Yesterday we published an article regarding the movement of weapons onboard British C-17s from the UK to Ukraine.
That happened, so what’s the problem you ask?
I am guilty of an error in judgement. I included my opinion that Germany appeared to be denying British cargo aircraft permission to fly through German airspace. That was wrong.
Regardless of the reason for British cargo aircraft avoiding German airspace (the official reason, by the way, is that the UK did not ask for permission and as such, Germany did not refuse), it was wrong to include speculation regarding this in a news article. We may never know the reason permission wasn’t sought from Germany to allow these flights but it’s not acceptable for me to offer my own personal opinion in the context of a news article.
On top of placing speculation into a news article, I published the speculative sentence before hearing confirmation. That was also wrong.
I was wrong to do these things and I am sorry to all of you, this falls far below the standards I aim for. I hope some of you give us a second chance.
Thanks for reading,
George
Nothing to apologise for George, don’t worry about it👍
Thank you for the correction.
As an avid reader, thank you for the clarification, the comments the article brought out were very illuminating and not least, they examined the malaise that is European Policy or lack thereof!
Yeah, Germany is a questionable ally and an EU Military is a delusional pipe dream and has everyone forgotten that appeasement doesn’t work with dictators, how did that go near a century ago with Hitler?
What the heck, why would you say Germany is a questionable ally and constantly bringing up Hitler and the war is just ridiculous. A totally incorrect statement about Germany was made, quite insulting to them, an apology was made which should of been, and all of a sudden it’s Germany is a bad ally and let’s not forget about Hitler. For goodness sakes isn’t it time to move on and let’s all try and get on with each other.
George, a very human error, for which you have apologised. Keep up the good work…
Hi George
Everyone and every organisation makes mistakes, but it’s how you deal with it.
You have shown remarkable integrity in highlighting this error and have done so rapidly and without fuss.
This just reinforces the fact that you hold yourself and your site to the highest of standards, if only those you report on did the same.
Have a beer or two and put it behind you, tomorrow is another day.
George,
I’d like to second Pacman27’s well put comment.
If the UK press generally behaved with the same level of integrity as you have today public life in this country would be far better to the benefit of us all.
Thank you to you and your team for an excellent and authoritive website.
CR
Hear hear
Well done. If only all the media used your high standards
Seconded.
Likewise, ….dont know how you manage George
(My personal opinions would be creeping in everywhere!)
Totally professional as always.
George, mate. Behave!
2nd chance my foot. I doubt many have any issue with it. If it was speculation, so what.
Based on Germany’s historical attitude it was reasonable.
No reason whatsoever to apologise for writing an article.
Yes. But its important to seperate facts from opinion. Thats why newspapers have Opinion sections clearly labelled.
George has done the right thing here…
It’s up to us to provide the speculation…I suspect we didn’t ask for permission to avoid putting the German’s in a difficult position..
He has. It’s when he asked for a second chance I thought, come on, will people seriously pull him up for that??
UKDJ. Best UK Defence site out there.
It’s not like the BBC dont speculate now and again lol…
That thought had occurred to me. They put their opinion on everything.
Yes sadly more now than in the past me thinks.
Fortunately for us George is way more professional than most at Auntie.
I think it is worse that that. The BBC don’t appear to utilise subject matter experts if they can possibly avoid it so we get glaring errors, and guesses to add to the opinions of journalists. The BBC should be informing everyone but end up misleading people too much of the time.
I’ve recently seen an example of the BBC intentionally misleading, being called out immediately by the company they misrepresented, and then waiting weeks before quietly correcting the article.
That is bad. The BBC works for the license payers and should present facts fully checked with context and alternative arguments which viewers can absorb and reach their own conclusions. There are some now who are beginning to feel that the narrative coming from the BBC is getting misleading and dangerous. Odd times we live in.
And I’m one of them. I won’t watch the BBC news. I’m not interested in Brussels opinion.
Their narrative seems constantly left leaning, woke, anti Tory, pro EU, pro anyone else but Britain.
The BBC is, in its own words, a well respected impartial news organisation. The fact that you disagree with its stance makes you, in Hilary Clinton’s words, a “deplorable “ since you are obviously incapable of thinking what Auntie wants you to think. No doubt when the Orwellian thought police really get going you will be top of the list for “reeducation “ Along with quite a lot of the rest of us!
PS. Well done George, no apology needed.
The BBC is the Guardian. But we don’t have to buy the Guardian or go to jail.
It was a reasonable assumption that most of us agreed with. I just wish every outlet would put their hands up when they’re knowingly wrong never mind inadvertently.
Well Germany have made a statement that their position is unaltered.
So we can safely assume that includes a sabotaging other NATO members attempts to help Ukraine with arms.
My Opinion based on Germany’s clearly stated fact and past behaviour.
Spot on. If they’re upset about everyone else thinking they’re up Putins rear end they should behaving like they are.
George you are a super star, nothing for you to loose sleep about
Thanks for the correction and honesty. It’s a shame more companies don’t hold themselves to such high standards.
We all are wrong every day, and sometimes we are right. No worries. In fact it was highly plausible so I never questioned it.
Well if you fell short so did Newsnight last night for inferring the exact same thing. One presumes there is a reason why they flew over Denmark and Poland (who one presumes they asked) rather than Germany so if they didn’t ask them there was surely a reason worth speculating upon, even though rightly not presenting it as fact unless/until proven as such.
But sometimes you don’t ask because you don’t want to get or risk getting a no which would have played into Russias gleeful hands, though let’s be honest I’m sure they see the same message and speculation it’s just better not to have it confirmed as fact to have it broadcast to the wider world. In the end depressing but sensible decision on our part.
If there was only more honesty and responsibility acceptance such as this in society. Well done George, a nice example of ‘Britishness’. 🇬🇧🏴❤️
We live in a democracy – opinions matter
“We live in a democracy – and it matters very much that facts are (real) facts and opinion is opinion. It is extremely dangerous to confuse the two – in fact if you do then no one can have soundly based opinions.
VAR… red card
Thank you for all you do & articles you publish – things happen you made a slight error. Something that many well funded news outlets have done in the past without apology. Do not beat yourself up about it. let this be the end of it water 7nder the bridge
Keep up the great work
Foegiven George. Ive been reading articles and following UKDJ for years and there is nothing to apologise for. We are all human.
Germany has gone all Tony stark saying they want to resolve the Ukrainian crisis peacefully and to stop the export of weapons to other countries. Good luck with that when Putin does what he wants and re-establishes the Soviet empire and gobbles up half of Europe and the iron curtain descends again.
I guess they calculate they won’t be in that half of europe. So they couldn’t care less.
Hi George. Bravo for owning up, not many people today have the balls to do so!
Will you be releasing a piece on the USNs latest release of information on their future DDG(X)?
Hi DaveyB, is this a personal request for some new info here? Love it! Can I copy you… and I’d like to ask for any update on the carrier defensive armament upgrades.. Lol
Yes basically. I think it’s relevant to the UK Defence Journal, because of the forthcoming T83 program, as it will be introduced into service in a similar time scale.
The main announcement made with DDG(X), is that it is planned to have three laser weapons systems.
See link below:
Navy Unveils Next-Generation DDG(X) Warship Concept with Hypersonic Missiles, Lasers – USNI News
With a single 150kW laser forward and two 600kW lasers on the hangar roof. This means that they will have a combined power output of some 1350kW (1.35MW). A laser is not power efficient and generally uses twice as much electrical power input to generate the emitted output figure. Therefore, the ship will be looking to generate around 2.7MW just to power the lasers.
In the grand scheme of things this may not sound a lot, after all a single MT30 genset can generate 25MW to 40MW of power. But when the ship is going down the all-electrical integrated drive train route, plus there’s the other weapon systems, radars, radios, ESM, ECM, lighting, heating, air-con, the hotel system etc to power. Making sure a capacitor bank is constantly charged will place a huge load on the electrical system. Perhaps, this is why there are only two 600kW class lasers instead of three? The USN believe a 600kW class laser is sufficient to replace the RAM in the CIWS role. Leaving the 150kW laser for the smaller stuff.
Apart from the frictional wear on the rail gun arms, the electrical power required to fire a rail gun round, is probably another reason why it didn’t go any further and has been shelved.
Why does that matter to the T83 program? Well, if the USN are looking at a laser based CIWS. You can bet the RN will be to. News on the Dragonfire front has gone very quiet of late! Besides a lot of the publications were saying it would top out at 150kW. But, as it is a fibre laser, it may be feasible to scale it up to >500kW? The ship’s power requirements will go to some way in deciding the size of the ship. You need volume to house 1 or 2 MT30s and diesel gensets, plus all the accessories that they need, air intakes and exhaust etc. So, a large proportion of the ship will need to be dedicated to where the gensets are located and how they are separated for battle damage redundancy. The number of gensets then will determine your base electrical power generation. Which will then determine what systems can be run and if there is sufficient headroom for system growth. But crucially it will determine if there is scope to continuously power a capacitor bank for a 600kW class laser or two!
The USN have said DDG(X) will initially replace the Ticonderoga (Tico) class cruisers and then the early Arleigh Burke (AB) destroyers. The ships are some 170m and 160m (Batch 3) long respectively. They have said that the ship will have a similar missile count to the AB, though they have also said that some of the forward Mk41 VLS will be replaced with an enlarged silo to house vertically launched hypersonic missiles, when they become available. Also telling is that a mission bay is optional and not a prerequisite as per the T26 etc. They have said they want the ship to be more fuel efficient. Now I’m not a hydrodynamicist, but I do know a longer narrower hull form can either be faster through the water or use less power to push it through the water at a given speed. Therefore, the ship’s length will probably be closer to the Tico rather than an AB, if not longer.
Again, if we look at the T45 and T26 both are around 150m long. The T26 has one single MT30 gas turbine and 4 diesel gensets. The T45 has two WR21 gas turbines and will also have three diesel gensets. Whilst an AB uses four GE LM2500 gas turbines, which is the same as the Tico. The Zumwalt by comparison uses two MT30s and two small RR 4500 gas turbines to produce a published 78MW of power. Looking at the DDG(X) image the USN have published, it shows a ship with two widely separated exhaust stacks. So possibly using two MT30 class gensets. But they also want a 25% fuel efficiency over the ABs and a 50% greater range. So, they must also be looking at complimentary diesel gensets. Again, these items all take up space, hence the large hull form. But with two MT30s plus some diesel gensets, there is scope to continuously power laser-based weapons systems along with everything else needed to fight and live on the ship.
This is something I believe the RN T83 planning office need to take into serious consideration. If they want 600kW CIWS class lasers, then the ship will need to be much bigger than the current T45. As it will need significantly more power to make sure it can continuously power this class of laser weapon system. Therefore, it is very likely that the ship will need two MT30 type gensets, along with complimentary diesel gensets, which requires a lot more space than a T26 or T45 hull can accommodate!
Fair enough George.
It’s good to hold yourself to those standards.
In this case the speculation (which I am assuming was started with your piece / tweet) has appeared in a number of places that I have seen elsewhere – especially in political circles with a certain amount of Germany bashing.
So thank-you for a clear and quick correction / apology, rather than an excuse or sloping of soldiers.
Good job. Such maintains rather undermines authority.
You made a mistake. You’ve apologised. No harm done. Keep writing and keeping us up to date.
IF only the MSM was as decent!! fair play for putting ya hand up
I’m a long time reader of this site. This is the first time I’ve commented, because I wanted to say: well done, George. I work in the media and I wish there were more who held themselves to such standards of integrity. Thank you for all your good work and I hope you find the time to keep it up.
That is a great example to set George. Look how easy it is to apologize. Incredibly easy when one is motivated to get better and humble enough to do it. There is no shame in that is there? Contrast that with people who are complacent and would get defensive for example, not admit to anything, and not learn from the event. The choice is clear and it should be much easier for people to follow your example than it is.
All good from me too George. I thoroughly enjoy reading this website daily and everyone’s posts.
Also being an Englishman we probably tend to say sorry more and offer our apologies more than most and we can get ribbed for this. Love the decency, integrity and standards here.
… but, “sorry”, the English cricket team… was rubbish this time around… 😆
There is no point in asking for diplomatic clearance if you know the country you are asking to over fly will not give it.
Don’t worry about it. It was and still is very reasonable speculation to make. Germany are naïve like that.
But yes, it is best not to make such speculation in the future. Leave that to us here in the comments.
This was a very professional response (to what was a minor error), thank you
Thanks for your honesty
I spoke with a good friend of mine Juregen in Hamburg yesterday, he couldn’t understand why his gas had been turned off 😂
video of the C17 getting unloaded in Kiev
https://twitter.com/osinttechnical/status/1483516639295463441?s=21
Do you reckon the Ruski’s will watch this? Why was this special delivery publicised? Every thing and movement seems to be on video these days.
People. And attention seeking.
The Kiwi photos from their assessment flight over Tonga were also leaked.
Yes they will watch it.
A shot across the bows ?
It’s OK. It’s just a mistake… One with much truth in it.
My own ‘speculation’ is that the UK did not ask Germany for permission because they anticipated that it would be refused. Classic diplomatic tactic to avoid an argument that would only make a bad situation worse.
Morning George. Thanks for setting the record straight and I am sure we all agree-no need to apologise! UKDJ remains the number one source for defence news-even more so with corrections like this
Cheers from Durban
Howzit Geoff,
My regards to Durb’s, we left 25 years ago… folks still up in Mooi River.
Cheers,
Howsit Ivan! Are you folks on a farm or in town? MR is a cold spot in Winter😁 We are still hanging in and hoping down here. I am a DHS Old boy btw-class of 1966 and still meet with survivors for a lunch and dop every 3 months.
Don’t want to abuse Georges hospitality!!
Cheers my friend
..your folks
I can think of a certain former journalist and someone very much in the public spotlight at the moment who could use just an ounce of your ethical behaviour.
Great site George, thanks for your hard work.
Well done for being transparent and correcting the error. Keep up the good work.
George, its understandable, you thought that with all the flights going on, it was a “works function” and so didn’t really check. You have realised that it wasn’t, so have apologised. I don’t think any of us will call for you to step down !!!!😀😃.
It still begs a question. In view of the imminent invasion Is Germany likewise supplying arms to the Ukraine and if not why not?
No they’re not. Why not ? That’s the million dollar question !
oh dear. No conspiracy theories or snide comments required.
The reason is the same as the reason that they stay clear of any armed interventions in foreign countries. For them, defence is defence. No one, from the political class to the citizens is going to break that consensus any time soon -n would have been the view a week ago.
But I reckon the situation is so grave that they have changed their mind on a fundamental principle. And that too has been done in a way that my guess would be that it has high level of popular support.
The occasional mistake set against otherwise an excellent website and spot on journalism. If anything this one mistake is a reminder of how good you are – particularly when you fez up and apologise. Keep doing what you’re doing. MSM – this site/individual is an excellent example to follow!
@George
Thank you for you hard work and your integrity.
As others have said you put BBC, Telegraph and Times to shame in many respects on defence matters.
No problem, I visit here regularly and will continue to do so.
To err is human………………
It’s how you deal with it that matters George. Well done from me, so keep up the stirling work.
As a valued place for defence information, correcting errors are important and by doing so you become a more reliable source.
Ukraine has confirmed they were supplied with NLAW from the UK stocks. I wonder if they will be replaced.
Hi George, apology noted and accepted. As Daniele Mandelli (another great contributor here) says, your website is the best UK journal out there so, for God sake, keep these news feeds coming. This website is a daily go-to for me. When I read the original article I also took into account the Twitter snapshot you’d included which stated the UK hadn’t asked Germany for permission to over-fly and, therefore, didn’t interpret your article as suggesting over-flights had been denied anyway …. so there wasn’t an issue between UK and Germany. It’s good you’ve acknowledged any implication with your article but it also shows you have integrity which just reinforces my point that choosing to read UKDJ was such a good decision in the first place. Keep ’em coming.
Seems the “Sun” must have read your initial article ! https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/17367817/raf-ukraine-nato-missiles-germany-air-space/
No worries George. Bigger losses at sea as my grandmother used to say. Keep up the good work. Its appreciated.
Keep your reports coming, George! As far as I’m concerned UKDJ is my daily, reliable, fix on defence matters. It’s amusing, if sad, to read what other ‘news’ media say about the same subject. Total lack of standards. UKDJ reigns!
Hi folks hope all is well.
Everyone makes mistakes, it’s human to do so.
The difference is how one comes to the front and say they’ve made a mistake which appears rare these days.
Good for you George, nothing to worry about whatsoever, keep up the good work mate!
Cheers
George Amery
If only main stream media were as honest and open with their mistakes people would have more faith in them.
I wish all journalists had your ethic George. Too often a little fact is stretched and spun by personal opinion and political leaning that it ceases to be news and becomes propaganda. Well done for putting us straight. It only makes me a more avid reader!
George, thank you for your professional approach.
This only solidifies the UK Defence Journal’s credibility.
Keep up the excellent work.
You couldn’t pass these sentiments on to some politicians could you (especially certain Scottish ones) Ho Ho Keep up the good work
Indeed you should be very sorry. You run a superb website and I expect the highest standards. Seriously, I thought you were going tell us you were at a garden party or something. Thanks for the update.
Thank you for the correction and well done for putting your hand up.
A nice contrast with such as the BBC.
Thank you, George.
If only MSM were as good c:
I appreciate considered opinion – its what makes the comments so interesting. Just note things as your opinion in the future rather than not saying anything at all.
Integrity.
Media reports suggest that the UK didn’t seek German permission because ‘it would take too long (to get it)’. Which brings up a question: why does it take ‘too long’ to get a permission in Germany, when, clearly, it takes no / little time to get one from Denmark and Poland. Is it because German military/political chain of command is (famously?) so long, or is it, because they ‘didn’t pick up the phone’?
Shit happens mate, don’t beat yourself up over it. You made a mistake (I’ll take your word for it) and have apologised….. its all you can do.
Well said Andy. That is why I enjoy this website. No agenda. Just the facts. Opinion labeled as opinion is just fine.
TBH with what they were carrying they were probably trying to minimise the risk by flying mostly over water and low populated areas even though it made the trip significantly longer.
Nobody seems to be asking why the U.K. military did not politely ask for clearance to use German airspace.Maybe we still have a close and trusting relationship with your EU friend. Sadly several comments have shown a rather nasty bias against Germany. Could we please look to co-operation with and respect for our EU friends rather than making snide remarks about the six years last century which showed us all how much damage hatred can do.
Sorry . Our EU friend.
George. We are all human, many would not have published an apology and many would have doubled down further justifying their comments.
Understandable mistake to make in this political climate.
A correction sufficed, no need for apology.
I would have thought the far greater crime is to leave UKR swinging in the face of a tyrant. So much for the EU army and EU military leadership.
Thank you George for the correction and the apology. I wish more people learned to apologise and mean it, as it seems you clearly do 👍
Apology accepted George, mistakes happen.
Now if only some of the readers alleging German intransigence would also do the same.
Nothing to apologise for. I suspect the Germans (who have refused to supply any weapons to Ukraine) had a sign up which read: “Do not ask for permission to use our air space, as a refusal may offend.”
The Germans and the Soviets were as thick as thieves in the 1920s and 30s and history does tend to go round in circles.
we all make mistakes it’s human nature it is how we deal with those mistakes that makes a person, and those who admit they got it wrong are the better person ,so don’t worry George you got it wrong and put it right, maybe our politician’s could learn a thing or two from you…
This was untrue when you wrote it (they were sending humanitarian aid, and have also supported Ukraine economically, It is now (Monday 28th early morning) even more untrue. No fracture at all. And BTW I am not a fan of NATO – but I am a fan of the truth.