On 12/09/2022 16:34, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> Secret Service simply would not permit Biden to travel in anything but
> the Beast.

Like when the Queen drove him in her Range Rover?

On 12/09/2022 23:21, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> I don't know what the protocol is, or even if there is one, for a former
> and sitting US President to travel together in the same vehicle.
>
> It's also worth noting that former US Presidents also have Secret
> Service protection.

And they remain titled "President" for the rest of their lives.

MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 12/09/2022 23:21, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> I don't know what the protocol is, or even if there is one, for a former
>> and sitting US President to travel together in the same vehicle.
>>
>> It's also worth noting that former US Presidents also have Secret
>> Service protection.
>
>
> And they remain titled "President" for the rest of their lives.
>

Yes, but that also applies to many lesser US positions, such as the Veep,
senators, congressmen, judges and mayors. I notice that the Donald still
refers to Melania as 'the first lady'. I don't know if that's legit, but
bit certainly sounds wrong to British ears.

In message <tft0b2$31cja$3@dont-email.me>, at 17:43:16 on Wed, 14 Sep
2022, MB <MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>On 12/09/2022 23:21, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> I don't know what the protocol is, or even if there is one, for a former
>> and sitting US President to travel together in the same vehicle.
>> It's also worth noting that former US Presidents also have Secret
>> Service protection.
>
>And they remain titled "President" for the rest of their lives.

They do, but the majority of their domestic reporting I see from the USA
refers to "Former President Trump". I don't know if that's a deliberate
snub, or whether the convention is changing.

A very wide range office holders there retain the right to use their
title for life - so Judge Judy really was a judge (back in the 70's and
80's). We are used to Colonels and so on retaining their military rank
on civvy street, but would probably find it odd to hear former
politicians referred to in the present tense.
--
Roland Perry

On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 06:25:15 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
wrote:

>In message <tfo8gv$2bqgg$2@dont-email.me>, at 21:32:15 on Mon, 12 Sep
>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 12/09/2022 17:53, Recliner wrote:
>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/09/2022 06:59, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Foreign heads of state and their spouses heading to London for the state
>>>>>>>> funeral for Queen Elizabeth II have been asked to arrive in the U.K. on
>>>>>>>> commercial flights and banned from using helicopters to get around.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> World leaders have also been told they cannot use their own
>>>>>>>>state cars to
>>>>>>>> attend the funeral at Westminster Abbey on September 19 — and
>>>>>>>>will instead
>>>>>>>> be bussed in en masse from a site in west London.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> …
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Westminster Abbey will be so packed for the event that it will be
>>>>>>>> impossible for more than a single, senior representative per country and
>>>>>>>> their other half to attend, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development
>>>>>>>> Office (FCDO) lamented in the official protocol message regarding the
>>>>>>>> event.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In the document, sent to overseas embassies late Saturday night, the
>>>>>>>> department said it “regrets that, because of limited space at
>>>>>>>>the state
>>>>>>>> funeral service and associated events, no other members of the principal
>>>>>>>> guest’s family, staff or entourage may be admitted.”
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Heads of state unable to attend may choose someone else as their
>>>>>>>>official
>>>>>>>> representative, such as a head of government or senior minister.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>><https://www.politico.eu/article/queen-elizabeth-joe-biden-king-ch
>>>>>>>>arles-westminster-abbeyonly-heads-of-state-plus-one-to-attend-quee
>>>>>>>>n-elizabeths-funeral/>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Heads of State in a bus/coach? Can’t see Biden going by bus! Whole,idea
>>>>>>> sounds like a security nightmare. All eggs in one basket and all that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Secret Service simply would not permit Biden to travel in anything but
>>>>>> the Beast.
>>>>>
>>>>> The president probably travels more often in the armoured Chevy Suburban
>>>>> vehicles, including during the G7 in Cornwall.
>>>>
>>>> You could well be right.
>>>>
>>>> In any event, they simply would not allow him to travel in anything
>>>> other than their vehicles.
>>>
>>> Yes, it would be remarkable if he did take the Park and Ride.
>>
>>This report suggests there will be exceptions:
>><https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/12/queen-funeral-travel-bu
>>s-helicopter-biden>
>>
>>There's also the question of whether the Obamas will be invited. I think
>>they were the Queen's favourite first couple (certainly, of the living
>>ones), and could perhaps be invited as family friends rather than as a
>>former president. They could share the vehicle with the Bidens, so it could
>>be called a bus.
>
>There's an awful lot of excluded-middle in the comments from the press.
>For example the President's armoured vehicles hardly qualify for the
>description "Private Car". And he doesn't travel without a convoy,
>either. On the other hand, neither the car nor the convoy drive the
>President everywhere: Trump was seen walking in the grounds of Windsor
>Castle when he visited.
>
>My prediction (let's not over-use the word "expectation") is that a
>significant essentially pedestrianised zone will be established around
>Westminster, with multiple drop-off points on the perimeter for all but
>the Royal Family, and quite a lot of walking between the various
>individual premises.
>
The "pedestrianisation" (traffic lights and other street furniture
being unbolted) was on the go around Parliament Square when I walked
through about 2am on Wednesday. As usual around Whitehall and the Mall
when other events are on, vehicle routes have to be maintained for
emergency and servicing access anyway.

hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 12/09/2022 17:53, Recliner wrote:
>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 12/09/2022 06:59, Tweed wrote:
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Foreign heads of state and their spouses heading to London for the state
>>>>> funeral for Queen Elizabeth II have been asked to arrive in the U.K. on
>>>>> commercial flights and banned from using helicopters to get around.
>>>>>
>>>>> World leaders have also been told they cannot use their own state cars to
>>>>> attend the funeral at Westminster Abbey on September 19 — and will instead
>>>>> be bussed in en masse from a site in west London.
>>>>>
>>>>> …
>>>>>
>>>>> Westminster Abbey will be so packed for the event that it will be
>>>>> impossible for more than a single, senior representative per country and
>>>>> their other half to attend, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development
>>>>> Office (FCDO) lamented in the official protocol message regarding the
>>>>> event.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the document, sent to overseas embassies late Saturday night, the
>>>>> department said it “regrets that, because of limited space at the state
>>>>> funeral service and associated events, no other members of the principal
>>>>> guest’s family, staff or entourage may be admitted.”
>>>>>
>>>>> Heads of state unable to attend may choose someone else as their official
>>>>> representative, such as a head of government or senior minister.
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://www.politico.eu/article/queen-elizabeth-joe-biden-king-charles-westminster-abbeyonly-heads-of-state-plus-one-to-attend-queen-elizabeths-funeral/>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Heads of State in a bus/coach? Can’t see Biden going by bus! Whole,idea
>>>> sounds like a security nightmare. All eggs in one basket and all that.
>>>
>>> Secret Service simply would not permit Biden to travel in anything but
>>> the Beast.
>>
>> The president probably travels more often in the armoured Chevy Suburban
>> vehicles, including during the G7 in Cornwall.
>>
>
>
> You could well be right.
>
> In any event, they simply would not allow him to travel in anything
> other than their vehicles.
>

I heard a heavy military freighter landing at Northolt this morning,
probably a C-17 (I didn't get a chance to see it). That usually precedes US
presidential visits, as it's the USAF plane carrying the Beasts and Secret
Service cars.

I didn't hear the late Queen's C-17 land, as it came in from the west. I
noticed that all Heathrow landings were paused as it approached. It later
took off towards the east, but didn't fly over me. But I saw a complaint on
a local bulletin board about a big, noisy military plane flying low
overhead after taking off from Northolt.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> writes:

> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 12/09/2022 17:53, Recliner wrote:
>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 12/09/2022 06:59, Tweed wrote:
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Foreign heads of state and their spouses heading to London for the state
>>>>>> funeral for Queen Elizabeth II have been asked to arrive in the U.K. on
>>>>>> commercial flights and banned from using helicopters to get around.

<SNIP discussion of who this will or won't affect>

> I heard a heavy military freighter landing at Northolt this morning,
> probably a C-17 (I didn't get a chance to see it). That usually precedes US
> presidential visits, as it's the USAF plane carrying the Beasts and Secret
> Service cars.

It was a US C-17A, call sign RCH4594, from Dover air force base -
on Delaware Bay and not too far from Washington.

> I didn't hear the late Queen's C-17 land, as it came in from the west. I
> noticed that all Heathrow landings were paused as it approached. It later
> took off towards the east, but didn't fly over me. But I saw a complaint on
> a local bulletin board about a big, noisy military plane flying low
> overhead after taking off from Northolt.

Also, it landed through low cloud and heavy rain, which could
have lessened the apparent noise. I didn't notice when it took off.

--
David

In message <tfupeb$39979$2@dont-email.me>, at 08:57:47 on Thu, 15 Sep
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:

>I heard a heavy military freighter landing at Northolt this morning,
>probably a C-17 (I didn't get a chance to see it). That usually precedes US
>presidential visits, as it's the USAF plane carrying the Beasts and Secret
>Service cars.

Normally they'd fly into Mildenhall, which isn't that far from London in
the great scheme of things, and has a significant permanent presence of
many of the kind of resources required to support a Presidential visit
(not just to UK, it's a staging post for much of Europe and Middle East)
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <tfupeb$39979$2@dont-email.me>, at 08:57:47 on Thu, 15 Sep
> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>> I heard a heavy military freighter landing at Northolt this morning,
>> probably a C-17 (I didn't get a chance to see it). That usually precedes US
>> presidential visits, as it's the USAF plane carrying the Beasts and Secret
>> Service cars.
>
> Normally they'd fly into Mildenhall, which isn't that far from London in
> the great scheme of things, and has a significant permanent presence of
> many of the kind of resources required to support a Presidential visit
> (not just to UK, it's a staging post for much of Europe and Middle East)

They normally fly the cars into Northolt. Perhaps helicopters are flown
into Mildenhall?

David Williams <davidw_3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 12/09/2022 17:53, Recliner wrote:
>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 12/09/2022 06:59, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Foreign heads of state and their spouses heading to London for the state
>>>>>>> funeral for Queen Elizabeth II have been asked to arrive in the U.K. on
>>>>>>> commercial flights and banned from using helicopters to get around.
>
> <SNIP discussion of who this will or won't affect>
>
>> I heard a heavy military freighter landing at Northolt this morning,
>> probably a C-17 (I didn't get a chance to see it). That usually precedes US
>> presidential visits, as it's the USAF plane carrying the Beasts and Secret
>> Service cars.
>
> It was a US C-17A, call sign RCH4594, from Dover air force base -
> on Delaware Bay and not too far from Washington.

Thanks, that confirms my expectation.

>
>> I didn't hear the late Queen's C-17 land, as it came in from the west. I
>> noticed that all Heathrow landings were paused as it approached. It later
>> took off towards the east, but didn't fly over me. But I saw a complaint on
>> a local bulletin board about a big, noisy military plane flying low
>> overhead after taking off from Northolt.
>
> Also, it landed through low cloud and heavy rain, which could
> have lessened the apparent noise. I didn't notice when it took off.
>

I don't hear Northolt landings from the west, nor most take-offs.

On 14/09/2022 20:42, Recliner wrote:
> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>> On 12/09/2022 23:21, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>> I don't know what the protocol is, or even if there is one, for a former
>>> and sitting US President to travel together in the same vehicle.
>>>
>>> It's also worth noting that former US Presidents also have Secret
>>> Service protection.
>>
>>
>> And they remain titled "President" for the rest of their lives.
>>
>
> Yes, but that also applies to many lesser US positions, such as the Veep,
> senators, congressmen, judges and mayors. I notice that the Donald still
> refers to Melania as 'the first lady'. I don't know if that's legit, but
> bit certainly sounds wrong to British ears.
>

Well he still claims to be the current President, so for once he's being
consistent.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 15/09/2022 07:44, Roland Perry wrote:
> A very wide range office holders there retain the right to use their
> title for life - so Judge Judy really was a judge (back in the 70's and
> 80's). We are used to Colonels and so on retaining their military rank
> on civvy street, but would probably find it odd to hear former
> politicians referred to in the present tense.
> --

IIRC Majors and above are allowed to continue to use their rank after
retiring. Hence captains are often promoted to hon major shortly before
they retire.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Thu, 15 Sep 2022 17:59:48 +0100
Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>On 15/09/2022 07:44, Roland Perry wrote:
>> A very wide range office holders there retain the right to use their
>> title for life - so Judge Judy really was a judge (back in the 70's and
>> 80's). We are used to Colonels and so on retaining their military rank
>> on civvy street, but would probably find it odd to hear former
>> politicians referred to in the present tense.
>> --
>
>IIRC Majors and above are allowed to continue to use their rank after
>retiring. Hence captains are often promoted to hon major shortly before
>they retire.

All a bit daft though isn't it. Could you imagine "Project Managed John Smith
Rtd" or "CEO Fred Bloggs Rtd"? I guess military types are more defined by their
jobs than those of us on civvie street to have a need to cling onto (some
would say dine out on) their former ranks after they retire.

On 16/09/2022 11:54, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Sep 2022 17:59:48 +0100
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 15/09/2022 07:44, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> A very wide range office holders there retain the right to use their
>>> title for life - so Judge Judy really was a judge (back in the 70's and
>>> 80's). We are used to Colonels and so on retaining their military rank
>>> on civvy street, but would probably find it odd to hear former
>>> politicians referred to in the present tense.
>>> --
>>
>> IIRC Majors and above are allowed to continue to use their rank after
>> retiring. Hence captains are often promoted to hon major shortly before
>> they retire.
>
> All a bit daft though isn't it. Could you imagine "Project Managed John Smith
> Rtd" or "CEO Fred Bloggs Rtd"? I guess military types are more defined by their
> jobs than those of us on civvie street to have a need to cling onto (some
> would say dine out on) their former ranks after they retire.

Project manager John Smith isn't usually introduced as such outside the
work environment, unlike Major Jones.

On 16/09/2022 15:49, Certes wrote:
> On 16/09/2022 11:54, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Sep 2022 17:59:48 +0100
>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 15/09/2022 07:44, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> A very wide range office holders there retain the right to use their
>>>> title for life - so Judge Judy really was a judge (back in the 70's and
>>>> 80's). We are used to Colonels and so on retaining their military rank
>>>> on civvy street, but would probably find it odd to hear former
>>>> politicians referred to in the present tense.
>>>> --
>>>
>>> IIRC Majors and above are allowed to continue to use their rank after
>>> retiring. Hence captains are often promoted to hon major shortly before
>>> they retire.
>>
>> All a bit daft though isn't it. Could you imagine "Project Managed
>> John Smith
>> Rtd" or "CEO Fred Bloggs Rtd"? I guess military types are more defined
>> by their
>> jobs than those of us on civvie street to have a need to cling onto (some
>> would say dine out on) their former ranks after they retire.
>
> Project manager John Smith isn't usually introduced as such outside the
> work environment, unlike Major Jones.

On the other hand John Smith might well present himself as J Smith, PhD

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Fri, 16 Sep 2022 15:49:11 +0100
Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>On 16/09/2022 11:54, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Sep 2022 17:59:48 +0100
>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 15/09/2022 07:44, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> A very wide range office holders there retain the right to use their
>>>> title for life - so Judge Judy really was a judge (back in the 70's and
>>>> 80's). We are used to Colonels and so on retaining their military rank
>>>> on civvy street, but would probably find it odd to hear former
>>>> politicians referred to in the present tense.
>>>> --
>>>
>>> IIRC Majors and above are allowed to continue to use their rank after
>>> retiring. Hence captains are often promoted to hon major shortly before
>>> they retire.
>>
>> All a bit daft though isn't it. Could you imagine "Project Managed John Smith
>
>> Rtd" or "CEO Fred Bloggs Rtd"? I guess military types are more defined by
>their
>> jobs than those of us on civvie street to have a need to cling onto (some
>> would say dine out on) their former ranks after they retire.
>
>Project manager John Smith isn't usually introduced as such outside the
>work environment, unlike Major Jones.

Whooosh....

On 16/09/2022 16:01, Graeme Wall wrote:
> On the other hand John Smith might well present himself as J Smith, PhD

I like the Continental system of using the title "Engineer".

Many of the uses of "Doctor" for people with PhD's are a bit of an ego trip.

On 16/09/2022 16:23, MB wrote:
> On 16/09/2022 16:01, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> On the other hand John Smith might well present himself as J Smith, PhD
>
> I like the Continental system of using the title "Engineer".
>
> Many of the uses of "Doctor" for people with PhD's are a bit of an ego
> trip.

"Doctor" also suggests a medical ability which most PhDs lack.

On 16/09/2022 16:37, Certes wrote:
> On 16/09/2022 16:23, MB wrote:
>> On 16/09/2022 16:01, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>> On the other hand John Smith might well present himself as J Smith, PhD
>>
>> I like the Continental system of using the title "Engineer".
>>
>> Many of the uses of "Doctor" for people with PhD's are a bit of an ego
>> trip.
>
> "Doctor" also suggests a medical ability which most PhDs lack.

I knew somebody would obsess over the random academic title I used.
First one I could think of.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 16/09/2022 16:37, Certes wrote:
> "Doctor" also suggests a medical ability which most PhDs lack.

Some M.D.'s probably do not have much practical medical ability.

MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 16/09/2022 16:37, Certes wrote:
>> "Doctor" also suggests a medical ability which most PhDs lack.
>
>
> Some M.D.'s probably do not have much practical medical ability.
>

Another oddity is dentists, who are often called Dr Driller, when I don't
think they have the right to the title.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>> On 16/09/2022 16:37, Certes wrote:
>>> "Doctor" also suggests a medical ability which most PhDs lack.
>>
>>
>> Some M.D.'s probably do not have much practical medical ability.
>>
>
> Another oddity is dentists, who are often called Dr Driller, when I don't
> think they have the right to the title.
>
>
It’s a bit of a bone of contention with conventional medical doctors. The
dentists just declared they had studied as long as medical students and
thus were entitled to call themselves doctor. On the other hand my doctor
son only lasted two years as Dr before becoming Mr again after passing his
surgeons exams. Strange old world.

MB wrote:

>On 16/09/2022 16:01, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> On the other hand John Smith might well present himself as J Smith, PhD
>
>
>I like the Continental system of using the title "Engineer".

Which works as long as its meaning is fully understood.

Whilst I can still use the letters BSc, since retirement I
allowed my professional institution membership to lapse, and
along with those letters (MIET) I also lost Chartered Engineer
status.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK
chris@cdixon.me.uk @ChrisJDixon1

Plant amazing Acers.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> writes:

> Foreign heads of state and their spouses heading to London for the state
> funeral for Queen Elizabeth II have been asked to arrive in the U.K. on
> commercial flights and banned from using helicopters to get around.

<SNIP details of arrangements on the ground in or near London>

> <https://www.politico.eu/article/queen-elizabeth-joe-biden-king-charles-westminster-abbeyonly-heads-of-state-plus-one-to-attend-queen-elizabeths-funeral/>

(Sorry!) A bit of plane spotting:

Japan's representatives seem to be using their own transport -
call sign JF01 has just landed at Stansted (18:20 BST) while JF02
diverged from the JF01 track near Milton Keynes and is now
heading east over Kent. (JF02 may be heading for Brussels.) In
each case, the aircraft is a Boeing 777-300ER.

Pakistan's Gulfstream 4 (or G450), call sign PFF756, has landed at
Luton, about 18:32 BST.

Nigeria's Dassault Falcon 7X, call sign NGR002, is declared for
Stansted, currently heading NW over Chessington.

The Nigerian and Pakistani planes are on Flightradar24; the
Japanese flights are hidden by FR24 but visible on (some) other
flight trackers.

There are probably others - these were just easy to find.

--
David

David Williams <davidw_3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Foreign heads of state and their spouses heading to London for the state
>> funeral for Queen Elizabeth II have been asked to arrive in the U.K. on
>> commercial flights and banned from using helicopters to get around.
>
> <SNIP details of arrangements on the ground in or near London>
>
>> <https://www.politico.eu/article/queen-elizabeth-joe-biden-king-charles-westminster-abbeyonly-heads-of-state-plus-one-to-attend-queen-elizabeths-funeral/>
>
> (Sorry!) A bit of plane spotting:
>
> Japan's representatives seem to be using their own transport -
> call sign JF01 has just landed at Stansted (18:20 BST) while JF02
> diverged from the JF01 track near Milton Keynes and is now
> heading east over Kent. (JF02 may be heading for Brussels.) In
> each case, the aircraft is a Boeing 777-300ER.
>
> Pakistan's Gulfstream 4 (or G450), call sign PFF756, has landed at
> Luton, about 18:32 BST.
>
> Nigeria's Dassault Falcon 7X, call sign NGR002, is declared for
> Stansted, currently heading NW over Chessington.
>
> The Nigerian and Pakistani planes are on Flightradar24; the
> Japanese flights are hidden by FR24 but visible on (some) other
> flight trackers.
>
> There are probably others - these were just easy to find.
>

I found a YouTube video showing many of the leaders' planes arriving.