit silly, but they matter because too many people think they matter.Concorde wasn't hypersonic and it was forbidden to go supersonic over land and it was extremely expensive to run and it was extremely inefficient on fuel (which is an even bigger political deal nowadays). It couldn't be leased out when not in use, partly because you can't lease a plane like that out due to security concerns and partly because Concorde was never financially viable anyway. It's also far too slow. If something is really urgent, you don't have time to spend 3 hours getting to it. If it's not that urgent, you're better off spending 6 hours (not 8 - Concorde was at best slightly more than twice as fast as a normal modern plane) and being better prepared. Concorde was a brilliant feat of engineering and international co-operation, but it wasn't practical in any way.
Why is this suddenly only an issue now? Is it because we need all the power we can get now that we're on our own?