AAC MIDDLE WALLOP

[TCAS FAN]

After my initial attempt, I am informed that this is the appropriate thread for my question.

A comment made by a reliable source close to MOD indicates that AAC Middle Wallop's closure is now on the Strategic Defence Review agenda, with a move of assets to Wattisham. Not intended immediately, but only a few years away.

Anyone out there who can shed some light on this?

[airborne_artist]

Can't be true - the runway hasn't been re-surfaced recently :E

[Peter Carter]

It is possible - they did put more grass seed down earlier this year.

[BATCO]

I worked in MOD through Tony's SDR in '97. Middle Wallop was due to close then and disperse its functions to other bases (Topcliffe, Wattisham, Dishforth and Shawbury spring to mind but I can't be sure, memory fades). However, Army are past masters at keeping their historic turf. So they rushed on with WAH 64 simulator at MW and hey presto! Too expensive to move it, so keep MW open. Handily, the Museum of Army Aviation is right next door and another option for AAC pers to move around the various Army units/HQ around SPTA whilst staying in same house (and probably drawing BSA then CEA too).

So, MW closing through SDSR/PR12......don't hold your breath.

Batco

[green granite]

And an excellent museum it is too. :ok:

[BATCO]

I second that. Especially the Horsa and WACO.

Batco
....give us a tow anyone?

[I'm Off!]

Still closing...

[Roadster280]

Surely it would be more in the national interest to close Andover (the town, that is), and keep MW open?

[BATCO]

.... and Swindon vice Lyneham.

Batco

[andrewn]

Ref the OP's question:

I'm not in the know in any way but as the RAF has recently had it's MOB's cut then logic would dictate that RN/AAC will suffer similar cuts.

And if you look at the likely future size of AAC (~30 Wildcat and ~60 Apache) then consolidation of MOB's seems more probable than possible.

Feel sure the beancounters are mulling all "options" over as we speak:O

[LFFC]

I'm sure this goes back a long way and and is probably linked into the MFTS solution for training bases.

Shawbury or Linton to Close by 2012 (http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/298632-rumour-alert-shawbury-linton-close-2012-a-2.html#post3678547)

Posted 3rd Nov 2007, 16:19. Like all good rumours this one has an element of truth. The MFTS competitors said they could do the job on 5 bases not the current six (the 6 are Cranwell, Culdrose,Linton, Middle Wallop, Shawbury and Valley). So its not just a toss-up between Linton and Shawbury its a 6 way spread bet. So time for fantasy training group: which 5 bases would you use and how would you lay down flying training from entry to before OCU for all 3 services on them? Of course feel free to use other bases and delete all 6 of the current ones but you'll need good reasoning to back that up.
Looks like it might all be finally coming home to roost. Remember that the flying training system will probably be even smaller in the future than expected 5 years ago, so it may not only be one base that is lost!

:sad:

[Roadster280]

Fair observation. Close Cranwell (completely) and MW.

Send RAF POs to Sandhurst, and Army student pilots to Shawbury. Given the reduction in numbers, collapse Linton into Valley. Three airfields closed, crab officers get to find out all about "trying harder at school", output of flying training meets demand, jobza.

[appleavi8or]

The HALS is in the wrong place & the Fixed Wing runways cut the airfield into segments (which, to be honest, compromises effective flying operations for Rotary). Apache have to go elsewhere to simply fly circuits & other rotary spend much of their time training on Everleigh where there is no crash cover. MW isn't being operated as well as it could or should be. It needs to get rid of FW ops and build a HALS in the middle of the field and have a professional long-term view of how it would function best.

The Wildcat is probably going to Yeovilton so that leaves some Squirrels and the Apace Conversion Sqn (ignoring the dying Gazelle & single 212). Put the Apaches with all the others at Wattisham and safe a substantial amount in duplication of resources. The Squirrel training could easily be done at Shawbury but the over-reliance of civvy instructors wouldn't sit well with the AAC there. AAC ground training could be absorbed into any one of a load of bases within Southern or Eastern England - the numbers are small in comparison.

Much is always said of the 'strategic' proximity of SPTA, which has some validity but we are only talking 'skids-on' options here as most other training can be/is done in the general Low Flying System.

Training RAF pilots at Sandhurst is a top idea. The RAF Officer Training System is dreadful, especially the leadership training which is probably not much different to that conducted in Tescos (but with boots). The IOT course was extended by 3 months a few years back specifically to address leadership but some schooly-lefty pinko didn't make the connection with 'Military Leadership' so it's all group hug stuff and geared around admin staff.

On the topic of real estate, the Lynx sim is soon to be redundant, the Thales Apache Sim is in a shed which could move to Wattisham for less than the income from the real estate and the housing patch looks as though it was built for it's resale potential anyway.

Or we could just put the Pumas there when the Merlins go to the Navy and make all rotary pilots either Navy (Merlin & Sea King) or Army (Apache & Chinook) & close Benson instead?

[Admin_Guru]

If there is scope at Sandhurst to accept a larger training commitment; you should send the RLC Officers back there to learn how to manage and lead without reference to those skills previously learnt at Deepcut.

Wallop will soon enjoy the same status as Netheravon and Upavon. That HQ JHC was built away from an airfield might be politically correct insofar as not advertising single service biase, but for sure Defence Estates have missed a trick and so sealed the fate of DAAvn in its present state.

That said, IMHO the colocation of all helicopter support elements at an airfield such as Hullavington would have been the optimal if expensive answer. Even if no flying sqn was actually based there. However that boat has well and truly sailed, even though MoD Stafford or at least TSW in addition to Colerne (21 Sigs) could have closed and the JHSU hangar given back to Odiham for their new Chinooks. I suppose the same could be possible at Benson if and when Merlin flies away.

[Toddington Ted]

"Training RAF pilots at Sandhurst is a top idea. The RAF Officer Training System is dreadful, especially the leadership training which is probably not much different to that conducted in Tescos (but with boots). The IOT course was extended by 3 months a few years back specifically to address leadership but some schooly-lefty pinko didn't make the connection with 'Military Leadership' so it's all group hug stuff and geared around admin staff." I have to disagree with that as its now out of date.

Although what is considered to be "robust training" varies depending upon how the term robust is interpreted, IOT has indeed been the subject of some adverse criticism, and I should know, having made some critical comments myself as an instructor of ex-IOT students on a Phase 2 course, but there has been a relatively recent overhaul of the IOT course, seemingly for the better as regards leadership and military values etc. Another issue is that the RAF, like most of the Military, can currently afford to be very choosy about who makes the grade and who doesn't. However, once the recruiting machine has to start winding up again (which it always does) there is always a temptation to let people through on the benefit of the doubt (Blimey, I bet one of them was me!)
As regards location, RAF Cranwell will always be the spiritual home of the RAF and so will never close (probably, well, who knows...). :ok:

[LFFC]

Sorry for the thread drift, but it looks like another military training airfield is about to be closed as well.

Skydive Weston in Oxfordshire angry over closure. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-14505265)

The RAF said it could not underwrite the club and was reviewing how facilities at the base were used.

Kind of works in nicely with this development just down the road:

London Oxford Airport to install new Radar System ready for the Olympics. (http://www.oxfordairport.co.uk/airport_news/news_2011/new_radar_system.htm)

With a steady increase in both business aviation traffic and aspirations to entice further commercial airline activity, the go-ahead for the new radar system is one of the most significant steps forward in the airport’s history.

... and maybe the Weston Otmoor eco-town (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weston_Otmoor) plan hasn't entirely gone away either.

:ouch:

[P6 Driver]

Completely disregarding such things as regimental/service histories and traditions for a moment, I can see the day in the distant future when our armed forces are combined under one banner in a similar fashion to the way the Canadians operate.

Our forces are shrinking in many ways and having fewer bases and camps to run is one by-product of this.

[gijoe]

'crab officers get to find out all about "trying harder at school"'

Where did this little Crab or Crabette officer gem start?

Why is it that all Crabs think that everyone aspires to be like them?

G:ok:

[wg13_dummy]

So basically we will be relying on the crabs to completely train Army pilots? Hmm, great idea. Means it will take a lot longer to beat those horrid civilianised traits they already pick up at Shawbury....


Why is it that all Crabs think that everyone apsires to be like them?


We have a few Lance Corporals who do but they tend to be over qualified.

[parabellum]

similar fashion to the way the Canadians operate.


Didn't the Canadians try this and then bin it in favour of going back to three separate services?

Wouldn't it be simpler to move AAC fixed wing flying to an existing fixed wing base and leave MW as 100% rotary?

[AH7]

Guys,

I am not one for being too much of a traditionalist, but lets not forget Wallop is the home of the AAC and remains one of the busiest fields in the UK with many thousands of movements per year.

Army pilots must remain to be trained at Wallop from flying grading to the award of wings. Yes the fixed wing/HALS ect combo is not ideal but with such an outstanding ATC team there are no issues. SPTA and Hampshire/Wiltshire creates great army pilots. LONG LIVE MIDDLE WALLOP.

It is always too easy to combine units and types and sadly that is happening as we speak all over the UK, clearly due to cost, but the penalty is the loss of unit identity.:=

[HEDP]

AH7,

Nice aspiration but my understanding is:

670 Sqn being drawn into Shawbury.

Wildcat to Yeovilton, Lynx expires as does Gazelle.

Apache originally destined for a single type hub and would be more efficient in the long run, could consolidate at Wattisham.

That leaves Grading and ground training (better at single type hubs).

Not a good cost effective basis really.

I can see the taxpayers take on this.

[fayslag]

Bring back 'Choppers Arms' that will ensure the survival of Wallop!!:)

[LFFC]

Looks like there's some intensive lobbying going on by the Army to take control of RW training and keep Middle Wallop open!

British Army fights to influence helicopter training choices (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/in-focus-british-army-fights-to-influence-helicopter-training-choices-363505/)

Although it doesn't look like they've quite got the hang of "tri-service" yet:

"They arrive here [670 Sqn] and we try to unmould their tri-service learning."

[MightyGem]

There's a world of difference in training pilots to "fly" a helicopter at Shawbury and then train them how to "use" it according to Service. I'm sure the RAF and RN do the same.

[LFFC]

Absolutely, but one usually builds on common, tri-service training and enhances it by teaching specialist single-service skills. However, the article makes it appear that the tri-service training was an obstacle to overcome.

[proudfishead]

I can certainly confirm that 6-7 years ago, the Army's take on courses running behind at DHFS could be summarised as, "We don't really care how many shortfalls they leave with, it's less for us to un-teach them when we get here". It does seem to support the fact that they aren't fully engaged with the concept of tri-service fundamentals of flying. Then again, I'm not an SH/AH pilot and so am perhaps not best placed to judge.

[RotatingPart]

Indeed, you aren't best placed to judge Proudfishead. I've instructed on the Army Pilots Course and can tell you that output standard from Shawbury was of grave concern on occasion. I personally saw students pass from 660 to 705 Sqn who shouldn't even have got that far, but somehow managed to be passed out through the sausage machine for us to deal with on the Operational Training Phase. So where are the concepts of "Tri-Service fundamentals of flying" there? We are in the business of producing "MILITARY" helicopter pilots. DHFS is a largely civialiansed organisation focussed on teaching basic flying skills. A task which it does well on the whole (something the RAF didn't consider when they left Shawbury out of there original plans for MFTS).

So let's not kid ourselves on here. Each service has a completely different approach to how it operates it's aircraft and no service has fully embraced a joint concept. The Army is very focussed on mission effect and it's main effort is to deliver that effect on the battlefield / theatre of operation. It is this concept that is lacking in alot of students returning from Shawbury and so there is often a need to remind people of what they are there to do in the first place.

I am not having a go at DHFS. I enjoyed my training there and the standard of instruction was second to none. But it is out of touch operationally, geographically it offers none of the benefits that SPTA does both by day and night and the reality is that it is not equipped to deliver the requirement that Army Aviation needs. The Army is right to push Middle Wallop to the fore, it delivers the end product we require.

[Tiger_mate]

I have taught at DHFS and in accordance with DSAT protocols, the 'customer', read Sqns and in particular OCFs, were invited for face to face liasion to confirm that DHFS output standards were compatable with input expectations. This was not embraced at all by the Sqns and one can therefore logically assume that they were happy with the standard being provided. *Although the ammount of out of office (deployed) messages was also a reflection of reality. To clarify, this was post multi engine rather then Squirrel, but I assume that the single engined side of the house was similar if not identical.

It was usually as a result of newly posted in military instructors bring contemporary protocols with them that the course developed. To cut to the chase, if DAAvn or the staff working for him were unhappy with the standard or quality of army students, what, if anything, was done to staff a solution? ...especially after "I enjoyed my training there and the standard of instruction was second to none", for DHFS were not adverse to change, far from it.

Regarding focus on the battlefield and mission effect. I suggest that all military helicopter crews regardless of service serving today, tomorrow and every day thereafter have that argument truly squared away.

[RotatingPart]

Tiger_mate,

There was dialogue and visits between DHFS and AACen which did improve the situation and also led to DHFS taking on a little more night flying training. But this does not make Shawbury a credible alternative to deliver the full spectrum of training for Army pilots.

The fact that no one embraced the chance to reveiw whether DHFS output standards were compatable with input expectations after multi engine doesn't logically mean that people were happy with that either (As you said, out of office, deployed, apathy maybe?). A similair question was asked by AACen with regards to the output standard of the Lynx CTT. This led to a Conversion To Role course in addition to the CTT which went a large way to reducing the training gap and the burden on the Regiments to train new pilots to CR standard. Middle Wallop has been ideally suited to this task and only time will tell what effect moving Wildcat to Yeovilton in toto will have on how the Army operates this new aircraft.

I have no doubt that DHFS are receptive to change and rightly so if they want to survive in these harsh times. But that doesn't make them the solution. I think Middle Wallop has more than a strong case for it's future and its Commandant is right to push and highlight this :D.

I'd also agree that most military helicopter crews have battlefield focus and mission effect well squared ;).

Fly safe.

[chinook240]

Bit of thread duplication going on:

http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/466688-aac-rotary-training.html

[LFFC]

I have no doubt that DHFS are receptive to change and rightly so if they want to survive in these harsh times. But that doesn't make them the solution. I think Middle Wallop has more than a strong case for it's future and its Commandant is right to push and highlight this.

The solution is meant to be UK MFTS, but reading this thread makes me realise that, 10 years into the project, it's not made much progress!

[Backwards PLT]

Yet again the army painfully demonstrate that they just don't do Joint.

They seem to think that they are some type of special case, which of course they are not. It is the same with every type of flying which requires tactical warfighting - the basics are taught first then the pilots need to be trained to do the tactics. In the FJ world it is no different - the QWIs will grumble about the bloody QFIs and having to "unteach" pilots so that they can fight the aircraft, not just fly it, but the fundamentals need to be there first. What doesn't help are public articles bashing each other, what does help is talking and constantly trying to make things work better. Together.

Of course it wouldn't be as much of a problem if Air did air and Land did land. :E

[xenolith]

Well said Sir (or Madam), nail on the head and all that.:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

[timex]

Or is it they disagree with the way the Joint system works?

[Shackman]

Or is it because the officers (ie 2nd Lts) fall behind their peers in the promotion stakes by having to do a long 'learn to fly' course, when the other Sandhurst graduates are virtually straight into their respective regiments. Always remember an AAC officer is a soldier first, no matter how extensive (or expensive) training may have to be.

[RotatingPart]

Hahahaha, that really is Pot calling Kettle and asking for a colour state! :D

I agree, service bashing from any quarter does no one any good. And at a time when it would appear that the Support Helicopter element of the RAF is being cut down to one type (Chinook), it's no surprise you've wheeled out the "Air should do air and Land do land" self licking lollypop, but Army Aviation is long past having to justify it's existance to anyone so no pi$$ing contest there with SNCO pilots operating aircraft just as complicated as one of your fast, pointy jets.

All credit to the Navy right now though who seem to be making a good job of sneaking in the back door and nicking all of your sweeties :E .

[Mr Grim]

Is Middle Wallop where they get issued their 10 gallon hat, spurs and chaps?

[Backwards PLT]

I've got one boys and I'm reeling him in! Come on rotating, that was waaaaay too easy - I even had a smilie.;)

[bob shayler]

I served at Middle Wallop for two years in 1973 - 1975 and recall my time there with great affection. I was in the Army (R.E.M.E.) and worked in the first line Workshop in logistics where we had Sioux and Scout helicopters. The Gazelle was just coming into service then and I recall most of the manuals I saw being in French.
Being an aviation enthusiast, this was a dream posting and I had a fantastic time there. This was the only time in my career that my O.C. wasn't a R.E.M.E. Officer but a Fleet Air Arm Lieutenant.
My wife Chris and I visited Middle Wallop three weeks ago and had a look round the Museum which recalls the history of Army flying from it's earliest days. The museum has many exhibits of Army Aviation dating back to 1878 when the Royal Engineers commenced trials with balloons working with a budget of £150.00. There are also many displays devoted to the R.F.C. and R.A.F. as Middle Wallop was also a W.W. II Fighter Station. The R.A.F. remained at Middle Wallop until the late 50's when the Army Air Corps took residence. There are 30 aircraft on display inside the Museum and two, a De Havilland Beaver and a Scout on display outside. Well worth a visit,
Regards,
Bob

[bob shayler]

My first attempt at posting an image. It started as 800 x 600 pixels on Photobucket and landed here at 160 x 120 pixels. Must have been a turbulant flight. Will keep trying.
This is the Scout on dislay outside the Museum,
Regards,
Bob

Re-sized


http://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w421/bobshayler/Scout_zps89f90870.jpg?t=1348595445

[bob shayler]

Trying one more, the De Havilland Beaver,
Regards,
Bob

Getting there




http://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w421/bobshayler/DeHavillandBeaver_zpsc934f22c.jpg?