Nope. No maintenance manual anywhere will have a chapter for “strip down engine stages & remove paint.”
Most engine blades (especially turbine section***) these days have almost microscopic cooling holes / channels - you can’t just dip blades in paint remover! The Rolls Royce Trent 700 must be in the region of £20M per engine; the main fan is about 97” in diameter.
This will be a huge amount of to repair.
*** did a tour of Rolls Royce engine plant that made the Tornado engines - the turbine blades operated at a hotter temperature than the melting point of the metal that they were made of!
Why havent we shipped out a dozen raf ref, who can stand guard 24/7 in pairs on shift… seems pretty basic to me.
If we dont trust the Indians that much of course…
Which falls short of the definition of terrorism, the alleged offence for which they were proscribed. Their actions were not designed to kill or injure.
Given how frequently governments of all leanings call certain acts terrorist in order to ban them, we must be careful not to permit the dilution of the definition.
If the Russians destroyed our aircraft on the ground it would be an act of war, so it stands that if an hostile domestic group does the same thing we would consider an act of war then it’s terrorism.
In principle, it might meet the criteria, as I linked above. But that should be for a court to decide. Not the Government.
And then, even if a court decides what those two did was terrorism, I don’t think the whole group and anyone who supports them should suddenly become illegal to exist. We have laws already to deal with individuals within a group who take things too far. As it stands, this is the only direct action we know of from this group. And they are being treated the same way as international terrorist organisations who are actively killing people. The two are not even close to the same.
Where in Terrorism Act does it say they their actions have to be designed to kill or injure? It includes serious damage and I would say £20M fits that bill to a T.
