SAR is Hard to Give Up!

[Brit_in_CAP]

Some months ago another thread speculated on this very event which has now become reality.

Reported on the BBC today: Prince William to Join Air Ambulance.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-28685666

Short version: "The Duke of Cambridge is to become an air ambulance pilot next spring, it has been announced."

Apparently, it gets in your blood...!

[PHall]

Well duh!   Which would you rather do? A never ending list of "Royal Duties" or save someone's life by getting them to the hospital within the "Golden Hour"?

[Brit_in_CAP]

Well duh!   Which would you rather do? A never ending list of "Royal Duties" or save someone's life by getting them to the hospital within the "Golden Hour"?

Indeed...I'd take the helo every time!

[Flying Pig]

As an American I'll never understand the idea of a royal family.

[abdsp51]

As an American I'll never understand the idea of a royal family.

Me either and it may be ignorance talking but at least it looks like William and Harry are more productive and positive images of the Royal family. 

[Flying Pig]

At least they are out there doing it.  But it sure must be nice to be able to go in as an officer and just pick what you want to do because one of your ancestors was the King 1000yrs ago and you are still reaping the bennies of it.  Oh well, thats how England runs their operation, no skin off my back.

"Maybe Id like to fly fighters???  Ehhhh, maybe sea kings?  Perhaps the infantry?  Oh, Im done with that, now Id like to fly Apaches"  I know I clumped both brothers into one statement, but do regular officers get to bounce around and try out different fields like that?

[JeffDG]

As an American I'll never understand the idea of a royal family.

Makes them lots of money
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhyYgnhhKFw

[Flying Pig]

Wow....interesting.  They are like the ultimate celebrities.  Maybe I should rent the United States my house?

[Eclipse]

As an American I'll never understand the idea of a royal family.

Makes them lots of money
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhyYgnhhKFw

Amazing the power of facts.

My first, and honestly only thought, was "How can you protect him without impacting the mission?"

[Brit_in_CAP]

At least they are out there doing it.  But it sure must be nice to be able to go in as an officer and just pick what you want to do because one of your ancestors was the King 1000yrs ago and you are still reaping the bennies of it.  Oh well, thats how England runs their operation, no skin off my back.

"Maybe Id like to fly fighters???  Ehhhh, maybe sea kings?  Perhaps the infantry?  Oh, Im done with that, now Id like to fly Apaches"  I know I clumped both brothers into one statement, but do regular officers get to bounce around and try out different fields like that?

No, not the extent that William has although he's a special case.  Prince Harry is a serving, probably career, Army officer with a commission in The Blues and Royals, and he took advantage of the system that any officer in the Army can in that he volunteered for service as aircrew with the Army Air Corps (AAC).  That's open to any officer who meets the standards required for pilot and to any Senior NCO who meets the pilot or observer standards (I think they still have the non-pilot aircrew roles).  The choices available are: short term transfer whilst remaining a member of their original regiment or corps, short term with a view to transferring to the AAC or, in a very few cases, immediate transfer to the AAC.  On the short term transfers the officer retain the uniform of his regiment or corps and wear the AAC beret with his original 'cap badge.

To complete the picture, you can, of course, join the AAC directly as either aircrew or ground crew.

In Harry's case he wanted to do more than he was allowed to previously; he had served in Afghanistan as a FAC with the B&R, and he was withdrawn when a newspaper broke the story.  Sadly, he is a bullet magnet because of who he is, and the Taliban made it clear they were 'Harry hunting'.  Mainly for the protection of the soldiers with him, the Army withdrew HRH from theatre; he was publicly unhappy about that.

They were less worried about him being in Theater as an Apache pilot, despite the threat from the Taliban to skin alive any UK Apache pilots they captured!

William, as second in line to the throne, was never going to be allowed to serve in the front line.  Like his brother, he joined the B&R although he first went to University whereas Harry joined directly (no mandatory college degree in the UK for officers).  Being the heir to the throne he underwent training with all branches of the UK military, including the SF, and served afloat in HMS Iron Duke which included hauling supplies during hurricane relief in the West Indies (if I recall the location correctly).  The RAF offered him the only opportunity for anything close to operational flying, hence his transfer and subsequent service in the SAR force.

The Princes are indeed positive images for the Royal family.  I won't debate here the utility of the institution....   

When Grandma is the Commander in Chief you can do these things!

[Flying Pig]

As an American I'll never understand the idea of a royal family.

Makes them lots of money
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhyYgnhhKFw

Amazing the power of facts.

My first, and honestly only thought, was "How can you protect him without impacting the mission?"

I knew is was a financial arraignment.   Still, as an American, the idea of a king is just amusing.  Bolstered by the idea in the video that the only reason there is a "royal family" is because of money.  So they royal family bought their commissions in the military, Harry and William bought their positions in the military along with all of the other members of the royal family who hold commissions in every branch of the military.  Prince Charles is an Admiral, General or whatever they call them in all the branches not because of leadership earning it, his family bought it. 

In all honestly, the video makes me laugh at the idea even more. 

[Brit_in_CAP]

As an American I'll never understand the idea of a royal family.

Makes them lots of money
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhyYgnhhKFw

Amazing the power of facts.

My first, and honestly only thought, was "How can you protect him without impacting the mission?"

You can't.  That simple.  So, he either flies with a minder who is also an air ambulance crewman (unlikely) or you give HRH some additional training (much easier).

Honestly, today in the UK its on overblown threat.  Whilst it would be sad if the Prince were to be killed it also wouldn't end the monarchy whereas (for example) the loss of the heir even 100 years ago would have brought the country to a staggering halt.  Not only are there 'more where he came from', the monarchy is no longer involved **directly** in the government of the UK.  That last statement is as far as I go on CAPTALK with a discussion about constitutional monarchies....there isn't enough space......................

[Brit_in_CAP]

As an American I'll never understand the idea of a royal family.

Makes them lots of money
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhyYgnhhKFw

Amazing the power of facts.

My first, and honestly only thought, was "How can you protect him without impacting the mission?"

I knew is was a financial arraignment.   Still, as an American, the idea of a king is just amusing.  Bolstered by the idea in the video that the only reason there is a "royal family" is because of money.  So they royal family bought their commissions in the military, Harry and William bought their positions in the military along with all of the other members of the royal family who hold commissions in every branch of the military.  Prince Charles is an Admiral, General or whatever they call them in all the branches not because of leadership earning it, his family bought it. 

In all honestly, the video makes me laugh at the idea even more.

OK - not seen the video but...

Money and the Royals - sure, long acknowledged as being the #1 tourist attraction in the UK but also interwoven into the governmental structure and the societal fabric.  You  / we may not like it but it works.

Buying commissions - not since the 1800s.  The family name may well have gotten members of the Royal Family admitted but please don't disparage the two young men quite so quickly.  My USMC son met the FAC party in The Stan who had served with Prince Harry and the overwhelming opinion was that he was a fine troop commander.  People who've met and served with Prince William likewise quite impressed by him.  Some of the others...well, maybe not so impressive.   That said, Prince Philip served in the RN throughout WW2, saw major fleet action and served for a few years afterwards.  Prince Andrew served in the Falkland Islands campaign, playing catch with Exocet missiles....a tactic that used a Sea King helo to draw the missile above the ship target.

We could debate this all day...but I'm not going to!

[Flying Pig]

In think its interesting, but its not my country.  In the end I don't really care whether Harry or William are working at Chippendales or flying Sea Kings

[Garibaldi]

We mock...what we don't understand. (Dan Ayckroyd)

[Flying Pig]

Nobody is mocking it.  They are gazzillonaires who's ancestors set them up for eternity.  Some of the conversations Ive had with British Royal Marines about the Royal family pretty well secured my understanding that it was just a system they are stuck with. 

I was always interested as to why the royal family never really made any political decisions.  That video cleared that up. 

[JeffDG]

Nobody is mocking it.  They are gazzillonaires who's ancestors set them up for eternity.  Some of the conversations Ive had with British Royal Marines about the Royal family pretty well secured my understanding that it was just a system they are stuck with. 

I was always interested as to why the royal family never really made any political decisions.  That video cleared that up.

Thinking that the Queen has power is like saying that the President of the United States is selected by the votes of 0.000167% of the people of the United States.  They're both technically accurate, but do not represent the way things truly work.

[Flying Pig]

I would think she is probably influential in certain areas.  But she seems to be more of the face of England vs having any real "power" I guess.  It would be neat to be able to trace your family back that accurately, that far. 

[JeffDG]

I would think she is probably influential in certain areas.  But she seems to be more of the face of England vs having any real "power" I guess.  It would be neat to be able to trace your family back that accurately, that far.

In reality, the separation of the role of Head of State from the role of Head of Government has tremendous advantages.

Her Majesty, the Queen, does not involve herself in political issues, ever.  As such, she can represent the nation and all of the people of her realms (remembering that while she is best known as the "Queen of England", she's also the "Queen of Canada", Australia, NZ, etc., and really, England is a bad exemplar too...as her proper title is "Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland", of which "England" is one of four constituent nations) free from the rough and tumble of politics.  The Prime Minister gets down in the trenches and deals with the day-to-day politics.

In the US, the roles are combined in the Presidency, and as a result, one person serves as the "living symbol of the nation", and also gets into the mud-pit that is day-to-day politics.  Sometimes reducing their effectiveness at politics (can't do things that are "unpresidential"), and sometimes the opposite occurs (many give great deference to the office).

Now, from a legal perspective, the Queen has tremendous power.  She is the only one who can summon Parliament to meet.  Only she can end a Parliamentary session (prorogue) or dismiss the entire Parliament and call new elections (dissolution).  She, legally, appoints the Prime Minister, and the entirety of the executive serve at Her pleasure.  Laws are enacted by the Sovereign on the advice of Parliament, but the Queen is the one who actually makes something into a law.  An entire branch of the UK Parliament (the Lords) are appointed by the Queen, not elected by the people (a power she also holds over the Senate of Canada).  Not to mention that she holds these powers not just in the UK, but in all of the Commonwealth realms.

[Panzerbjorn]

As an American I'll never understand the idea of a royal family.

Sure you can.....The Kennedys.

[ZigZag911]

As an American I'll never understand the idea of a royal family.

Really? How about our national political "dynasties"?

[ZigZag911]

And speaking of the offspring of those same political dynasties, when was the last time one of them -- or the kids of the "one per cent", since you also dragged the issue of money into the conversation, Flying Pig -- volunteered for military service, let alone hazardous duty?

Yeah, the British royals are wealthy and privileged...but they are not shirkers.

[Luis R. Ramos]

What does our national political "dynasties" have to do with a Royal family?

The idea of the Kennedys is just media hoopla. The Kennedys and others have never done what the Royal family in Great Britain does except play to the media.

[cnitas]

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/03/dynasty-its-not-just-for-monarchies-anymore-105205_Page2.html#.U-Vsb_n4ePo

[Luis R. Ramos]

So are you saying that because all those people rode in the public sympathy generated by the media, they are royalty now?

Where is the connection...?

[Flying Pig]

And speaking of the offspring of those same political dynasties, when was the last time one of them -- or the kids of the "one per cent", since you also dragged the issue of money into the conversation, Flying Pig -- volunteered for military service, let alone hazardous duty?

Yeah, the British royals are wealthy and privileged...but they are not shirkers.

Im not the one who brought up political families in the US, you did.... so who knows.

[ZigZag911]

VP Biden's son deployed to the Middle East a couple of years ago...I think he's a Marine reservist.

I can't think of another example.

[Eclipse]

The idea of the Kennedys is just media hoopla. The Kennedys and others have never done what the Royal family in Great Britain does except play to the media.

Joseph was a political mover and shaker in the best tradition of "royalty" for the majority of the first half of the 20th century,

John was elected President and assassinated while in office.

Robert was Attorney General, a US Senator, and assassinated while in office.

Ted was US Senator for 47 years and died in office.

The wives and daughters have always been politically and charitably active and visible for far more then just being
"Kennedys".  What more do you want?

The Bushes and Clintons have been essentially running this country since the mid-60's, at least.

Considering how young the USA actually >is< those are dynasties, even more so if you consider
royalty as "landed" families who rise to political power, which is exactly what they all are, which the exception of Bill Clinton,
the Bushes and Kennedys certainly fall into that category.

[SARDOC]

VP Biden's son deployed to the Middle East a couple of years ago...I think he's a Marine reservist.

I can't think of another example.

He's a Major in the Delaware Army National Guard.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Delaware Army National Guard? D.A.N.G.!

[Flying Pig]

Delaware Army National Guard? D.A.N.G.!

JAG Lawyer

[Brit_in_CAP]

I would think she is probably influential in certain areas.  But she seems to be more of the face of England vs having any real "power" I guess.  It would be neat to be able to trace your family back that accurately, that far.

In reality, the separation of the role of Head of State from the role of Head of Government has tremendous advantages.

Her Majesty, the Queen, does not involve herself in political issues, ever.  As such, she can represent the nation and all of the people of her realms (remembering that while she is best known as the "Queen of England", she's also the "Queen of Canada", Australia, NZ, etc., and really, England is a bad exemplar too...as her proper title is "Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland", of which "England" is one of four constituent nations) free from the rough and tumble of politics.  The Prime Minister gets down in the trenches and deals with the day-to-day politics.

In the US, the roles are combined in the Presidency, and as a result, one person serves as the "living symbol of the nation", and also gets into the mud-pit that is day-to-day politics.  Sometimes reducing their effectiveness at politics (can't do things that are "unpresidential"), and sometimes the opposite occurs (many give great deference to the office).

Now, from a legal perspective, the Queen has tremendous power.  She is the only one who can summon Parliament to meet.  Only she can end a Parliamentary session (prorogue) or dismiss the entire Parliament and call new elections (dissolution).  She, legally, appoints the Prime Minister, and the entirety of the executive serve at Her pleasure.  Laws are enacted by the Sovereign on the advice of Parliament, but the Queen is the one who actually makes something into a law.  An entire branch of the UK Parliament (the Lords) are appointed by the Queen, not elected by the people (a power she also holds over the Senate of Canada).  Not to mention that she holds these powers not just in the UK, but in all of the Commonwealth realms.

Nice summary!  The Lords, as it happens, are headed towards being principally an elected chamber (80%).

All of this from my humble post about SAR flying...

[Flying Pig]

I have learned the title of the post has nothing to do with the discussions that occur 

[Brit_in_CAP]

I have learned the title of the post has nothing to do with the discussions that occur 

:clap:

[JeffDG]

Nice summary!  The Lords, as it happens, are headed towards being principally an elected chamber (80%).

Was not aware of that.  I knew they'd removed the hereditary Lords, and left only the life peers as members.

The Canadian Senate is doomed to remain an appointed body...although they do get booted out at age 75 now.

[ZigZag911]

Booted out at 75???

Now there's an idea for the U.S. Congress!!!!

[SARDOC]

Delaware Army National Guard? D.A.N.G.!

I think they picked up on that.  That's why they abbreviate the Air Guard as DEANG and the Army Guard as ARNGDE

[Luis R. Ramos]

I lived in Dover, Delaware and never realized that. Anyway, it was like Ground Operations Director was changed to Ground Operations Branch Director since people were always joking with the Ground Operations Director... is GOD!

[Garibaldi]

Delaware Army National Guard? D.A.N.G.!

I think they picked up on that.  That's why they abbreviate the Air Guard as DEANG and the Army Guard as ARNGDE

Washington/Wisconsin Army National Guard (redacted)

Georgia Army National Guard (GANG)

Oregon Army National Guard (ORANG(E))

Florida Army National Guard (FLANG(E))

Hawaii National Guard (HING(E))

*snicker* 

[Luis R. Ramos]

Hey another one I forgot! I grew up in Puerto Rico.

Puerto Rico Air National Guard=PRANG

[JeffDG]

Booted out at 75???

Now there's an idea for the U.S. Congress!!!!

Yeah, but they can be appointed to the Senate at 30, and never face anything so mundane as an election.

[PHall]

Delaware Army National Guard? D.A.N.G.!

I think they picked up on that.  That's why they abbreviate the Air Guard as DEANG and the Army Guard as ARNGDE

Just like California does with CAANG and CAARNG or Texas with TXANG/TXARNG.
All of the states do it that way, probably because the NGB directed them to do it for standardization.

[Luis R. Ramos]

You did not have to explain.

The bureau probably picked the state and PR's postal abbreviations. The easiest way, no need to reinvent the wheel.

But D.A.N.G. surely sounds nice for a tongue-in-cheek barb.

When some joke in here, most seem to laugh. When others joke along the same vein, they are treated as if they do not know what they are talking about!

[LSThiker]

Just like California does with CAANG and CAARNG or Texas with TXANG/TXARNG.
All of the states do it that way, probably because the NGB directed them to do it for standardization.

All the NGs do it that way to reduce confusion and create a standard.  After all, CARNG could mean California, Colorado, or Connecticut.