Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Queen Elizabeth II And Horses  
User currently offlineTiger119 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1919 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3732 times:

I have been doing a little reading on HRM Queen Elizabeth II and read that she loves horses. I guess I always knew that but does she enjoy horse racing and has she ever attended The Kentucky Derby the first weekend of May every year in Louisville, KY, USA?


Flying is the second greatest thrill known to mankind, landing is the first!
32 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 1, posted (4 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3727 times:

Yes, in 2007. Her visit was filmed as part of the documentary Monarchy: The Royal Family at Work.

http://www.pbs.org/opb/monarchy/



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineFXramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7172 posts, RR: 86
Reply 2, posted (4 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3723 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!


She loves doggies too!



User currently offlineMadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10862 posts, RR: 38
Reply 3, posted (4 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3707 times:

The Queen likes horses, dogs and also gardening.

She looks jolly good for her age.

2012 will be her 60 years of reign.
The longest living Monarch on Earth along with the King of Thailand.

I wish Her Majesty QEII Concorde Flyer stays healthy and happy for many more years.

 airplane   veryhappy   airplane 



There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13940 posts, RR: 63
Reply 4, posted (4 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3694 times:

And she loves fixing mechanical things. As a young woman, towards the end of WW2, she enlisted, against the wish of her parents, in the women´s branch of the British Army (the Auxiliary Territorial Service, short ATS) and got trained there as a driver / mechanic. After training she served as a truck driver. This also explains the connection she and her husband have wth WW2 veterans. Her husband served in combat as a naval officer on destroyers., so both are military veterans themselves.

Jan


User currently offlineRonglimeng From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 625 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 10 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 3619 times:



Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 4):
And she loves fixing mechanical things

Somehow, I doubt if she's ever had a wrench in her hand since those publicity photos back in the early 40's.

She's been on the throne since I was a little kid and in all those years she has never really seriously screwed up once, that I can recall. I think when she dies it will be the end of an era. We'll probably put her in the same category as Queen Victoria.

I don't see the next "King of Canada" lasting for too long, at least as head of state here in the Great White North.


User currently offlineUal747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (4 years 10 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3603 times:



Quoting FXramper (Reply 2):
She loves doggies too!

LOL, that's Helen Mirren.

UAL


User currently offlineTiger119 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1919 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 10 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 3570 times:

Changing subjects slightly, when HRM needs to travel abroad, who flies The Queen and her staffers? The RAF? BA? I have always wondered about that.

David



Flying is the second greatest thrill known to mankind, landing is the first!
User currently offline757MDE From Colombia, joined Sep 2004, 1753 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (4 years 10 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 3559 times:

I think I read somewhere that it depends on the country.
Since she's the queen of other countries besides the UK (Canada, Australia... the "Commonwealth Realms"), if it's Canadian business she would be transported in a Canadian Polaris and so with the other countries.

But then again, I read that a long ago and I'm really sleepy right now, might not be true.



I gladly accept donations to pay for flight hours! This thing draws man...
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13149 posts, RR: 78
Reply 9, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3521 times:

Reply 5, no she did serve for real.
Hence she had no problems with her son Andrew going with his naval helicopter unit to the Falklands war, or her grandson more recently in Afghanistan, until the media compromised that.

The man she would marry, as MD-11 stated, was a Naval officer, some say had he not married into the Royal Family he could have gone a long way in his career.


User currently offlineDragon6172 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 1202 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3519 times:



Quoting Tiger119 (Reply 7):
Changing subjects slightly, when HRM needs to travel abroad, who flies The Queen and her staffers? The RAF? BA? I have always wondered about that.

When she came here to Hampton Roads for the 400th anniversary of the Jamestown settlement it was via a BA 777. Parked right on the ramp next to our C-12 King Airs. Pretty neat to see, wish I had my digi cam in the car that day!



Phrogs Phorever
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13940 posts, RR: 63
Reply 11, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3443 times:

Quoting GDB (Reply 9):
Reply 5, no she did serve for real.
Hence she had no problems with her son Andrew going with his naval helicopter unit to the Falklands war, or her grandson more recently in Afghanistan, until the media compromised that.

The man she would marry, as MD-11 stated, was a Naval officer, some say had he not married into the Royal Family he could have gone a long way in his career.

Actually a few years ago I met a Canadian WW2 veteran, who served in the Queen´s Own Rifles of Canada. During the build up for the Normandy invasions he, a sergeant back then, was mostly on convoy duty in the UK on a motorcycle.
He told me that one day a lieutenant and himself were accompanying an American convoy of huge tank transporters, which were bringing a load of Sherman tanks northwards to some destination in Englandb on a narrow road. The drivers were all black Americans ("They didn´t have power steering back then and the drivers had arms as thick as my legs!"). Sudenly an order came for the convoy to get off the road since another convoy was coming down the opposite direction. Obviously the drivers of the tank transports were not too happy at the thought of having to dig their trucks and trailers out of the muddy fields and the mood became bad. The veteran told me that he sent his lieutenant away (" I just told him to drive up to the next village and have a cup of tea while I´ll sort out he mess"). The Canadian sergeant, who got along well with the GIs, convinced them that they had to drive into thev fields on higher orders.
The reason was that one of the drivers of the opposing convoy was the future Queen and that it was ordered from well up the chain of command that she shouldn´t be obstructed. Now, I assume that she didn´t even knew about this order and that it was given by some colonel or higher rank, who wanted to suck up to the royal family.
The sergeant said that it took them several hours to get the trucks back on the road.
The sergeant later suffered a bad accident just a few weeks before D-day and after he recovered, was made instructor for motorcycle dispatch riders in the UK.
At the memorial event I met him in the Netherlands, he was wearing his old uniform from 1945, which still fitted him perfectly!

Jan

[Edited 2009-08-19 00:49:38]

[Edited 2009-08-19 00:50:56]

User currently offlineMadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10862 posts, RR: 38
Reply 12, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3421 times:

In 1945, Elizabeth accompanied her parents on visits to Commonwealth service personnel, and began to carry out solo duties, such as reviewing a parade of Canadian airwomen.[16] She joined the Women's Auxiliary Territorial Service, as No. 230873 Second Subaltern Elizabeth Windsor. She trained as a driver and mechanic, drove a military truck, and rose to the rank of Junior Commander.[22] She is, at present, "the only living head of state who served in uniform during World War II".[23]

At the end of the war in Europe, on Victory in Europe Day, Elizabeth and her sister mingled anonymously with the celebratory crowds in the streets of London.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_II_of_the_United_Kingdom

Long Live Queen Elizabeth II One Hundred years or more!



There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7035 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3405 times:

Last time she visited New Zealand NZ flew her down on a 747, they converted the first class cabin into an apartment for her.

She's been a good Monarch, however I don't think Chuck should take the throne after she pops off, William should take over, if not I don't see it (the Monarchy) lasting much longer.


User currently offlineTiger119 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1919 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3396 times:



Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 13):
She's been a good Monarch, however I don't think Chuck should take the throne after she pops off, William should take over, if not I don't see it (the Monarchy) lasting much longer.

- Just my opinion but I think a lot of Americans like the Queen herself but do not like Charles much. And I think it should be William over his Pop.



Flying is the second greatest thrill known to mankind, landing is the first!
User currently offlineMadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10862 posts, RR: 38
Reply 15, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3391 times:

Whoever comes after her, I hope this will not be any time soon, whether Charles or William, none will be able to match her. The Queen has too much History to even think of being equalled.

In 1946 the King of Thailand, His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej, came to the throne. He is now the longest reigning monarch in the world.

Yet there is no doubt that Queen Elizabeth II is the world's last living Historical figure.

Things will never be the same again after she is gone. She is very healthy and keeping well and I think she still has many years ahead of her. Also she is very much loved and admired the whole world over.

I hope she will outlive Jeanne Calment. 123 would be a good age for her to reach.

Long Live the Queen!  airplane   cheerful   airplane 



There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
User currently offline757MDE From Colombia, joined Sep 2004, 1753 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3379 times:



Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 13):
Last time she visited New Zealand NZ flew her down on a 747, they converted the first class cabin into an apartment for her.

That would be congruent with I had read.



I gladly accept donations to pay for flight hours! This thing draws man...
User currently offlineAndz From South Africa, joined Feb 2004, 8440 posts, RR: 10
Reply 17, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 3307 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Tiger119 (Reply 7):
HRM

Ahem, it is Her Majesty or Her Britannic Majesty. What is HRM?



After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
User currently offlineRFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7498 posts, RR: 32
Reply 18, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 3291 times:



Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 11):
I assume that she didn´t even knew about this order and that it was given by some colonel or higher rank, who wanted to suck up to the royal family.

Many years ago - 1972 - I served with the son of a US senator in the Navy.

In 2003, my son's unit in 3rd Infantry which captured the Baghdad Airport included the son of a US congressman.

It is very seldom a desire or a colonel or other officer to suck up to the family, royal or political, but more a case of self-preservation.

If you are the officer in command of a convoy, and the potentially future queen is one of the drivers, you are danged well going to do everything you can to minimize the chances of an accident.

Because the investigation is going to be lengthy, detailed and any thing you did not do to ensure that safety is going to be criticized.

My son said his battalion commander - LtCol - spoke to the congressman's son one day after the unit had lost four people from an IED. Something along the line of "From now on, you stay by my side. I don't want any of my men injured or killed, but I sure the heck don't want to have to face an investigation by Congress as to why you were hurt and I was not."


User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13940 posts, RR: 63
Reply 19, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 3276 times:

This must have been a serious problem for Prince Harry´s commander in Afghanistan. Harry, as an army lieutenant, wanted to do the job he was trained to do, to lead an armoured reconnaisance platoon in combat and gebnerally "be one of the boys", and keep being respected by his comrades (which he wouldn´t be if he would have stayed somewhere safe in the rear, while his friends bled). This necessarily means that he will be exposed tto enemy fire, danger and possibly capture.
In fact the Taliban put a prize on his head, he would have made a good hostage for them.
His whereabouts were kept secret and he was assigned to a Ghurka Rifles unit, which was less likely to be penetrated by British tabloid press (the Gurkhas have a reputation to uphold and stick together, this includes the British members of their units). Also, in a rare move, the British press agreed to keep mum.
IRCC, his location was finaly revealed by some foreign journalists, upon which the Taliban zeroed in on his unit. To protect the other soldiers, it was eventually decided to send him home, much to his disappointment.

Jan


User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7035 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3232 times:



Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 18):
I served with the son of a US senator in the Navy.



Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 18):
included the son of a US congressman.

These people aren't anything in the scheme of things and shouldn't be treated any different from any other serving soldier, whereas Harry or William are a completely different kettle of fish.


User currently offlineEDICHC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3197 times:

Why this persistence in referring to the Queen as Queen Elizabeth II?

As her head of state title is...Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, her Dominions and Dependencies, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith

There has never been a previous Queen Elizabeth bearing that title. There was a Queen Elizabeth of England, Wales and Ireland who reigned from 1558-1603 but not of the UK.


User currently offlineMadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10862 posts, RR: 38
Reply 22, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3170 times:



Quoting EDICHC (Reply 21):
Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, her Dominions and Dependencies, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith

This is how Cunard should name their next QE.
It would have a lot more meaning than "QE3".



There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
User currently offlineTG992 From New Zealand, joined Jan 2001, 2910 posts, RR: 10
Reply 23, posted (4 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3077 times:



Quoting EDICHC (Reply 21):
Why this persistence in referring to the Queen as Queen Elizabeth II?

For god's sake, does it really matter on an aviation website's off-topic forum?



-
User currently offlineFerengi80 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2007, 687 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3070 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting EDICHC (Reply 21):
Why this persistence in referring to the Queen as Queen Elizabeth II?

I would have thought that was obvious... she is the second Queen to bear the name Elizabeth, and therefore is Queen Elizabeth II. Just like the eight Henry was Henry VIII and the sixth George was George VI... kinda simple when you think about it!



AF1981 LHR-CDG A380-800 10 July 2010 / AF1980 CDG-LHR A380-800 11 July 2010
25 Ronglimeng : I'm all in favour of keeping it simple but I think I understand where some honourable members may be going with this, perhaps not being happy with an
26 Ferengi80 : I'm kinda with you now. James II of England was James VII of Scotland, and it wasn't until 1707, with the Reign of Queen Anne that the Act of Settlem
27 MadameConcorde : Her Majesty likes airplanes. Concorde piqued her interest. She has finally ordered her own plane and had the interior fitted to her own taste and nee
28 EDICHC : Well I don't think it belongs in the aviation forum! I would have thought this is what an off-topic forum is for. As I am Scottish born but now NZ re
29 GDB : To enlarge on MD-11's point ref Harry, a well known (that is journalists surf the site a lot and quote from it) website with many UK forces members, k
30 TheCol : Considering the untold billions it would take to change Canada into a republic, I highly doubt it will happen in the near future.
31 ExFATboy : Actually, that's outdated, the term "Dominions" is no longer used, and I don't believe "Dependencies" is either, at least not in reference to Bermuda
32 MD11Engineer : The site owners gave the members a strict warning that the Princes had the same right for privacy and personal security as any other soldier and gave
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
A Message To America From Queen Elizabeth II posted Sun Oct 12 2008 23:50:13 by 747438
Cunard's New Liner The Queen Elizabeth 3 posted Fri Mar 20 2009 07:22:44 by MadameConcorde
What If The Queen Elizabeth Did Not Burn? posted Thu Oct 18 2007 19:28:52 by 747400sp
Cunard New Queen Elizabeth posted Fri Oct 12 2007 12:29:35 by 747400sp
Frying Chips With A Pentium II And Motherboard posted Wed Nov 15 2006 19:45:19 by Aer lingus
Queen Elizabeth Of England posted Mon Aug 28 2006 05:17:12 by Tsaord
Queen Mary II: 12 Die posted Sat Nov 15 2003 20:41:03 by AOMlover
Only Fools And Horses Is Back! posted Mon Nov 26 2001 07:02:59 by Hkgspotter1
European Members' Families And World War II posted Fri Oct 19 2007 18:50:12 by UAL747
Can The Queen And Monarchy Be Dissolved? posted Fri Oct 5 2007 15:30:37 by Mbj-11