Would they treat animals so?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-120886 8/Flown-home-cattle-class-frontline-How-troops -home-Afghanistan.html

If you have ever moaned about your cramped seating or the poor flight service you have received during your 2-3 flight from Spain, just consider how our troops feel.

And they have not been on a holiday!!!!

[MimeMaster]

Thats more seat space and leg room then most commercial flights!

How else are they meant to ferry hundreds of soldiers to and from the warzones, Two by two Like noahs ark?

[ABerrant]

Indeed a non-story...

Airbus A320 : cabin area = 100m� : seats = 164+

C-17 Globemaster : area = 110m� : seats = 102

Therefore holidaymakers (cattle) are allocated 56% of the space provided to the troops in the article, and pay for the privilege!

[jake-the-peg]

What a ridiculous headline.

I can only image that whoever wrote that has never tried to get past a trolly to get to the toilets on a packed transatlantic flight before returning to their middle seat between a couple of oversized tourists only to find the guy in front has dropped his seat as far back as it'd go.

How out of touch do you have to be to see that as "cattle class"?

[andy-hughes]

Don�t see an issue here - the MOD need to transport large numbers of personnel quickly and efficiently from one place to another - and this looks like a perfectly acceptable way to do it.

And as anyone knows - veal calves are transported in crates in which they can't move, never mind turn round or lie down, so the answer to your question appears to be no - animals fly in far worse conditions, and they are not going on holiday either!

[jno]

wow, if I could get half that much legroom on my next flight... As for animals, I'll bet they'd pay extra to be taken to the abattoir in that much comfort. Have you actually been on a plane recently, oldgit? (I'll bet the Daily Mail editor only travels by private jet, so he wouldn't know either.)

[naomi24]

Isn't that the way troops are normally flown? I'm sure I've seen pictures of WWII troops being transported in a similar fashion. Now if you really want to ask 'would they treat animals so?', have a look at rush hour commuter trains - and those people are paying thousands of pounds a year for the privilege.

[jojojojoanne]

do you think animals are generally treated better than humans?

[LoftyLottie]

Troops have always been flown in this way. The seats are specially made for troop transport. Somewhere in the back of my mind I am told that it is also for safer evacuation.

t looks a lot more comfortable than standard class air travel and as for flight service, there isn't any these days.

A total waste of newsprint.

[Lonnie]

I'd just like to say, when I was flown in and out of countries where we were on 'active service', mostly it was by Britannia's and VC10s, but Andovers and Herculese aircraft were also used.

Nothing wrong at all, I'm a Daily Mail reader, and this story is even more sensationalist than the norm.

[Gromit]

None story by the out of touch for the out of touch.

Holiday jets are far more cramped than that. And at least there are no screaming scrikeing children apparent in the Mails photo.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_AOAM1m9N5vA/SVz5Fe0m R5I/AAAAAAAACQQ/YN6GqCKrvXU/s400/sonic-airplan e-ad.jpg

http://media.photobucket.com/image/Crowded%20i nside%20Airplane%20%25252B%20cabin/lcsheng/DJ% 20164/IMG_0104.jpg

[BertiWooster]

Is that sp1814 in the middle front , of the first picture ?

[LoftyLottie]

A thread in 'News' where all the respondents agree!!

Where is AOG?

[naomi24]

Blimey, well spotted Lottie. That has to be a first. Champagne anyone?

[rov1200]

I have some sympathy with your argument. Would we send back failed Afghan asylum seekers this way?

[anotheoldgit]

rov1200
Would we send back failed Afghan asylum seekers this way?

They certainly would not rov, even in the unlikelihood of the UK sending any asylum seekers back to Afghanistan or anywhere else for that matter.

They even ship ex Guantanamo Bay detainees back to Britain in private jets.

[LoftyLottie]

Right AOG. How would you transport a troop of service men. The aircraft will be more of a target than a passenger craft and they need to be able to evacuate quickly and efficiently and have essential items to hand. Unecessary paraphanalia in the cabin not allowed.

They are seated comfortably and with plenty of leg room and in specially designed seats.

There are plenty of good reasons why they travel like this - you want to change this - for what valid rerason?

[LoftyLottie]

And do you want Guatamalo detainees shipped back on passenger aircraft or on private jets where there is the correct security.

I don't understand your reasoning at all. This is so totally not newsworthy.

[LoftyLottie]

And you haven't answered any of us who don't agree with you and have made arguments to substantiate our beliefs. You only communicate with Rov. who sort of agrees with you.

[buildersmate]

Precisely, Lottie, which is why I am having a go at him on another thread.
He shoves up these questions but isn't the slightest bit interested in entering into a debate. On the Burka thread (also raised on the same day - and a reasonable question) - he entered just 2 responses into a thread which ended the day on 69 answers long - and both of those were to have a cheap jibe at Gromit.