The Voyager aircraft, named “Vespina”, has completed its refurbishment with a new paint job.
The Airbus A330 Voyager is an aerial refuelling tanker aircraft with transport capabilities and is based on the civilian Airbus A330. The multi-role A330 tanker/transport has been ordered by the Royal Australian Air Force, Royal Air Force, United Arab Emirates Air Force, Royal Saudi Air Force and Republic of Singapore Air Force.
14 Voyagers leased from the company ‘Air Tanker’ are in the Royal Air Force fleet, nine are in the RAF’s “core” capability and the other five are considered “surge” aircraft and are often leased to airlines when not required. It should be noted that one or two of the surge fleet remain in the Air Tanker livery and are often flown permanently on MoD transport duties to the Falklands, Canada and other locations.
The job of this specific Voyager aircraft, say the MoD, is to provide a secure, cost-effective and suitably profiled transport for Government Ministers and the Royal Family.
“The aircraft now proudly displays the Union Flag alongside RAF markings and is ready to represent the UK across the globe.”
After weeks of work, the Voyager returned to RAF Brize Norton where it will operate alongside the rest of the RAF Voyager fleet. Alongside its VIP transport role, the repainted Voyager aircraft remains certified for its original use of air-to-air refuelling and personnel transport.
Air Commodore Simon Edwards, the Senior Responsible officer for the project said:
“This project was a privilege to have been involved in and I am delighted to have seen it delivered so quickly and efficiently, together with our industry partners. The aircraft’s new paint scheme will better reflect its prestige role which we are proud to undertake.”
According to a statement from the Royal Air Force:
“The aircraft, known as Vespina and also often referred to as ‘ZZ336’ which is its military registration number, was previously visually indistinguishable from the rest of the Operational Voyager Fleet. This external paint scheme will better reflect its VIP mission and contribution to ‘Global Britain’. The paintwork concludes a refurbishment stemming from the 2015 SDSR. The Project first created and agreed an outline design before being modified to account for commercial, legal, operational and design needs. This process was not only about the visual design, this was a complex engineering project requiring detailed drawings which were developed by AIRBUS. Marshall Aerospace and Defence Group were then chosen to deliver the project on time and within budget.”
The aircraft is used by the Prime Minister, other ministers and senior members of the Royal Family for official engagements.
Official flights using either Royal Squadron planes or long haul charter, cost on average £6,700 per flying hour while using a Voyager aircraft would cost £2,000. It would be available for refuelling when it wasn’t in use.
Voyager key facts:
- Based on the Airbus A330 aircraft.
- Weighs 293 tonnes.
- Has a wingspan of 60m.
- Can carry 111 tonnes of fuel or 45 tonnes of freight.
- Has a crew of 2 (pilot and co-pilot) on passenger carrying missions.
- Has 8 cabin crew when passenger carrying or else 11 cabin crew on VIP tasks.
- Has a surface area of 2874 metres.
Looks absolutely stunning, great job ??????
Absolutely agree.
I really don’t see reason in the public’s resentment of this plane and it’s paint job. It’s near enough the cheapest way of transporting VIPs. Cheaper than chartering jets and cheaper than building a bespoke new one. Like the article mentioned, it’s still qualified as a refuelling aircraft too.
It is media resentment not public resentment. To get to the truth, think diametrically opposed to what the BBC and even the Daily Mail says.
Whilst the media certainly jumped on the topic, I believe it’s all around perception, and I mean this in two ways.
Firstly, current timing. The perception and view of the performance of the government and key individuals within it has rarely been lower. When times are bad people will tend to amplify the negatives of any situation – which spirals. If the paintwork needed redone, and they decided for a change which was no more costly than the grey then there’s just an element of bad luck with the timing. Boris Johnson’s Government have been so monumentally inept with PR recently that they had very little leeway, and £x hundreds of thousands spent on painting a plane in the middle of the biggest economic challenge UK has ever faced does not look good PR wise, even if the paint needs done (remember I’m not saying that the money being spent is wrong, just the way it is inevitably perceived).
Secondly, I think there’s a general unease among a lot (not all and I won’t even commit to a majority) of the British populace at the idea of a Presidential Prime Minister (it’s what we have the Queen for after all). The government getting this plane in the first place in 2016 was controversial but we were tempered by being told it would be an aircraft still available to the RAF for operational duties (hence the grey), this is clearly no longer the case – even if qualified for aerial refueling the circumstances it could now perceivably be used in are reduced.
On a personal level just feel it’s a little OTT, the gold lettering looks tacky as anything to me. I envisaged something akin to Air Force One, clearly American but relatively subdued and classy – this not so much. I do however like the idea that Trump will feel he has to outdo Boris and look forward to seeing a repainted Air Force One with a Bald Eagle nose art, diamante “United States of Murica” and a US Flag with flashing stars.
And with that I retreat back to hiding on the site and rarely posting, chuckling to myself like the muppet I am.
Wow!!! So much better than the predictions. A stunning design and will turn heads everywhere.
Great job, it would have looked even better with a blue belly instead of all white.
I’m a self confessed left of centre person but I have absolutely no problem with this. We need representation around the world. So if this is the royal / PM’s aircraft why do we still need the BAe C2 & C3 aircraft? So we have lost one of our Voyager MRRTs to VIP transport – OK replace it with a new Voyager.
Potentially activate a plane from the surge fleet to replace it as a tanker, perhaps? But then again, if 8 ‘regular’ Voyagers can meet the refuelling requirements then maybe using this as a VIP transport enables a closer to full use of the core fleet which I assume is paid for at a fixed price? Surge aircraft I assume cost money as and when activated?
Are 8 Voyagers enough for current requirements? Anyone know?
9 are permanently available at Brize. but some of the 5 that can be leased out are used for Falklands and Cyprus air bridges. The fleet as a whole is well used, but still far less then a holiday operator would use them.
It will still be used for air air refueling, and other military operations, Boris/MP’s and the Royal Family don’t fly around in these aircraft 7 days a week. it’s still a full mission capable Voyager.
Robert not picking a fight here but it is painted white with gold letters on the side. It is not fit or available for military ops. I can’t see why the gov don’t just own up, close down the BA 146 ‘Royal Flight’ and buy another voyager to support the front line.
Rob, it’s a tanker not a stealth bomber. The paint scheme really has no impact on its ability to refuel aircraft. Any enemy capable of downing an RAF tanker will be able to do so with a BVR missile whether it is painted grey or bright pink. What would be the point in buying a new voyager when there are the 5 surge aircraft available? The RAF and the wider armed forces are short of equipment across multiple capabilities, but in my opinion air to air refuelling is not one of them. The Airtanker contract is one of the few examples of these kinds of private sector contracts actually delivering an efficient, undiluted and sufficient capability.
I don’t think it really matters what colour it is when refuelling Typhoons over the North Sea, or transporting pax to Cyprus. And if it was needed somewhere really nasty, the grey would soon be slapped back on. ?
Royal Flight is long gone Rob. 32 (R) Sqn now.
Voyagers are used for transporting personnel as well as AAR. Not in any tactical role that requires low viz camouflage. If it needs using elsewhere it will be.
Cheers.
Why wouldn’t it be suitable for military ops? The Voyager that took me on OTX’s didn’t benefit in anyway from it’s Grey paintjob.
Can’t help but thing BA will be on the phone to their lawyers for copyright issues….
It looks better than I feared although personally I’d have still preferred the ‘roughy toughy’ workhorse look but hey ho.
Love it! It’s a great paint job, clearly promoting the UK and the Royal Air Force. Like the lovely cheat line. The scheme says it all – so add nothing and take nothing away.
But ‘Vespina’? That’s some kind of moth, I understand. Like Boris, I guess – flitting about all over the place…
Love it. I suggested White too!
Looking good.
Royal Mail horror show confined to history.
It reminds me of the old VC10 and Tristar livery: white, with a blue stripe. Looks nice!
Agree mate. And the name? I’m not familiar?
As far as I’m aware, Vespina is a Moth.
Yes, I meant any previous military use. None I’ve heard of myself.
Air Force One….vs Moth! I suppose it might catch on!
I thought so. No, not that I’m aware of, nor does it follow any of the other naming conventions, such as mythology, or individuals of distinction.
They should have named it ‘Sir Winston Churchill’. That would have triggered the haters even more. Especially if they included all of his honours too.
Now….THAT would have been fantastic! God what a missed opportunity! Fits too.
The USN have a Churchill, we could to.
Great idea.
Time to pen a letter to our local MPs!
I’ve also just noticed the ‘ER’ crown by doors nearest the engines. A nice touch!
Good spot. I had to zoom in in screen to see.
On another subject. Is there any indication looking at these photos that the aircraft has had any extra kit added? ECM, comms fit, and so on?
I’m not expecting AF1 with escape pods and EMP pulse here, just wondered.
I have no idea about anything extra, but it does already come with the Defensive Aids System to counter IR targeting MANPADs, which seems a reasonable benefit for transporting a head of state and a head of government. Also secure military comms system, including satcoms, for its tanker role. And a military air crew trained in the use of such systems. I suspect these are attributes that get overlooked when its suggested to just buy a commercial aircraft.
Good points GHF. So sufficient for its role I guess.
Doesn’t look bad. Although I can’t say I’m a fan of the RAF Kettering colour.
As a daily… ahem… operator, of a bona fide VESPA PX200E I absolutely resent this intrusion into my space.
That, that, that plane almost (almost) puts my bike to shame.
Hurruph.
I just don’t get it sorry. The RAF paint job was fine, the plane does the job no matter the colour.
It may be I’ve spent to much time scrapping for a couple of thousand pounds here and there to keep important service running. But spending close on a million quid for A vanity paint Job on one aircraft just pisses me off and offends me more than I can ever fully explain.
I could have paid for mental health care workers who could look after the mental health of something like 500 ex service personnel or really ill kids a year for 10 years with that money.
I will say it, you can only spend the money once….you can spend it on something like stopping kids killing themselves or you can spend it on crap like paint. I’ve had to look at the face of dead kids and close their eyes for the last time when we stopped resuscitation then had to pull it together and go and tell the parents how sorry I was but….. Stuff like this triggers my PTSD driven rage more than I can tell you.
Time to go for a walk along the sea front I think…..( bugger Brighton beach is jammed )
Wonder how long it takes for crowds of self righteous demonstrators, with limited subject matter knowldge put it on the “I know fuck all about history and rip shit down” website, and try to climb on the tailplane with a tow rope, a couple of D shackles, and some placards, and try to pull the tail plane down!!!!!!!! ?
That’s turned out really well. I like it. Most of the way there now against a fair amount of media & some public headwinds. In my mind not quite all the way there yet though.
It’s got the nice paint job, some defensive aids against missile attack (is that standard on all Voyagers or beefed up for this VIP one?), secure comms which I think were specifically augmented for VIP/Government use, and it can still perform fully in the AAR role and to a lesser extent in the personnel transport role (I assume it’s not as good as the other Voyagers there because the upgraded seating at the front must surely mean that total passenger capacity is reduced vs the other other Voyagers). The final upgrade that I think is still missing is to compromise the troop transport role further by more upgrades to accommodation at the front which would inevitability ripple down to fewer available seats at the back.
From the pictures that I’ve seen the top VIP level at the front looks very similar to a BA first class cabin (I specifically mention BA first class because that isn’t as good as first class in many other airlines that have individually partitioned off seats or even fully enclosed cabins in some cases), another section behind that more like a regular business class cabin for the mid ranking officials, and finally probably standard Voyager seating for the press pack – basically economy class.
I think they should have dedicated a fair amount more space to the highest level accommodation at the front so that the principal (I’m thinking mostly of the Prime Minister here) could have a private cabin to sleep in and a private meeting room/office with proper sit down desk and conference table to do planning and other work when on long journeys. We expect the highest levels of performance from whomever we vote into office as leader of our country so it’s not grandstanding or an over-inflated sense of national self importance to want at least these basic amenities available to our Prime Ministers when they fly out to important negotiations so that they can arrive as prepared and as rested as they can possibly be and hence represent us at the highest level at which they are capable of regardless of who happens to be in office at any given time.
So, I think I’ll give this using-a-Voyager-as-VIP-transport marks of 8 out of 10 so far and it really wouldn’t take that much to get to 10 out of 10 but with all the negativity that the media tends to throw at such things I suspect my ideal version won’t materialise.
Julian, I ‘get’ the need for a VIP aircraft and I accept that it will be tied (ie maintained/crewed etc) to the MOD. I wouldn’t go as far as your ‘palace with wings’ myself but tomatoe tomato… I’m not keen that we’ve effectively removed a useful military asset for this VIP aircraft, even if they’re trying to pull the ‘hospital ship’ defence. If the government want a swanky jet then it should be funded outwith the MOD budget.
I’m not sure I’d characterise my suggestion as a “palace with wings”, I’d more say a “porta-cabin with wings”. A basic proper single-person berth rather than a lie-flat recliner with a flimsy curtain around it and a proper sit-around table to do pre-meeting planning, or crisis management if something kicks off back home when a PM is en-route (within a soundproof cabin in case classified info needs to be discussed), rather than squatting at the foot of each other’s chairs to talk, or having snatched conversations in aisles, doesn’t seem too much to ask.
I wouldn’t disagree with you about the various ways the Government loads other stuff onto the MoD budget but we are in a situation where as a country we have to try to do as much as possible with the current limited budgets to even stand still. Given where we are (this VIP Voyager exists) I still maintain that it is a shame it is, in my view, compromised for both military personnel transport and very-VIP transport (as in PM or the most senior ministers) roles. It sort of falls in between the two in my view – not quite enough internal facilities up front to act as an “office in the sky” (maybe that’s a better characterisation of my wishes) which is the level I would want to ensure we get the maximum effectiveness from our PMs even when they are en-route to distant destinations.
In theory the AAR role is not compromised in the slightest in terms of capability as opposed to availability but, given they probably try to keep this plane with good availability for short notice VIP flights, maybe it is effectively now part of the surge fleet as opposed to the core fleet thus reducing the core fleet to 8 with 6 surge. If that is correct then a fairly easy fix to that loss of core tanker asset would seem to me to be to bring one of the other surge aircraft back into the core fleet to restore the previous 9 core aircraft that can be scheduled for use for military taskings with complete RAF control leaving, as before, 5 surge aircraft to be called up in emergencies. That would presumably increase the annual cost of the Air Tanker contract but possibly still be cheaper and offer more overall utility to the UK than commissioning a whole new dedicated VIP aircraft. In that event I agree it would be entirely appropriate for the Government to fund that additional annual contract cost for upgrading a surge aircraft to core from a non-military budget since it is effectively costs attributable to running the office of the PM.
The way you say it the free and easy approach to budgets shouldn’t be an issue but surely that’s not the point of departments having budgets if other stuff out of their control just lands on their desk. I’m a fan of having a more holistic approach to budgets, the small minded ‘MY’ budget often isn’t helpful but this just seems a bit cavalier to me. Not that my views will be sought on the matter. 😉