Out for a stroll…Really?

[MichaelH]

This is why, I would expect:

I'd also wager that most people criticising Craig also aren't jealous but simply annoyed at the fact someone who has been shooting LL for a few years would be as naive to sell images to an agency/newspaper. Craig was vocal on another forum when another persons images ended up splashed across the rags, so slightly hypocritical on that basis

Pretty much.

You don't need to be a regular out and about in the low level haunts to know what the state of play is there. You also don't need to be a regular reader of the DM or the other toilet papers to know the previous uproars that have occurred from sensationalist stories regarding the low-fly/RAF in general. And has been stated elsewhere, this is someone who is apparently very familiar with them there valleys. With all told, it's certainly a more than foolish action, regardless of any apparent 'good faith'.

History never repeats yada yada...

[Rockstar]

The most annoying aspect of this article for me is that they keep referring to the fact the Tornado is on a flight from RAF Marham in Norfolk when quite clearly it is a 41sqn special tail from RAF Coningsby in Lincolnshire. Very poor reporting.

[Agent K]

Just for informative purposes, in case Craig is not aware, the photograph and a small caption also in todays Metro rag too, complete with mis-spelling of your sirname. "Sulman"

illiterate bunch of fools,


regards, Danny

I think you meant sUrname.......... agree with sentiment however.....

[Velvet Glove]

Just for informative purposes, in case Craig is not aware, the photograph and a small caption also in todays Metro rag too, complete with mis-spelling of your sirname. "Sulman"

illiterate bunch of fools,


regards, Danny

Spotted three off the cuff there, ..

todays Metro rather than today’s Metro, mis-spelling rather than misspelling, and sirname rather than surname.

Four if you want to capitalise Illiterate.

Only bothered to really look because the end comment drew attention to spelling.

[dannyboyo20]

Oh dear, the irony! That will teach me for replying whilst on the move.....
As you were, Danny

Just for informative purposes, in case Craig is not aware, the photograph and a small caption also in todays Metro rag too, complete with mis-spelling of your sirname. "Sulman"

illiterate bunch of fools,


regards, Danny

Spotted three off the cuff there, ..

todays Metro rather than today’s Metro, mis-spelling rather than misspelling, and sirname rather than surname.

Four if you want to capitalise Illiterate.

Only bothered to really look because the end comment drew attention to spelling.

[Harkins]

I was confused reading the early posts in this thread as to what exactly was causing the upset but, later posts have suggested it's what I suspected.

I've only been to the Mach Loop once, earlier this year and it was mentioned to me by more than one of the regulars standing on the Bwlch that day, that posting the images willy-nilly was very much frowned upon by all regular Loopers and the crews. Admittedly I wasn't exactly sure what the problem was with that but I accepted it (although I'd be in no rush to show off my efforts anyway!)

It would certainly be a shame if the loop was negatively affected by this but, surely the RAF wouldn't cease low level training just because there is a photo of a Tornado in a 'newspaper' would they? After all, nobody has done anything illegal have they?

[Skip]

An honest question here, why is posting pictures taken from the loop frowned upon by 'regular loopers' I've never been to the loop so don't know the situation?

[Unknown74]

Wow this is awesome, always love Low Level jets screaming over when I've been in the Scottish Highlands & The Borders - wonderful.

[Supra]

An honest question here, why is posting pictures taken from the loop frowned upon by 'regular loopers' I've never been to the loop so don't know the situation?

An honest answer, I think?... For me to explain on a public forum why posting any images willy-nilly is frowned upon by 'regular loopers' would cause more problems than the story/pictures from the OP! Suffice to say that occasionally an image of an inappropriate gesture or an aircraft in 'unusual' circumstances could have far-reaching consequences for the continued career of the subject Aircrew &/or curtailed & restricted usage of the Loop ie:- "I'm with stupid!!"
But then, if you don't know that you can only proceed in ignorance & incur hatred on a mammoth scale from 'Loopers' whose fun-time just got screwed.
None of the above applies to Craig's pictures, which show normal flight within the prescribed criteria. The first problem is they are toooo good! The second problem was misplaced faith in the lying scum that generate news from a pile of lies!
To be safe in future, just remember that "what happens in Wales, stays in Wales"....especially images of regulars & sheep!

[deerhunter]

To be safe in future, just remember that "what happens in Wales, stays in Wales"....especially images of regulars & sheep!

If the Daily Fail got hold of it, it would be baaaaa faced lies !!!!!!!

[MichaelH]

It's not just 'Loop-regulars' though; I'm not one and can see the error.

End of the day, you don't need give these kind of agencies ammunition to put into their nonsense cannon, and an opportunity to lambaste like they have done previously. Doesn't have to be the Loop for example either. (Ie. Jets low over fences where clowns think it's a good idea to stand etc etc.)

I'm sure a lesson has been learned for more than one party; let's hope no serious harm done and move on?

[onemac]

So there's unwritten rules if you do LL photography? Pray tell who wrote them and who is in charge of enforcing them (and list them please)? I need to know because I'm heading down soon and don't want to make more of a tit of myself than I usually do

When I had my little accident a few years ago, one of the things my wife did was to speak to the local paper who ensured she ratified the happenings in her own words. 24 hours later the tabloids printed a heap of garbage based (very loosely) on the local story because it 'was in the public domain'. Apparently they could interpret the story any way they wanted I realise that this incident is different and I'm sure lessons have been learned. However, to criticise Craig's choice of charity is uncalled for - go do your own fundraising, choose a charity and when somebody criticises your choice have at them.

Nice one Craig.

Al

[DaveChapman]

Out of all the photos that have been sent to the papers and upset the cart , this is the tamest article on low flying I have seen.
No mention of the Mach loop
No signs held up
No burners
No smoke on go
No story that's negative towards the RAF
Hundreds of positive comments about the article on the Fails website
TBH cant see what the fuss is about except between the low level community.
Theres been sadly plenty of stories that have been headline news in recent years about aircraft hitting the sides of mountains so im pretty sure the public know that the RAF do fly low level and have to practice low level flying and they've probably worked out it happens in hilly areas of the UK.
I am a regular in the Loop and myself I`d never let the papers have my photos even for an article that had nothing to do with low flying for just this reason that it may end up as something else. I was even talked out once by people up the hill of letting my photos be used in an aviation magazine for an article about the loop in 2010,hindsight says im an idiot!
Theres no damage done thankfully and certainly not enough to warrant animosity against Craig
Edit to add : Wondered as so many people are kicking off that he wasn't out for a stroll would they be happier if he said he was in the loop to tog jets?

[Dunk]

I think we all know this is an emotive subject, and no matter how much you cover your backside the tabloid press will manipulate your story to suit. Lessons learnt.

Don't think we're achieving anything here now, time to move on, so thread locked.