Linton rumour

[blackwithwhitestripe]

Has anyone else heard that a certain RAF two star let slip at a recent dining in night that Linton is closing !!!!! Ps this is a rumour not gen just trying to get some opinion as to options

[fabs]

I heard the dining in night story too. If true said 2 star should be treated the same as anyone else who leaks information.

[whowhenwhy]

It was on the 22 Gp website for a day a couple of weeks ago - swiftly taken down. Any bets on where they're going to go?

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

can't be true, they haven't had any major money spent on the airfield in the last few years.............


....apart from a rwy resurface and a new tower...


ooops:ooh:

[just another jocky]

Lots of rumours going around, including CF closing, Wyton (EFT/UAS/AEF) moving to Wittering etc etc. I guess we'll just have to wait and see. :zzz:

[Finningley Boy]

Air Police, since when was it confirmed Leuchars will close? And since when was it in a foreign country? And are you suggesting its under occupation by a foreign air force now?

Or are you another of these Brits, English or Scots or otherwise for whom it never sinks in. Your nationality is British. The last time we were Scots, English and Welsh as separate nationalities, to all intents and purposes, was 1707.:rolleyes:

FB:)

[Capt Niff Naff]

I missed 1707 as I was on the phone. It is 1723 now, how I long for 1707!!
He did say another country, not nation, so lets split another hair.

[Cornerstone958]

Capt NN
Double :D:D
CS

[andrewn]

Perhaps they could move the Linton operation to (the soon to be vacant) Leuchars and meet another objective by having flying training, and noise complaints, outsourced to another country.


If I were a betting man I'd say a more likely outcome would be a much reduced fleet of Hawk's and Tucano's centred on Valley and Mona....

As always time will tell.

[dctyke]

I did say on this very forum in December that it was briefed at Linton that options were being looked at to move to Leeming or Valley. This was before the slashing of FJ aircrew so I'd be suprised if it wasn't an odds on certainty now!

[whowhenwhy]

Oh hurrah, we're resurfacing MPA, please tell me it's closing? Or perhaps the Tin cans are going there rather than the other cold, wet, windy place that's been told to plan for that eventuality! Let's think, the AAC have been wanting to co-locate all their AH at Whatashambles for a while, if the Tincans go to Valley, we can shut 4 airfields at the drop of a hat.

[Finningley Boy]

He did say another country, not nation, so lets split another hair.

Country, Nation same difference.

FB:)

[Poltergeist]

having the disadvantage in this thread of being Non Military, I am now confused. The public headlines were the cloing of St Mawgan, Cottesmore and Lyneham.
Not trying to stir, just interested, why a busy station like Lyneham when airfields like Colerne, Henlow, Scampton etc seem to be underused? and looking at this thread, how many airfields are being closed?

[ColinB]

No matter what the reason I just hope they don't close Linton it is really beautiful. I think it may be in a time warp remote and trapped forever in the 1930s

[Finningley Boy]

Poltergeist,

The exercise may well be simply to cram as much as possible onto as small a piece of real estate as possible. We're likely to see all these places you've listed, not suitable for use by Tornados and Typhoons, stay open to accommodate all kinds of odd ball units coming and going, with no aircraft in many cases, while somewhere else one of the four remaining operational bases in 1 Group disappears. But although I've just said it, I can't see the logic in it.:confused:

FB:)

[Sgt.Slabber]

The public headlines were the closing of St Mawgan, Cottesmore and Lyneham.

From the MoD website front page - today, 2010-02-16

Ministry of Defence | Defence News | Estate and Environment | Military planes to land at Newquay Cornwall Airport (http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EstateAndEnvironment/MilitaryPlanesToLandAtNewquayCornwallAirport.htm)


Military aircraft will be able to land free of charge at Newquay Cornwall Airport, which is adjacent to RAF St Mawgan, as of this week for a trial period.

The commercial airport will open its skies to all military fixed wing aircraft under 30 tons. The agreement made between Cornwall Airport Limited, RAF St Mawgan and the Ministry of Defence comes as part of the continuing partnership and working relationship following the transfer of ownership of the RAF runway to Cornwall Council in November 2008.

The agreement with the MOD will encourage UK military aircraft to undertake their flight training requirements at the airport and the skies above it...
etc.

:confused:

[BEagle]

A similar ploy was used by Middleton-Teeside-Durham Valley-St. George back in the 1970s - it helped to keep up their number of aircraft movements....

....which led to a successful bid for a chunk of controlled airspace for the airport.

[Farfrompuken]

Was utilising Newquay's services yesterday. Fantastic airfield and very flexible atc; possibly the best training option for 2 Gp a/c when Lye closes soon.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Sorry to drag this thread back to topic, but...

The closure of Linton and moving of its function to Valley will mean the demise of the Tin Can, due to the imm suit restrictions, so the Happy Shopper plan for BFJTS (ie keeping the Tin Can going TFN by operating the fleet at a lower tempo) has fallen at the first hurdle. Oh well!

[Tankertrashnav]

When I am on Prune I often make the mistake of thinking I am still part of the RAF, and fairly up to date with what's happening.

Then I read a post like the last one and realise I haven't a clue what he's on about, and realise how totally out of touch I am :(

[whowhenwhy]

sure that I saw somewhere that the Hawk T2 was considered not to need the tincan as a lead-in and could fulfil both functions as a precursor to Typhoon and Dave (model TBN). Given potential timescales for closure etc, if this is true, could we not close Linton and mothball the tincan at the same time in 2-3 years??

[Bob Viking]

That would be false!
BV:8

[indie cent]

Torque,

Happy Shopper plan! Haha! I'm not sure using Tincan from Valley would be impossible. Pretty frikkin tricky, but not impossible. Tracking (via a couple of corridors?) off and on Anglesey could keep you feet dry. PD's and mixed cct traffic would surely be greater stoppers for the "shoppers" plan...?!

Anyway, there seems to be an awful prescience in the order of 28 Hawk 128's. I'm sure we were all scratching our heads going "why only 28?" at the time of the order...!

Seems like Spookily accurate procurement now!!

[fabs]

Would the mixed cct be a massive problem? Genuine question because I'm not aircrew, managed to work a mixed cct plus PDs at FNY years ago, in fact it made people better controllers (I assumed the same with aircrew). Certainly more aware than most of the ones we get through now.
I don't want Linton to go, loved the place. Shut Valley, Fenton and Toppers. Keep Linton and Leeming (either one RLG) use the shiny Linton tower for LEE radar and the fast jet guys get their night time div airfield (assuming Leeming actually start opening past 6 pm)

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Indie,

No doubt you're right, though don't forget all those bl00dy helicopters...11 based at Valley at the last count plus the frequent visiting ones...yes the helos generally stay LL but ATC still need to keep an eye on everyone (or at least they think they do!). As you say, the instrument pattern would truly be a nightmare with no alternatives nearby for the Tucano or RW folks (NB SARTU and 203 Sqn both teach IF, it's not just SCT where being broken off at 1300' on every GCA still gets the required tick!:ok:). As for the tiny Hawk 128 order, yes I agree, and note with angst that not a single replacement helo trainer has yet been ordered...eek!


Shut Valley


Well we have just had the new MFTS hangar open, which does make Valley's future look less secure than it did:E. Or should I say the new SARTU hangar:E:E

[Bismark]

I think you guys need to get real. Yeovilton operates and has operated 100+ mixed RW and FW for years (including RW and FW training) with no particular flight safety problem. At its peak there were about 130 aircraft there. ATC were pretty good though! Culdrose in its heyday did the same.

I am not saying that BFT and AFT mix well but the FW training requirement has reduced very significantly and with JCA training likely to be in the US it may be even less in the future.

[andyy]

Where would they land at TyCroes? Its now a race circuit (and a very good one, too)

[RetiredSHRigger]

Ty Croes never had anywhere to land, it was a anti aircraft armament and missile testing facility opened in 1952 closed in the 1970's. Valley used the AMQ's for a while.

[27mm]

They also used the OMQs - we were in one in Jenkins Close - and what a god-forsaken place it was too....:(

[Non Emmett]

Bismark raised an interesting point - 100 aircraft based at Yeovilton and up to 130 at one stage. So how many airfields is the RAF likely to need looking ahead ?

Sobering thought.

[SirToppamHat]

Back to the St Mawgan/Newquay thing, are we still providing ATC down there?

[green granite]

No ...........................

[Neptunus Rex]

Why and how has Valley survived for so long? It is miles from anywhere so logistic support must cost millions extra per year. Nobody but the Viet Taff would want to be there. Perhaps the SAR and mountain training can be justified, but the rest? It's a joke. Surely a few thousand Welsh votes cannot be worth all that effort and expense.

[airpolice]

With all this time spent on looking closely at things, perhaps someone needs to ask how many airfields the RAF needed in 2005 not just in 2015.

The waste of money is huge, and nobody seems to care. Most of what I read is about how we should save raf somewhere because it was great for summer camps in the 70s or all the people who work there are nice chaps.

A decision needs to be made about saving the Royal Air Force in the same way that decisions need to be made about saving airfields. This process needs to be done by impartial people looking at facts.

Scenario 1. Imagine for instance, you have bought a nice house, just on the edge of camp. You are intending to sell it to someone posted in at or about the time you leave. Possibly you could find a civvy buyer wanting to live outside the two big towns nearby.

Now, the airfield is threatened with closure, lots of houses around you going on the market... not good.

You are going to be posted, nobody replacing you....what's going to happen to your house value? If you get made redundant rather than posted, this may not be where you want to live, given the lack of jobs around here with the airfield closing.

That's hardly the basis for you stating the best option for the RAF, and more of a reason for you to make up a case for retaining the airfiled.


Scenario 2. A retired serviceman with a large house nearby and a job on station to top up his pension. Whatever his considered opinion on the requirements of the service, practical issues dictate he will not want to suggest closing the airfield.

There are loads of variations on this so the decision needs taken by someone not involved. We can only hope.

The work carried out for the RAF by civvy contractors ought to be brought back in house, particularly the aircraft at Teeside. They could go to Cranwell with the Leeming Hawks. Dundee airport have a flying school with an MOD contract to train Pilots. Why are the RAF not doing that?

With no axe to grind, here's my plan for a cost effective RAF Footprint.

Lossie (the north)

Cranwell (Historical and handy as a diversion for the north of England and all EFTS/BFTS and 100 Sqdn)

Scampton/Waddington (one or the other to cover the east coast)

Wittering (Can't be sold it seems so it should get Odiham & Benson units)

Marham (just until the Tornado fleet is scrapped)

Shawbury (central but not really required unless Odiham and Benson aircraft are moved in)

Brize (Tanker facilities)

Valley (the west, where all jet training will be done)
Mona (part of Valley)

St. Mawgan (the south, for detachments and to protect us from the French)

Perhaps a case could be made to retain Halton, Coningsby and St. Athan, but I doubt it.

That should be all the flying stations required.



Odd bits like
Boulmer
Spade
Fylingdales
Tain
Wainfleet

Still need to exist, but the combo at Brampton, Wyton & Henlow could relocate to a flying station, just as the huge number of bodies in High Wycombe ought to. As for RAF Uxbridge....

Units stationed at Uxbridge are the Headquarters of Music Services and No 63 Squadron of the RAF Regiment, better known as the Queens Colour Squadron


Discuss:

[Chainkicker]

I thought QCS were going to Northolt and Uxbridge was closing?
Surely you dont expect the high and mighty to drive further than Northolt for a flight? :):)

[whowhenwhy]

Uxbridge is closed with both units at Northolt.

BV, thanks for the answer. It did sound a little odd

[Double Hush]

Linton is doomed as it is one of the few airfields the RAF have left that can actually be closed. Many of the others have covenants that require them to be returned to the original owner in the state that they were in when first occupied. Removing bomb dumps that glow in the dark and HAS sites is awfully expensive - the MOD is broke and can't afford to. LOZ will be relatively cheap to close.

As for putting Tincans in VYL, the mixed circuit is going to be dangerous. Yes, VLN may cope with a gazzillion aircraft but they aren't flown by a student who has very few flying hours and is maxxed out just trying to fly S&L, let alone having to cope with a fast jet 4 ship breaking into the circuit and a 80 kt helo flying a PAR into a 30 kt headwind!!!! Throw in the Sea Kings (203 Sqn) that are now going to be around for a while longer and the situation becomes untenable. VYL does have an RLG at Mona but the Sea Kings block book that for half a day at a time, denying its use to fixed wing. If the Tincans are to be placed at VYL, the Sea Kings have to go - 3 completely disparate training types cannot be mixed at one location.

As for VYL closing, dream on. With the closure of most of the major employers on Anglesey, the RAF is the last one left. Politically, its closure will be unacceptable, sigh.......

[Spartacan]

>>flown by a student who has very few flying hours and is maxxed out just trying to fly S&L, let alone having to cope with a fast jet 4 ship breaking into the circuit <<

Had to laugh at that one. I did my first solo in a JP at a Jaguar station. I remember calling for take off only to interrupted by a Jag 4 ship on the break to land. They were told to hold off because of a 'student on his first solo'.

I distinctly remember being about half way through my take off roll when a voice called out of the ether:

"Is he airborne yet?"

Under the circumstances I thought it was rather an unsympathetic call.

[frodo_monkey]

Cranwell (Historical and handy as a diversion for the north of England and all EFTS/BFTS and 100 Sqdn)

Really?! Not truly in the north, short (in terms of FJ ops) runway without a cable... Me, I'd shut Cranditz (at least the airfield side of it) but another option would be to do all EFT stuff there rather than have the present 3 Stn affair. I think it would be quite a gutsy call from an Airship to shut the place, but might show a willingness to change which wwould reflect well on light-blue.

Bin Scampton, save Waddo as the ISTAR hub and use Coningsby for the East Coast stuff. Stop basing stuff at Leeming but keep the airfield (N/S runway, got a cable, semi-handy for OTAs E and F). Undecided on Leuchars vs Lossie, but agree that Marham should stay until TGRF dies.

Move helos into Wittering?! Isn't the bulk of their trade (barring Spade and Otterburn etc) on Salisbury Plain?

[Bismark]

As for putting Tincans in VYL, the mixed circuit is going to be dangerous. Yes, VLN may cope with a gazzillion aircraft but they aren't flown by a student who has very few flying hours and is maxxed out just trying to fly S&L, let alone having to cope with a fast jet 4 ship breaking into the circuit and a 80 kt helo flying a PAR into a 30 kt headwind!!!! Throw in the Sea Kings (203 Sqn) that are now going to be around

The above reads like a quiet day at Yeovilton!

[Finningley Boy]

Navy have the best pilots eh!:cool:

FB:)

[It's only Me]

Don't all aircraft have their groundspeed reduced by a 30kt headwind, or is it just the Helo?

[Double Hush]

The point being that in the time it takes a helo to crawl down a PAR against a 30 kt headwind, everything else in the visual pattern has been sent round many, many times. None of the fixed wing types will have been able to fly their cct bashing detail and it subsequently goes in the Auth sheets as a DNCO, requiring a re-fly at great expense!

[Wensleydale]

The point being that in the time it takes a helo to crawl down a PAR against a 30 kt headwind, everything else in the visual pattern has been sent round many, many times. None of the fixed wing types will have been able to fly their cct bashing detail and it subsequently goes in the Auth sheets as a DNCO, requiring a re-fly at great expense!


This is not a new problem. Back in the mid 70s, while on a UAS at Finningley, I was on the reveiving end of a CFS check. I was scheduled to fly an hour GH sortie with the checker including 30 mins in the circuit. The final 30 minutes coincided with a 105 Sqn flt checker; the Dominie wave recovering; a couple of JP formations recovering plus the odd visiting fast jet. The result was a continual climb/descent between 1,000' and 2,000' in the overhead while ATC kept us out of the way. Even by extending the sortie by 15 minutes, we only managed one approach which was to land.

[patrickthepilot]

Their Airships have not got a grip of this one. Cranwell currently struggles to mix Grob Tutor and MEPT King Air circuit traffic. The grass is often used to get circuits in. When all EFT moves to Barkston + Cranwell, at the point when CF and Wyton inevitably close, and when Linton has shut, the RAF will be left with one main airfield too few.

Up until the mid-late 1990s, MOD/RAF had the scientific expertise to actually calculate the degree of circuit congestion that would exist, should either the task change, or an airfield shut. Since then, the year on year ditching of manpower/experience/capability/funding now means that they haven't a clue. I presume that MOD/RAF haven't the funds to have the analysis done properly. Yes it will end in tears, even with the latest projected cuts to training numbers, mixing 4 training tasks (EFT, MEPT, BFT, FJ AFT) at only 2 locations, and with only a mimimal number of RLGs is not a robust plan.

Has not Cranwell already been highlighted as a flight safety hazard due to mixed-circuit congestion?? Should not MFTS be addressing this? or is it not Ascent's job?

Someone needs to stand-up, be counted, and stop the stupidity before it leads to an accident. The RAF cannot afford to shut a main base (presumably Linton) until a full, proper, scientific analysis has been conducted, by people qualified to do the job, not some poor desk officer who has been given some fag packets to scribble on.

Nuff said for the moment.

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

wensleydale,

Sounds like a great CFS check!

Duncs:ok:

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

the Sea Kings have to go - 3 completely disparate training types


But the Griffins and AW139s can stay?

[aw ditor]

Back to Woodvale, and bring back the Chipmunk with an electric' starter?

[teeteringhead]

The point being that in the time it takes a helo to crawl down a PAR against a 30 kt headwind, everything else in the visual pattern has been sent round many, many times. ... not necessarily oh Best Beloveds...

..... one recalls one occasion when CFS was at Leeming, a young Teeters taking a CFS(H) Gazelle there for some important reason - prolly a photo shoot with the REds or something equally :yuk:.

Grobbly weather and in need of the tick (and finding Leeming!) one elected to fly a PAR. Was number 3 in the pattern. When a minijet joins, bored sounding controller says: "Roger c/s, I may have to orbit you, you are No 4 behind a (audible sigh) helicopter..."

Whereupon Teeters grows horns and accelerates to IPS, and stays there - for the uninitiated, this takes my slippery plastic chicken-leg down the slope at about 165kts .....

..... to be asked "Ahh ... Rotary c/s, please reduce speed - you're catching up the JP in front of you!"

Game set and match to CFS(H)!! :ok:

[Bob Viking]

...was that IAS or groundspeed?!
BV:E

[Old-Duffer]

This reminds me of an incident in the colonies many moons ago.

Lofty M******l, the late Pete Pressley and yours truly were coming back from a casevac to Lantau Island, off Hong Kong, one dark foggy night in late 1967 and were caught out by the bad viz.

Up to 4500 feet in a Whirlwind 10 and Lofty calls for a GCA. In response to: "what is your forward speed", news that it was 90 knots, brought an audible exclamation from the controller. However, as we were using the SAR callsign of "Pedro 99" there could be no argument that we - as our US Navy friends might say - 'had the ball'. An approach was then completed but the Kai Tak stack that night was getting pretty high and at least one guy pushed off to Manila 'cause he couldn't wait!

Old Duffer

[teeteringhead]

...was that IAS or groundspeed?! .. probably not a lot of difference that day BV - ISTR grobbly "goldfish bowl" conditions coupled with Middlesborough industrial crud, which would suggest anticyclonic conditions with a slight northerly drift....

..... not bad for an aftercast 30-several years later, eh! ;)

[Bob Viking]

...you're telling the truth!
You could be making it up for all I know!
Still, it sounded good.
BV:ok:

[teeteringhead]

Who knows BV, who knows. As a good chum of mine once said: "The older one gets the more clearly one remembers the things that never happened!"

I'll check logbook tonight to see if I can get a date for said occurence!

[bpster]

Anyone else been to Elevenerife?!

:rolleyes:

[Double Hush]

T-O-T-D

No, SARTU are remarkably adept at keeping a low profile, literally, as they zip in and out of the airfield at very low level. Their presence is rarely noticed, apart from their comm jamming of Gnd and Twr!!

[The_Agent]

At the risk of sounding unpopularly on topic, I'd like to reply to the OP:

I was at the dinner, and, yes, AOC 22 Gp chose that forum at approx 2330 hours to announce that "Linton is to close and the Tucanos to move to Valley." I was suprised at the choice of location for the announcement!

In theory, due to the reduction of flying over the past few years, RAF Valley now has plenty of spare capacity. I have doubts though as to some other practical apsects of flying - mixing Tucanos and Hawks in the sae cct may prove to be... interesting. I have also heard that it is not possible for a Tucano pilot to wear an immersion suit? This would cause issues at Valley as Hawk pilots are in their goon suits for about 6 months of the year!

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

SARTU are remarkably adept at keeping a low profile, literally, as they zip in and out of the airfield at very low level. Their presence is rarely noticed, apart from their comm jamming of Gnd and Twr!!

That's good to hear (low level not comm jamming!), but they must need a fair few instrument approaches, especially now they are doing some IF instruction!

[vikingdriver]

The Agent

You can wear an immersion suit in a tincan, however be prepared for being extremely hot as the conditioning won't cool the front seat enough, and, if you had to use the immersion suit post ejection, it would be pretty useless as the canopy would have shredded it on the way out!

Anybody see the photos of the kit that was worn post the display a/c crash at Linton?

[High_Expect]

errr... In what other situation would a Tincan driver need to use a imm suit without having ejected?!? A spot of windsurfing perhapes?

[The_Agent]

I knew there was an issue but not sure what it was - thanks for clearing it up. Can you see a way round it? Risk management of flight over the sea? The problem will be departing from 19 or recovering to 01 for the 5 months of the year when the sea temp is low (which is a frequent occurrence). It is, however, damn helpful that we are lucky enough to have a SAR unit based here, therefore rescue times should be at their absolute minimum. Maybe the bean counters will write it off as acceptable, and the tincans will just crack on?

[Double Hush]

A SAR unit is nothing without serviceable cabs - as happened last week and happens on a not unfrequent basis....

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

True, but don't forget there are 6 other SAR helicopters at Valley on top of the Sea Kings, and their operating hours are pretty similar to what the Tucanos would do!

[Biggus]

I was looking at a chart the other day, and my eye was drawn to cluster of airfields running north to south down the A1, Leeming, Topcliffe, Dishforth, Linton-on-Ouse and Church Fenton.

Given the current, and projected, size of UK military avaiation I'm afraid the thought that immediately sprang into my mind was:

"...that set up is totally unsustainable...".

[Yozzer]

Ref: RAF Valley.
Was the Hunter / Gnat / Whirlwind situation very much different from what is being proposed in the form of Hawk / Tucano / Rotary? Valley appeared to operate well in the 70s.

Could Tucano operate primarily from Mona in the same way that DHFS initially proposed to operate a Squirrel Sqn from Tern Hill. ie First flight out of Valley lands at Mona, and last flight from Mona returns home. Thats what portacabins are for if the support real estate is missing at this time.

I suppose closing the Vale of York and firing up Llanbedr is taking the Pee.

[Double Hush]

Yozzer, deploying to Mona like you suggest would be the way forward but, as has been mentioned previously, cannot currently happen whilst the SK OCU (Airfield Denial Wpn) do just that. In the past, there wasn't an issue as the Gnats and Hunters essentially operated at the same speed in the cct and did not get in each others way; the Whirlwinds/Wessex just did their own SAR stuff without bothering anybody. Trying to operate 3 completely different training aircraft types from one airfield (even 2 if Mona is included) that are reliant on prolonged cct bashing is a recipe for disaster. But, why should that stop it from happening!

[Downwind.Maddl-Land]

Two other scenarios spring to mind:

1. Close Valley, Mona (that should get a round of applause from what I hear), Linton & Church Fenton (Boo!) and move all FT to Leeming using Topcliffe and Dishforth as RLGs (could both be justified? - probably not) for the Tincans; you could call it 7FTS….. Move the (tiny, tiny) Rotary Wing element to a RW orientated flying unit; take your pick….

Politically acceptable to the coalition, keeps jobs in a now employment blackspot (York & the NE) while sending a message to the Welsh Nationalists of ‘well, you always wanted Valley closed and you do vote PC and Labour so, now, suck it up’.

2. Alternatively, if you wanted to ‘preserve’ Leeming in its current state/role, move all FT to Linton (would the ‘risk’ of Hawks operating routinely from a 6,000ft rwy with no barriers be acceptable?) and continue to use one of Topcliffe, Dishforth, Church Fenton as an RLG with the Hawks using Leeming as an RLG to justify its retention…… The political and RW scenarios stay the same as option 1.

BTW use the Wash Ranges for weapons training, and I suppose the weapons issue (storage) militates against option 2 but supports option 1.

Think of it…. Hawk AFT in North Yorks…….

[Yozzer]

The SAR folks need the harbour to swim in and the mountains to play on otherwise it would have been a good idea, with the SAR Op cab colocated with NW Police Air Service. However it will never happen; ever. Even if Valley were to close the SAR empire would reduce to a Boulmer style operation in their present location. Transit time to play pens costs money you know.

[cazatou]

Lots of ideas as to what should go where etc - but there are the " legal caveats" as to what should happen to Airfields where the land was requisitioned if the MOD disposes of that land.

I trained at 6 FTS RAF Acklington in the mid 1960's and the Airfield was a hive of building activity to create new accommodation and other facilities. A few years later the Airfield closed and it had to be returned to its original condition. I visited that area a few years ago and I only found where the Airfield had been with the help of the Farmer whose Family Land had been returned to him. Everything had been demolished and the land returned to pasture.

The point is that it was MOD that had the responsibility to return the land to its original condition (as specified by the Act of Parliament that allowed its requisition) prior to returning the land to the original owner.

[Yozzer]

Whilst I understand that you are right; the ghost of airfields past scattered around the country with livestock overnighting in the remains of former squadron buildings is testiment to that not being applicable in all cases. Valley was an expansion era airfield and may well have land that is held under the caveat of leaving as was. Reality though is that it would not be destined for an industrial estate or farmland whilst the tourism industry could make it into a goldmine. Even in these days of economic gloom the Mess would be a hotel quicker then you could say "I stayed there once".

[pr00ne]

cazatou,


Are you SURE you mean Acklington?

Having been there for a few visits over the last decade or so, most recent being Oct last year, I can tell you that the entire former RAF station, ie domestic and technical site, is now Her Majesty's Prison Acklington, a large category C establishment, and that the majority of the former RAF buildings, including the Gaydon hangar are still in use and are very recognisable as ex RAF.

The actual airfield site was sold off for open cast mining and the entire surface area of the airfield was removed to a depth of over 30 feet. Hardly what I would call restoring to pasture!

[N707ZS]

Could the basic training be sold off to civilian operating companies? Move the Leeming Hawks to DTVA and the various motor glider/tutor untits to the nearest civil drone.

[BEagle]

Hmmm.....

All the references I have (Action Stations 7, 1959-ish half-mill RAF aeronautical chart, Google Earth aerodromes overlay) show the aerodrome itself to have been situated in the centre of a triangle formed by the East Coast main railway line, the old LNER line to Amble and the B6345 from Acklington village to Togston. I.e. immediately to the north of the domestic site, now the 2 prisons, at OS Grid SU230010.

The Google maps image show this (in 2006) to be open farmland; the ugly open cast mine works are well to the south of the prisons and the old line to Amble. Perhaps the original 1980s mine works have since been made good and the land returned to pasture?

In May 1995, I was 'volunteered' to fly 2 senior officers to Northumbria in a Piper Warrior. They helpfully suggested landing at Acklington..... I'm not quite sure how they'd got to their exalted position in the RAF without knowing that the aerodrome had been closed to flying for over 20 years. I told them that we'd have to land at Woolsington instead; due to 3PoB we couldn't get enough fuel in without an en-route splash-and-dash at Gamston. Where the wretched aircraft had a magneto failure, so they continued by rail whilst the aircraft was fixed for my trip home the following day - without them...:\

Time to spare......:hmm:

Anyway, move the Hawks to Yeovilton, the Tucanos to Merryfield, move the navy to Culdrose and give Valley to the army...:uhoh:

[airborne_artist]

Tucanos to Merryfield

Only problem is that there is only one very small hangar at Merryfield.

[cazatou]

BEagle

I just found a site (on t'web - as they would say up there) which has aerial photographs of former Airfields in Northumberland that show the Airfield (as I knew it) has been returned to agricultural use.

The Prison was built next to the new RAF Married Quarters that were themselves built just before the Airfield closed.

[PlasticCabDriver]

1959-ish half-mill RAF aeronautical chart,

I bet that shows a very different picture to today! How many airfields?!

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Her Majesty's Prison Acklington, a large category C establishment, and that the majority of the former RAF buildings, including the Gaydon hangar are still in use and are very recognisable as ex RAF


I heard that when Acklington became a Young Offenders' Institute, the recently-built blocks containing two-man rooms (a luxury at the time) were demolished to avoid upsetting the prisoners who expected (and got) single accommodation!

[Norfolk in Chance]

I knew there was an issue but not sure what it was - thanks for clearing it up. Can you see a way round it? Risk management of flight over the sea? The problem will be departing from 19 or recovering to 01 for the 5 months of the year when the sea temp is low (which is a frequent occurrence). It is, however, damn helpful that we are lucky enough to have a SAR unit based here, therefore rescue times should be at their absolute minimum. Maybe the bean counters will write it off as acceptable, and the tincans will just crack on?

I wonder how many of the pilots would deem it to be acceptable to fly around knowing if they go over water or land in it all likelihood is they are going to drown....? I dare say some would say "no thanks"

[Norfolk in Chance]

to get this back on topic, i believe there have been a couple of recent studies done at linton to see if moving to either Leeming or Valley was viable..

something in the order of £85m to move the tucanos to Valley and over £100m to move them to Leeming, with no real savings as linton would have to remain open for accommodation if they went to Leeming and would have to be returned to pre-airfield state if they went to Valley

You'd like to think that those figures would make it unfeasible but seeing what has gone on under this government so far who knows...!

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

no real savings as linton would have to remain open for accommodation if they went to Leeming


Are you sure about this? Leeming must have a fair size Mess from when it had 3 op sqns, and there won't be many BFJT studes for the foreseable future...

[Norfolk in Chance]

it wasnt the mess that was the issue it was the married quarters, i.e. there are none! there are people working at Leeming on the patch at Linton already so for all the QFIs, an increase in the amount of ATC personnel no doubt, as well as other trades, space would need to be found.

[whowhenwhy]

Increase the number of "civilian" QFIs a la DHFS and you remove the requirement for expensive SFA:hmm:

[frodo_monkey]

Increase the number of "civilian" QFIs a la DHFS and you remove the requirement for expensive SFA

How do you justify that when we are making a large number of people redundant? And how on earth are you proposing to fund that?!

[Red Line Entry]

It's the wrong approach anyway. You don't decide to get rid of Service instructors from the training system because there are no MQs! That's tail wagging dog.

Having said that, once you've worked out the right size, shape and composition of your organisation, you then have to work out the best place to keep it. That's when issues like MQs will come into play and tend to drive costs far more than issues like whether a new tower is needed.