I couldn't for the life of me remember Live Aid. I tried Band Aid and Rite Aid...both obviously wrong. Even tried the politically incorrect "Starvation Aid" and was met with the wrong answer there too.
I kept trying variations of SST and supersonic transport until it finally dawned on me you wanted the brand name. I got Concorde just in time. The US was not happy with it in the beginning and it was even banned at first from JFK. I only remember it being called "the SST" in the news.
Somewhere on Youtube I think there's a recording of John F Kennedy ordering the head of Pan Am in no uncertain terms not to buy Concordes, as it was un-American to do so...
Not that long, ironically, after the American government had been pressurising the British government to abandon development the TSR-2 in favour of buying the General Dynamics F-111
I'm usually opposed to people suggesting more questions - but here goes :-) Didn't Hilary climb Everedt on the day of her coronation? I think that would be a neat one to add, because of the coinciding date, not just the event.
Also managed to score 100%: Good quiz. But I have to complain about the 1966 question. I answered "Soccer World Cup" which didn't work until I deleted the word "soccer". Do you think that there's only a World Cup in one sport?
Soccer is a British term. It's only in recent decades that people have got this idea that it's some sort of Americanism, but it clearly isn't (why is Sky's Saturday morning programme called Soccer AM? Or check out any number of books published in the UK between 1945 and 1990 with soccer in the title. Or watch old Pathe News reels on YouTube: loads of mentions of 'soccer' in the commentary).
You could have tried FIFA World Cup instead. It is accepted, and has no ambiguity regarding what kind of sport it is, or whether it should be called football rather than soccer.
I don't think we technically went to war with Argentina. Rather we didn't declare war on Argentina. Though it is called the Falklands War as it was a war over the Falkland Islands.
She was actually 'Her Majesty' - HRH is for other members of the family. Charles went from HRH to His Majesty (HM) at the exact moment of his mother's death.
May she rest in Peace. As an American, she forever earned my respect by going against precedent by requesting 'The Star Spangled Banner' be played outside Buckingham Palace on September 12, 2001.
I don't mean to be insensitive so soon after Elizabeth's death, but I think it's a bit much to assume Prince George will be king. I get the feeling that the Queen was the only person in the Royal Family that anyone really respected. Public support for the monarchy has already gone down in the past few decades, and with Elizabeth gone I think that trend will only accelerate. I've already heard some nations, like Antigua, are considering referendums to leave the monarchy. I'm not saying the monarchy will suddenly implode, but I wouldn't be surprised if people gradually lose interest in it to the point where there's no point in continuing it. Considering George is only 9 years old, this could certainly happen within his lifetime.
Also submitted respectfully: there have also been several heirs to the throne who did not live long enough to assume the position. The wording of the question assumes something that is, perhaps, likely and hoped for, but not assured.
Knowing how conservative the British tend to be in different traditions I would guess that the monarchy will not be ended during this century. What probably will happen is that Northern Ireland and Scotland will leave the UK and several commonwealth countries that currently have Charles III as the official (or at least ceremonial) head of the state will officially change to republics and cut this connection.
Another interesting thing is the vast personal property of the Royal family: will the British public continue to tolerate it or will the pressure grow up to demand most of it to be returned to national property ("nationalized" in a way)?
It was one of those quizzes I take and expect to miss a bunch.
Not that long, ironically, after the American government had been pressurising the British government to abandon development the TSR-2 in favour of buying the General Dynamics F-111
Another interesting thing is the vast personal property of the Royal family: will the British public continue to tolerate it or will the pressure grow up to demand most of it to be returned to national property ("nationalized" in a way)?