Did you know that registration to Fighter Control is completely free and brings you lots of added features? Find out more....

BBC Andrew Neil.

A place to chat and discuss everything and anything thats NOT Military Aviation related. No Civilian Aviation content please. We would be grateful for such inclusions on our sister site - Civilian Aviation.
Post Reply
Vulcan74
Posts: 557
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2018 10:26 am

BBC Andrew Neil.

Post by Vulcan74 » Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:28 pm

One of the BBC's greats Andrew Neil politics presenter has been given the push by the beeb. Due to PC gone mad!! by the dippy management there, apparently by upsetting a few politicians & making comments about the Horrible Histories programme. I used to look forward to Daily Politics show & This Week & Sunday Politics with livery debate.

Everything is going to the wall with the programmes & presenters on television. I hope the beeb gets split up into different groups or better still off the air completely. They could have put Andrew Neil on Question Time & got rid of Fiona Bruce just leaving her to reading the news & presenting the Antiques Show or maybe they want her to front all the programmes instead!! :grr:

Sparts99
Posts: 2289
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 8:02 pm
Location: London/Kent

Re: BBC Andrew Neil.

Post by Sparts99 » Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:49 pm

"The political discussion programme (Andrew Neil Show) had already been off the air during the Covid-19 crisis and will not return. But the BBC said it was talking to Neil about a new BBC One interview show." So not given the push at all. Where did you get the rest of your post? The BBC has to make cuts since the government went back on its 2017 promise to fund the over 75s licence fee for the rest of that parliament, so that pledge expires in 2022, not now.

Personally I don't rate him as a great either, I think he's wooden on screen, and inflexible in his interviewing, can't think on his feet which is fine for a print journalist which is his origin, not for a TV interviewer. While Fiona Bruce is still growing into the job on Question Time - I think she's had long enough and if she doesn't come up to scratch in the next series she should be replaced - there's no way Neil could've done the job. Particularly as bias will be shouted from the rooftops as he used to work for the Conservative Party.
In this world there's two kinds of people, my friend. Those with loaded guns, and those who dig. You dig.

Vulcan74
Posts: 557
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2018 10:26 am

Re: BBC Andrew Neil.

Post by Vulcan74 » Thu Jul 16, 2020 4:23 pm

The programme they offered Neil was an insult a late afternoon slot, so same thing really they knew what they were doing! I think you will find he was very popular on air with his style of interviewing & debates. Now I'm afraid it will be total blandness on any political tv show on the BBC. Question Time as lost it's fizz due to the loss of heavyweight politicians from the recent years, Jo Coburn is good but we will never see the likes of Andrew Neil again!!

Leuchars Fan
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 7:20 pm
Location: Welwyn Garden City

Re: BBC Andrew Neil.

Post by Leuchars Fan » Thu Jul 16, 2020 5:30 pm

Its Horses for Courses for sure, I've always been an Andrew Neil fan. Though I'm surprised that he's lasted as long as he has on the BBC. I remember in the run up to the 2015 General Election he cornered Stuart Hosie, SNP, over the issue of unilateral disarmament, if I recall, Hosie was making the point that the UK was out of step with many other countries over the Nuclear Deterrent and ought to follow suit. Neil rattled off a list of countries that have a nuclear deterrent, many the SNP might find far more agreeable than Westminster.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fl3WF-L5m7w

Above is the link, and Hammond was quite correct to point out that other NATO countries hold leased nuclear weapons from the US. Namely, Belgium, Netherlands and Germany, there respective air forces carry the weapons as part of the shared responsibility for the Tactical nuclear retaliatory capability.

LF

Malcolm
Posts: 3407
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 8:26 am

Re: BBC Andrew Neil.

Post by Malcolm » Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:57 pm

Leuchars Fan wrote:
Thu Jul 16, 2020 5:30 pm
Above is the link, and Hammond was quite correct to point out that other NATO countries hold leased nuclear weapons from the US. Namely, Belgium, Netherlands and Germany, there respective air forces carry the weapons as part of the shared responsibility for the Tactical nuclear retaliatory capability.

LF
This is not correct. The weapons are under US control in the European countries you mention. They aren't 'leased' and the host nation have no right to use them independently. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_sharing .

They NATO countries have to supply aircraft and crews trained to deliver the nukes if so ordered by NATO (which is why the Germans have been backed into a corner and are having to buy F-18 when they retire their Tornados). I doubt any Dutch, Belgian or German aircraft has left the ground carrying a live nuke for a long long time.

Leuchars Fan
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 7:20 pm
Location: Welwyn Garden City

Re: BBC Andrew Neil.

Post by Leuchars Fan » Fri Jul 17, 2020 6:29 am

You're right about the US having the final authority, perhaps the wrong choice of words on my part, but the point is, they hold nuclear weapons on their soil and actively participate in the nuclear umbrella at the tactical level. The policy is a NATO policy, the weapons are maintained at the respective European locations by USAF personnel, or were. This was the same for RAF Canberra and Phantom Squadrons based in Germany back in the 1960s and 70s. USAF personnel provided the ultimate security and maintenance for their weapons, but they were delivered by RAF aircraft flown by RAF aircrew. Sorry about the misunderstanding, but no nobody has had any autonomous control over 'their' weapons, they fall under the control of SACEUR rather than the USA, which is certainly a moot point.
The UK left this level of control when the Buccaneer, Jaguar and ultimately, Tornado GR1, arrived in Germany, they didn't carry the B7, B43, B61 etc, they carried the British made WE177.

LF

Leuchars Fan
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 7:20 pm
Location: Welwyn Garden City

Re: BBC Andrew Neil.

Post by Leuchars Fan » Fri Jul 17, 2020 6:35 am

You're right about the US having the final authority, perhaps the wrong choice of words on my part, but the point is, they hold nuclear weapons on their soil and actively participate in the nuclear umbrella at the tactical level, it was/is a shared responsibility. The policy is a NATO policy, the weapons are maintained at the respective European locations by USAF personnel, or were. This was the same for RAF Canberra and Phantom Squadrons based in Germany back in the 1960s and 70s. USAF personnel provided the ultimate security and maintenance for their weapons, but they were delivered by RAF aircraft flown by RAF aircrew. Sorry about the misunderstanding, but no nobody has had any autonomous control over 'their' weapons, they fall under the control of SACEUR rather than the USA, which is certainly a moot point.
The UK left this level of control when the Buccaneer, Jaguar and ultimately, Tornado GR1, arrived in Germany, they didn't carry the B7, B43, B61 etc, they carried the British made WE177. The SNP object to any such arrangement in any circumstances. Certainly where the UK is concerned! :whistle:

LF

PS: If the Americans were going to pressure the Germans into purchasing their wares, I would have thought the F-35 would be the option they would have insisted on/pushed/recommended/advised on the purchase of?

Malcolm
Posts: 3407
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 8:26 am

Re: BBC Andrew Neil.

Post by Malcolm » Fri Jul 17, 2020 9:21 am

Leuchars Fan wrote:
Fri Jul 17, 2020 6:35 am
PS: If the Americans were going to pressure the Germans into purchasing their wares, I would have thought the F-35 would be the option they would have insisted on/pushed/recommended/advised on the purchase of?
The Germans (Dutch, Italians, Belgians and Turks) are bound by the terms of the NATO agreement to provide aircraft and aircrew capable of delivering the nukes, which in their case is the American B61. At the moment the Germans use the Panavia Tornado. When they retire the Tornado they have to replace it with something. They have decided against single engine aircraft, which rules out the 'sensible' choice of the F-35.

Whatever they chose has to be capable of delivering the B61, and AIUI none of the currently available types (Typhoon, Rafale, F-18E/F) are configured for it. So which ever aircraft they chose has to have a software rewrite to enable B61 delivery. Since the B61 is an American system, it falls under ITAR, and requires US oversight of all the software code. Neither Eurofighter/NETMA nor Dassault want to hand over the code to the USA, because it would be handing over technological IP to a competitor. It's not just weapons delivery code, its flight control, nav and attack code too because all are required to target munitions.

That just leaves F18E/F or possibly F-15E. They've apparently chosen F18E/F, which BTW isn't currently configured to carry B61 either, but since it's a US platform the incorporation of the code is less politically problematic.

So they haven't exactly been pressurised into taking F18E/F, it's just the only realistic option if they insist on not using single engined aircraft.

Anyway, back to the point. I used to enjoy Andrew Neil, Michael Portillo and yes even Diane Abbot on This Week. It was a show that was mostly devoid of the political bickering that means I can't watch Question Time or any of the other shows on a Sunday Morning. I do rate Andrew Neil as an interviewer - perhaps not a replacement for Paxo but certainly more thorough than the other contenders around at the moment.

Leuchars Fan
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 7:20 pm
Location: Welwyn Garden City

Re: BBC Andrew Neil.

Post by Leuchars Fan » Fri Jul 17, 2020 11:36 am

Malcolm wrote:
Fri Jul 17, 2020 9:21 am
Leuchars Fan wrote:
Fri Jul 17, 2020 6:35 am
PS: If the Americans were going to pressure the Germans into purchasing their wares, I would have thought the F-35 would be the option they would have insisted on/pushed/recommended/advised on the purchase of?
The Germans (Dutch, Italians, Belgians and Turks) are bound by the terms of the NATO agreement to provide aircraft and aircrew capable of delivering the nukes, which in their case is the American B61. At the moment the Germans use the Panavia Tornado. When they retire the Tornado they have to replace it with something. They have decided against single engine aircraft, which rules out the 'sensible' choice of the F-35.

Whatever they chose has to be capable of delivering the B61, and AIUI none of the currently available types (Typhoon, Rafale, F-18E/F) are configured for it. So which ever aircraft they chose has to have a software rewrite to enable B61 delivery. Since the B61 is an American system, it falls under ITAR, and requires US oversight of all the software code. Neither Eurofighter/NETMA nor Dassault want to hand over the code to the USA, because it would be handing over technological IP to a competitor. It's not just weapons delivery code, its flight control, nav and attack code too because all are required to target munitions.

That just leaves F18E/F or possibly F-15E. They've apparently chosen F18E/F, which BTW isn't currently configured to carry B61 either, but since it's a US platform the incorporation of the code is less politically problematic.

So they haven't exactly been pressurised into taking F18E/F, it's just the only realistic option if they insist on not using single engined aircraft.

Anyway, back to the point. I used to enjoy Andrew Neil, Michael Portillo and yes even Diane Abbot on This Week. It was a show that was mostly devoid of the political bickering that means I can't watch Question Time or any of the other shows on a Sunday Morning. I do rate Andrew Neil as an interviewer - perhaps not a replacement for Paxo but certainly more thorough than the other contenders around at the moment.
Indeed, he manages to be aggressive without being quite as combative as Mr Morgan, he does get angry though as Stuart Hosie said to him. By the way, what was the arrangement arrived at, albeit many years ago to get the Tornado to carry the B61. I was aware of the German aversion to single-engine types, a phobia they developed in the 1960s because of the F-104. You would have thought they would have got over that by now, we also went down that way partially at one time when the cost of the Eurofighter put that project in question in the early 1990s we were as unhappy at the idea of a single-engine Typhoon, for all the same reasons, the safety aspect, didn't stop the Harrier and Sea Harrier continuing at the time of course.

LF

Malcolm
Posts: 3407
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 8:26 am

Re: BBC Andrew Neil.

Post by Malcolm » Fri Jul 17, 2020 12:18 pm

Leuchars Fan wrote:
Fri Jul 17, 2020 11:36 am
By the way, what was the arrangement arrived at, albeit many years ago to get the Tornado to carry the B61.
I don't know how it was done on the Tornado - it was before my time. What I do know is that the US became very strict on arms technology exports in the mid/late 80's, so if I had to guess I'd say it happened before the US got all strict. One example is the Australian F-111's. The early 'C's bought in the 1970's are being preserved all around the country without any real problems. The G's bought in the 1990's all had stringent end use conditions on them, resulting in them all (but 2?) being stripped for spares and then buried in the desert. If you talk to anyone in a UK company that deals with weapons system and use the word ITAR you'll see the blood drain from their faces.

The 'problem' with modern fighters is that they are all aerodynamically unstable, and require a computer to keep them 'balanced' and flying. If you hang a bomb on the wing, the computer needs to know about it so that it can adjust the flight laws to compensate for the extra weight on that wing. That obviously means the plane has to know what weapons are where - which pylons, how heavy etc. And then when you drop/fire the weapon the computer has to adjust for any dynamic effects that occur during the release, and then change the flight control calculations when the extra weight is gone. Early fighters were basically manually flown and aerodynamically stable so they didn't have or need any of that stuff - you just pulled the lever, the bomb fired/dropped and you ran away as fast as you could..

The weapons bus (the computer control interfaces) on modern fighters carry a lot of highly classified data. Some of the info is encrypted and (for instance) UK eyes only. To get a nuke on that bus under ITAR would require the disclosure of all the data on that bus to the USA. Politically that may not be acceptable. The US then needs to incorporate extra commands onto the existing bus traffic to interface with the nuke, in the same way as extra commands are required to talk to Storm Shadow, Brimstone or Meteor.

Leuchars Fan
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 7:20 pm
Location: Welwyn Garden City

Re: BBC Andrew Neil.

Post by Leuchars Fan » Fri Jul 17, 2020 6:45 pm

Many thanks Malcolm, one question, what on earth would anyone be doing wasting a nuke on Bus? :huh: :S

LF :D

User avatar
big john
Posts: 5968
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:53 am
Location: EGLL

Re: BBC Andrew Neil.

Post by big john » Fri Jul 17, 2020 7:00 pm

It's a bus bar. So it's not wasted if it deprives the Russian troops of their Vodka. :P :roll:
rgds
BJ
Always Watching: Always Listening
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

Leuchars Fan
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 7:20 pm
Location: Welwyn Garden City

Re: BBC Andrew Neil.

Post by Leuchars Fan » Fri Jul 17, 2020 7:11 pm

big john wrote:
Fri Jul 17, 2020 7:00 pm
It's a bus bar. So it's not wasted if it deprives the Russian troops of their Vodka. :P :roll:
It would certainly do the job Big John, any direct hit from a Bucket of the old instant on a Bus would blow it to smithereens! :thumb: Anyway, I'd better pack it in or I'll be getting a tug for thread drift. :halo:

LF

Malcolm
Posts: 3407
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 8:26 am

Re: BBC Andrew Neil.

Post by Malcolm » Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:30 pm

Leuchars Fan wrote:
Fri Jul 17, 2020 6:45 pm
Many thanks Malcolm, one question, what on earth would anyone be doing wasting a nuke on Bus? :huh: :S
Ha. A 'Bus' is a set of wires that connect multiple pieces of equipment together to allow data to be passed between them. Think of it like a USB computer link - USB actually stands for Universal Serial Bus, although AFAIK no aircraft use USB.

Most military aircraft Busses are Mil-Std-1553B, which is a 1-megabit per second serial communication link first used in the 1970's. There are other standards - Arinc 419 and Arinc 429 are common on civil aircraft and helicopters which are up to 100 K bits per second. Eurofighter Typhoon also has an optical bus in it - called Stanag 3910. This is an extension to Mil-Std-1553 (called Stanag3838 in Europe) that allows data to be transferred at a whopping 20 megabits per second . Rafale has an electrical version of Stanag 3910 also running at 20 Mbits/second.

Some of the newer types are starting to use Ethernet (Tranche 3 Eurofighter) and Firewire (F-35) - because they need to transfer much more data over the bus than is possible using Mil-Std-1553B.

Leuchars Fan
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 7:20 pm
Location: Welwyn Garden City

Re: BBC Andrew Neil.

Post by Leuchars Fan » Fri Jul 17, 2020 10:08 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:30 pm
Leuchars Fan wrote:
Fri Jul 17, 2020 6:45 pm
Many thanks Malcolm, one question, what on earth would anyone be doing wasting a nuke on Bus? :huh: :S
Ha. A 'Bus' is a set of wires that connect multiple pieces of equipment together to allow data to be passed between them. Think of it like a USB computer link - USB actually stands for Universal Serial Bus, although AFAIK no aircraft use USB.

Most military aircraft Busses are Mil-Std-1553B, which is a 1-megabit per second serial communication link first used in the 1970's. There are other standards - Arinc 419 and Arinc 429 are common on civil aircraft and helicopters which are up to 100 K bits per second. Eurofighter Typhoon also has an optical bus in it - called Stanag 3910. This is an extension to Mil-Std-1553 (called Stanag3838 in Europe) that allows data to be transferred at a whopping 20 megabits per second . Rafale has an electrical version of Stanag 3910 also running at 20 Mbits/second.

Some of the newer types are starting to use Ethernet (Tranche 3 Eurofighter) and Firewire (F-35) - because they need to transfer much more data over the bus than is possible using Mil-Std-1553B.
Indeed Malcolm, indeed. :)

LF

User avatar
Nighthawke
Posts: 3037
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:04 pm

Re: BBC Andrew Neil.

Post by Nighthawke » Fri Jul 17, 2020 10:47 pm

You didn't know either then!

Leuchars Fan
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 7:20 pm
Location: Welwyn Garden City

Re: BBC Andrew Neil.

Post by Leuchars Fan » Fri Jul 17, 2020 11:52 pm

Who didn't know what? :D

LF

Post Reply

Return to “General Chat”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests