UK PM to get his own RAF transport?
 

I must admit, converting an A330 Voyager to a VIP transport is probably not a bad idea. Fewer BA charters then.

Full story here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...ted-plane.html

(Obviously not what Blair was hoping for!)

I suspect the £10 million it is going to be hard sale considering the autumn statement next week.

I never disagreed with 'Blair Force 1' and this proposed option seems more sensible.

H

What happened when BA did not have an aircraft for Charter?

Didn't Blair charter a Concorde once?

It would be a hoot to "RAF One" refueling AF One, with Cameron waving from the boom operator's window.

About time. We are the only major country that doesn't have a dedicated aircraft for its leader. Just keep it to the PM and other senior government figures on official business. No Harriet Harman taking it on jollies and keep Prince Charles well away.

Charles? I think it's Air Miles Andy who they'll have to watch out for!

Seriously, I think this decision makes sense.

If this Aircraft is for David Cameron or his successor then our leader still won't have a dedicated aircraft aside from the BAe 146 and a Helicopter.

I wonder if Corbyn if he became PM would swallow his principles and fly (especially in a Military aircraft). Would love to see a picture of him in CCR...

Hoch potential savings of £750k pa on a £10m investment makes this a pretty good sell for the Chancellor.

Interestingly the competition to provide the Air to Air refueling aircraft was between the Airbus lead consortium with the converted A330 and a Boeing lead consortium which would have converted old BA 767 aircraft.

Yes but it looks bad. "Take away people's benefits to pay for the Prime Minister's private plane". I don't think it will happen.

Well I think it's about time too

This is well overdue


cs

Yup, the BAe 126 fleet (Queen's Flight???) is available to Royal Family, senior military bods and Government officials. I presume that includes PM.

Diferent tack, I remember a Hercules C-130 being fitted out with a 'cabin' inside to take Maggie down the the Falklands.

Especially if you ignore any running costs, which this article does. :rolleyes:

I don't have strong views on this either way, but it does p!ss me off how politicians of all shades and the media will gloss over significant aspects of any argument and hope they don't get called on it.

^

I don't see where in the article it is clear that running costs are excluded. It even mentions what the running costs are. The estimated saving is likely to have running costs included albeit an estimate based on previous PM travel plans. That is how business plans work.