The Real Reason Why Princes William and Harry Can't Fly on a Plane Together
It all has to do with the throne.
The Royal Family has been rumored to live by many rules. For example, they aren't allowed to accept clothing, wear certain nail polish colors, or vote in elections. There are also rules as to who is allowed to fly on a plane with whom. Now that Queen Elizabeth has died and King Charles has established himself on the throne, the hierarchy has changed. According to reports, one new rule is that Prince William and Prince Harry won't be able to fly on the same plane together ever again.
This might seem an odd rule, seeing as though Harry is fifth in line for the throne, behind his brother, and his three children, Prince George, Princess Charlotte, and Prince Louis. However, there is a good reason why the brothers shouldn't travel together.
If something happened to King Charles and Prince William, then his children would be next in line for the throne. However, because they are all under the age of 18, Prince Harry would have to act as regent for George until he was old enough to officially take the throne.
If Harry and William were both killed on a plane together, it would be a constitutional crisis. Technically, this would leave Prince Andrew as regent, followed by Beatrice. This could explain why Prince Harry did not board a flight out of RAF Northolt with his brother, Prince Andrew, Prince Edward, and Sophie of Wessex.
"There is a strong constitutional reason that William and Harry do not fly together – and that is to do with the line of succession," constitutional expert and royal author Brian Hoey told The Sun. "Royal aides have to consider everything, and this is very likely to have been a factor."
"While events happened very quickly, they have had years to plan for all eventualities. The speed of events caught everyone off-guard and could have affected travel plans – but it still would have been unwise for William and Harry to fly together," Hoey continued. "I don't think we will see them fly together again for constitutional reasons."
