Royal Transportation (land, sea, air)


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Yes, that's true. Just as it could be true that they could be free for the rest of the day! I'm not denying that the POW is a hardworking individual. I believe that he is. However, the royals, including Charles, may also be using the helicopter when it's not strictly necessary and other forms of transport could be utilised. You would think that Charles would also be alive to the environmental concerns of using helicopters on a frequent basis.
 
Curryong said:
First of all, I don't believe that Charles (or any of the Queen's other relatives) ring her up to get her permission for each specific trip that is made.



Second, this trip came on top of another made to attend a polo match on a day when Charles had no other engagements. In my view it's both extravagant to use this method of transport just because it is more convenient to do so, and it is also surprising, in light of Charles's well known opinions on the environment.



Four helicopter flights for Charles to watch polo says SEBASTIAN SHAKESPEARE | Daily Mail Online
Click to expand...


There is a TV series about the RF - I think it was Monarchy. It clearly shows the Queen approving the use of the helicopter during her daily meeting with her Private Secretary. On that occasion it was the Duke of Gloucester. According to the programme, she approves ALL use of the helicopter as there is only one.
 
Yes, and if Charles decides he wishes to use the helicopter during the week to go to a polo match, the Queen would sign off on it. That doesn't mean that he, the Duke of York, William or Harry or any other of the relatives, would be sitting down with the Queen each day drawing up a time and motion study for each trip, nor do I think the Queen questions the purpose of each helicopter ride.

The fact that she doesn't doesn't mean that it isn't extravagant at times or that various members of the family couldn't save fuel and aircrew time by using a car or the train.
 
Last edited:
Is this story even true?
It is after all the Daily Mail and Sebastian Shakespeare.

Why would the helicopter be based in Hampshire when no member of the RF lives in Hampshire?

Is this the helicopter the Queen leased for the family? If not where was the helicopter the Queen leased?

Shouldn't the helicopter or helicopters be based at Windsor and/or Gloucester?

Prince Charles and Princess Anne perform the most royal engagements. Combined they perform more than a quarter of all public engagements. Add Camilla who is also lives in nearby Wiltshire and they make up more than 31% of all Royal engagements.

Prince Charles is also the heir.

The RF should have two to four helicopters available for them. Two based in Gloucester and two based at Windsor.
 
Last edited:
They don't need that many helicopters at all. The one they have doesn't get used every day now so why have more that are just going to sit there and do nothing?
 
Curryong said:
Yes, and if Charles decides he wishes to use the helicopter during the week to go to a polo match, the Queen would sign off on it. That doesn't mean that he, the Duke of York, William or Harry or any other of the relatives, would be sitting down with the Queen each day drawing up a time and motion study for each trip, nor do I think the Queen questions the purpose of each helicopter ride.

The fact that she doesn't doesn't mean that it isn't extravagant at times or that various members of the family couldn't save fuel and aircrew time by using a car or the train.
Click to expand...
Why do you think that small helicopter and shorter route cost more than two luxury vehicles and longer route?
 
The four flights on the day of the polo match burned up around 200 gallons of aviation fuel. (This included the flight crew coming from the Hampshire RAF base and returning there). To get to the match by car would have used an estimated 5 gallons of petrol. Neither form of transport is great from a conservation point of view, always important to Charles he keeps telling us, but the car is the cheaper option.
 
There would be more than one car however as there would need to be at least one if not two cars for security - one in front of Charles' and one behind.
 
Yes, that would have been fifteen gallons of petrol, unless of course a police motorbike escort was used some of the way. Nevertheless, even if a convoy of cars was used, say four, it would have still been cheaper and less wasteful than a helicopter and crew coming from Hampshire and back.
 
A statement released by Clarence House said: "The charitable engagement at Guards Polo Club was fitted into a packed diary at relatively short notice.

"The Prince had a number of personal commitments after a heavy week of public engagements and his mode of transport was chosen so that no one was let down and limited time available could be maximised.

"The Prince of Wales carries out over 650 public engagements a year. A number of factors are taken into consideration when deciding which form of travel to use... including security, punctuality and logistics."


And according to the Sovereign Grant Act -

How is the mode of travel decided?

Safety

Security

Value for money

Length of journey

Transport which is consistent with the requirement and dignity of occasion taking into account whether the aircraft landing site is in the public eye

Which represents the most effective use of the Royal Family’s time

And which minimises disruption to others.

Seems like only Charles and William get guff for this. All royals use the helicopter. Its not like Harry hitch-hikes around the UK for engagements
 
No, I mentioned Harry in one of my posts, also stated that the Queen's relatives (meaning more than two) use the helicopter. This is the Charles thread and he was mentioned in the articles to which I gave a link.

I still think the way the helicopter is used (by all) can be wasteful and extravagant sometimes. 'Personal commitments' could mean anything, couldn't it; friends around for drinks, a spot of essential gardening, a neighbour's birthday dinner...?
 
Last edited:
Of course it could mean anything.


Charles could have had a totally personal commitment and decided to fit in both the personal and public commitments by using the helicopter.


What would you have him do? Have no personal like at all?


Many people use the more expensive option if it gets them more time to complete more events e.g. using a taxi over public transport, or a private car over the bus simply to save time and fit in both work and private commitments. It would certainly be cheaper for me to travel to work, for instance by public transport but it would take me over 2 hours to get to my place of work and again home again compared to 30 minutes by private car, solo, each way. The 'responsible conservationist approach would be to take the bus, train, bus and wait for the connections in between rather than the car but those extra 3 hours of time at home allows me to do personal things. Why can't Charles make the same decisions?
 
He can, and he's lucky, as the British taxpayers pay for it. The Australian taxpayers don't pay for your decisions about your transport. I'm just not sure that conservation or savings are uppermost in Charles's mind sometimes, where his personal convenience is concerned. Anyway, enough of Charles for me, as I'm about to go to sleep!
 
Before the popularity of package holidays gave Brits an easy gateway to Europe, travellers in the know would embark on a Grand Tour via the rails.
Offering Art Deco dining cars, silver service and sweeping views of unspoiled landscapes, the trailblazing way to discover the Continent was aboard the Venice-Simplon-Orient-Express.
Departing London, the train route would involve a journey to Paris and Venice through the Alps before reaching Istanbul.
In a series of nostalgic snapshots from 1950, photographer Jack Birns for LIFE magazine, captured the glamour of the post-war holiday boom, with ladies in fur coats relaxing in the carriages and sommeliers offering guests premium wines to accompany their gourmet meals.
Symbolising the luxury of a bygone age, when the Simplon Tunnel opened in 1919, royalty, diplomats and the bourgeoisie would flock to Europe on the iconic trains.
Now, Venice Simplon-Orient-Express still carries passengers from London to Venice on regular departures and once a year, the train recreates the famous Paris to Istanbul journey basking in the timeless elegance of yesteryear.
Click to expand...

Venice Simplon-Orient-Express pictures reveal the nostalgic glamour of 1950s journey | Daily Mail Online
 
I wouldn't be one bit surprised either and the first thing that crossed my mind is that it really shines a light on how well respected The Queen is respected around the world.
 
They just said that they reserved one for her not that she ordered one. They are just name dropping.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
Skippyboo said:
They just said that they reserved one for her not that she ordered one. They are just name dropping.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Click to expand...

I agree, I think they are attempting to use her name for free publicity.

Its not that I don't see her get a Bentley, she obviously has the Bentley State Limousine, as well as the Bentley Mulsanne that she regularly uses. Its just that, to me. the Bentayga just does not appear up her street.
 
You have to admit though that out of all the people in the world, even if this is just name dropping, it says a lot about how The Queen is regarded.

I think most of us know that HM is not and never will be an extravagant person and has a reputation for being frugal so it does seem iffy that she would need another vehicle besides the ones that are already in use. ;)
 
How about giving The Queen a new Royal Yacht?
 
Dman said:
How about giving The Queen a new Royal Yacht?
Click to expand...

Now that would be an absolutely grand gesture I think. Somehow I think that would make for a very big grin ear to ear for HM. :D
 
Iluvbertie said:
Who would pay for the ongoing maintenance and upkeep?
Click to expand...

Most likely if the Queen was gifted with a brand new royal yacht, the cost of the upkeep and the maintenance and the paychecks for the crew would have to come out of the Queen's own pocket as I really doubt that there would be much advantage to having the yacht to provide transportation for the royal family and the official duties they need to get to.

Once again, as frugal as the Queen is, I don't see it ever happening but she would totally love the idea of it though.

Now someone giving her the loan of a yacht for a seafaring getaway for her and Philip would be a grand idea especially if all the costs were included. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

iceflower
Royals at the Paris 2024 Summer Olympics & Paralympics
12 13 14
Replies
402
Views
61K
LadyFinn
LadyFinn
Sun Lion
Better Quality Mary Documentary.
Replies
4
Views
808
Sun Lion
Sun Lion
Somebody
Earning a living as a non-full time royal
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
Silverpot
Silverpot
Misskitty
Question about Queen Camilla
Replies
6
Views
1K
Iluvbertie
Iluvbertie
Marengo
Princess Märtha Louise of Norway and Durek Verrett: 31 August 2024
9 10 11
Replies
302
Views
39K
LadyFinn
LadyFinn

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom