Ealing Council propose closure of RAF Northolt

[Stuff]

A suggestion has been put forward to close the historic RAF Northolt station and build 20,000 homes on the site in an attempt to combat London's housing crisis.

The idea was submitted by Ealing Council for the Mayor of London Sadiq Khan's "City for All Londoners" document which outlines challenges and opportunities from across the capital.

Ealing suggested the working 100-year-old RAF station could be closed as it “serves no real strategic importance” and the land could instead be developed for housing.

The council has called for “radical thinking” and said the plans could help meet the housing challenges London faces.

Proposal to close 100-year-old RAF Northolt base to build 20,000 homes to tackle London housing crisis - Get West London (http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/news/west-london-news/proposal-close-100-year-old-12506465)

[GeeRam]

Just what the area needs, more ruddy houses.....:ugh:

Ealing Council is run by attention seeking idiots with absolutely no understanding of anything - as a resident of the borough I have first hand experience of their continual ineptitude on just about every subject.

The impact on the road and infrastructure when just less than a 1000 homes were built on the old Taylor Woodrow complex some 2 miles up the road from RAF Northolt has been dramatic......the number they are proposing would create havoc in that area.....

Muppets.

[andrewn]

But your missing the point GeeRam, it's not about quality of life, it's all about ramming in as many people as possible.

Cos more people = more GDP growth = more people = more houses, rinse and repeat :)

[VMD+12]

More houses = more council tax = more money for Ealing council and they will blur over the cost of additional services required.

[JAVELINBOY]

An important site in the great scheme, HM Gov. would surely ensure they keep it in reserve for response use to anything big going off in London?

[Wander00]

Always thought it was in LB of Hillingdon, but maybe that was just RAF Uxbridge

[Easy Street]

"No real strategic importance"

That's a proper armchair general's observation. It doesn't take much imagination to work out that there are things other than VIP transport that a military airfield near the capital city might be used for... and not just QRA during the Olympic games.

[Stuff]

HM Gov. would surely ensure they keep it in reserve for response use to anything big going off in London?

That's what many people thought about Halton after it's use for Op OLYMPIC and potential for other requirements in London. It has/had the capability to generate accommodation for thousands (if you sent the recruits home), an unrivalled ability to train people for ceremonial (or other duties) and you could reach London in under an hour (at suitably unsociable hours).

Even that, together with the apprentice history and tradition at Halton, wasn't enough to save it from the housing plan.

Is Northolt all that different?

[Easy Street]

Much easier to get 'stuff' into Northolt quickly than it is into Halton. Also, as sites around London are binned, the stronger the case for retaining Northolt grows: with fewer and fewer potential operational sites available, the ones you keep become ever more valuable.

[JosuaNkomo]

But where would that leave Dr Rupa Huq. She and labour need those houses filled with grateful multicultural benefit recipients whose votes can be cast by the "block" to ensure the right person gets in. Tower Hamlets being an example.

[MOSTAFA]

You are spot on Javelin Boy and Easy Street

HM Gov. would surely ensure they keep it in reserve for response use to anything big going off in London?

I can't begin to think of how, on at least a hundred times without Northolt's ILS I'd have ever got into the centre of London from a beautiful city near the Welsh border and more importantly, with the passengers, I was carrying and a very very low overshoot onto the heli lanes. The Bovingdon radial 233? (Can't remember) Used to scare the crap out of me in poor weather!

[lotus1]

If they can do it to kemp ton park horse track I know it's owned by the jockey club what's them not doing it to Northolt

[Heathrow Harry]

The Southeast needs more houses

No-one wants to build on the Green Belt

How many flights use Northolt? And how many of them are business jets these days?

Bit of a slam-dunk TBH

The idea it will be saved so that the RAF can fly in thousands of non-existant troops in case of "civil unrest" is fantasy.................

The only thing that will save it is that the case will be made to the politicians that they'll have to use City or LHR

[aw ditor]

Or Farnborough, or Biggin, or ................. .

[Heathrow Harry]

or even LHR at the end of the day..................

The Great British Public do not see airports as necessary or even desireable TBH - especially if they live near one................

[MOSTAFA]

HH oh what a wonderful fluffy world you live in.

[Al R]

What if JSFAW needs to maintain readiness and mount ops into London quickly? Northolt offers options that I don't think are available elsewhere.

[air pig]

AI R,

If I remember correctly Northolt had two Tornado's deployed there as 9/11 was happening on QRA.

If Northolt was closed down, that would make the owners of Kiddligton (Oxford) and Biggin Hill very very happy as they have tried in the past to close Northolt to civilian traffic. Are there wheels within wheels happening here?

[racedo]

Interesting one and how hard would it be to have a number of aircraft on QRA based at the New Heathrow with immediate access to runway if required ?

Time for Green Belt to be changed as it a blight and forces more and more people into less and less space while keeping house prices too high.

[ImageGear]

Time for Green Belt to be changed

//RANT ON

Having commuted into Central London on and off for 40 years, I can tell you that the Green Belt MUST to be expanded, not concreted over. When you cannot see from one side of Whitehall to other because of the smog, and people are collapsing in the street due to lack of oxygen, and the stench which rises from the ground in a morning, makes you want to vomit, and the salad vegetables grown under the approach to 09L at Heathrow arrive in local supermarkets tasting of paraffin or avgas, and your car is covered in spots of fuel, and where cattle and sheep graze on the grass covered in said fuel spots.

Where the runoff from concreted estates, airports, parking areas ends up in the River from which 20 million people drink every day. Not to mention the 5 sets of filtering kidneys anecdote.

We NEED less people and much, much, more green belt before we are all sickened or poisoned to the point of death.

//RANT OFF

There you go

Imagegear

[Heathrow Harry]

"HH oh what a wonderful fluffy world you live in."

I wish......... I live in the real world - where no-one gives damn about airfields, all they see is a big open space which doesn't seem to have much happening on it. And I can't see any politician standing up and saying "I think building more houeses here is a bad idea"

[allthatglitters]

Proposal to close 100-year-old RAF Northolt base to build 20,000 homes to tackle London housing crisis - Get West London (http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/news/west-london-news/proposal-close-100-year-old-12506465)
Even the article mentions the London Borough of Hillingdon as be the local council for the area.
(RAF Uxbridge was closed for redevelopment and the last time I passed it still looks like a dogs breakfast).
A project of this size on road infrastructure and facilities which are already at breaking point, try using any road around the area.

[MOSTAFA]

No you don't live in the real world, you live in the world fluffy people are trying to create where everything is wonderful and the worlds nasty people all live in la la land. To be honest I don't see many politicians doing that either, until of course they are properly briefed. I'm guessing, being on a military aviation forum, you either know something, about the intricacies of getting into London, be it piloting, or air trafficking it? Then you would know, your namesake just isn't an option, nor never will be and LCA rules preclude just about everything with the exception of what they have now bouncing off those rules daily.

The precision radar head at Northolt I'm sure remains fundamental in the first rule of government and I am certainly not living in your " flying in thousands of non existent troops in case of civil unrest... Is fantasy.......... Fantasy. But I do live in the real world where sometime nasty things happen sadly more often than you'd think and not necessarily in London.

Not that I give two figs anymore about military airfields, but I'd also like to comment on your "slam dunk TBH" theory, surely if the south east needs more houses? Why not build them in the south east, not north west London! Can I suggest if Mr Whateverhescalled (London Mayor) is hell bent on an airfield, maybe Biggin Hill? I seem to remember that was south east it was only useful as a turning point to avoid another London rule.

[aw ditor]

In this neck-of-the-woods it took about 15 years from the first 'Council rumblings' to the first house being built on the former RAF Oakington site. Whatever happens, it won't happen overnight.

[Rocket2]

I wonder when we're going to build a new reservoir or three to supply all these new houses with water - ohh that would get the NIMBYS going :}

[Training Risky]

I live in the Southeast.

The Southeast does NOT need more housing, it needs a reduction in population. Hopefully Brexit may achieve this.

The local council have agreed a plan to cut part of my local woods down and shoehorn 25 new houses into a rural area without giving a damn about the consequent strain on the roads, schools etc. 😡

[MPN11]

Having lived and/or worked in the area for longer than I care to recall [15+ years? *] between 1974 and 1991, I assure the proponents of this scheme that the traffic hardly worked back then. How the infrastructure would cope with this idea i a complete mystery to me.

West Drayton/Swakeleys
Uxbridge/Swakeleys
MoD/Uxbridge
11 Gp/Swakeleys
MoD/Northolt
MoD/Bracknell
Uxbridge/Bracknell

Join the RAF and see the World, eh? :)

[racedo]

The Southeast does NOT need more housing, it needs a reduction in population. Hopefully Brexit may achieve this.

Dream on..

[ImageGear]

Dream on..

"The UK will never vote to leave the EU"

"Trump is unelectable"

"Uncontrolled immigration will never be controlled"

Recognise a trend here?

The media must be feeling somewhat dispossessed - the British People are no longer prepared to listen to their not so subtle instructional techniques.

Indeed, where the people have the will, they will find a way and it may not be as directed by our propaganda pushing liberals. :=

Imagegear

[BEagle]

Even when local town councils, district councils, county councils and local people all oppose some speculator's plan to build houses in an inappropriate area, the Planning Inspectorate seems to be increasingly biased in favour of the speculator when the proposal goes to appeal.....no doubt there's some government pressure behind that :hmm: ?

Yet house prices are going up at an unsustainable rate, the mortgage mafia and estate agents are slavering over the associated increase in commission - when the new line to London opened last year, the number of London residents looking for houses near Kidlington increased dramatically. How is that of any benefit to local residents?

Oxford cannot find enough space to meet housing supply set by the government, or so they allege, so there is now increasing pressure on the 'green belt' - and local towns and villages are becoming Oxford overspill areas. But without any investment in road or rail infrastructure...:ugh:

[Arclite01]

Around here usually part of the planning conditions is that the developer is responsible for associated improvements to the roads, electrical and water infrastructure. These need to be completed before the Council will adopt the development. - Yeah right

I can name at least 3 developments near to me that are 250 Houses plus that had that planning condition applied and yet the houses have been built, sold and the developer gone away and the planning condition has not been completed. On 2 of the 'developments' (I hesitate to use the words 'estate') the infrastructure is so bad the roads are full of potholes and major junction improvements have not been completed, it's made local and regional news and yet the council still refuse to enforce the condition through the courts, none of the properties are cheaper end of the spectrum or achieve the goal of helping locals or first time buyers - so I am at a loss as to what the overall benefits were. The Dis-benefits are obvious:


We have lost local green space
The houses are rammed together (not attractive)
The roads are barely useable (unadopted and already damaged)
The properties have not helped the local housing situation
Local infrastructure overflowing (schools, doctors, sewerage, Broadband, roads etc)
Local Authority apparently powerless (unwilling or unable ?) in the face of the developers
Progressive downslide in overall quality of life..............


Meanwhile the Local Authority is tackling blatant illegal development by making one of my local farmers take down a barn that was 1 meter higher than the planning application he submitted and they have rejected his application for an amendment to the original planning app...........

All I can assume is that Local Councillors are either extremely naïve in what they think Developers will and won't do or they are receiving large brown envelopes to 'quieten' them down. Ultimately money talks and integrity walks.......

Finally, like you guys elsewhere I am amazed at the distances and time people spend travelling on the daily commute nowadays, many people round here do 2 hours each way, each day to work and spend in excess of £6000 for a season ticket............. just crazy !

And don't get me started on 'second' homes in Burnham Market...........

Arc

[racedo]

"The UK will never vote to leave the EU"

"Trump is unelectable"

"Uncontrolled immigration will never be controlled"

Recognise a trend here?

The media must be feeling somewhat dispossessed - the British People are no longer prepared to listen to their not so subtle instructional techniques.

Indeed, where the people have the will, they will find a way and it may not be as directed by our propaganda pushing liberals. :=

Imagegear

You talk about a reduction in Population with a glib comment but don't tell how much nor where the population will go.

Govt can't control the immigration it is control of and that is non UK immigration but some how Brexit means it will control immigration,

[Wander00]

Arc - used to visit Burnham Mkt quite often, liked the pub the Capt Sir William Hoste - when we lived in Little Snoring, papers delivered by Mrs Gotobed

[ImageGear]

Racedo

Indeed, uncontrolled migration over many decades has brought the UK to the point where every part of infrastructure is creaking at the seams, not just housing.

Wishing to keep this thread on track, having been extensively involved in trying to fight off the devious and sometimes near criminal tactics of Developers various I can tell you that they will stop at nothing to achieve their fiscal objectives.

They will say they want to build 25000 low cost houses, submit planning application, get told to go away and rethink, but they have already filed their next submission for 22000 houses, before the ink is dry on the first, followed by resubmit - reject, resubmit reject eventually reaching a figure of say 16000 houses. (Which was the original objective)

At this point planning wakes up and notices how much parking has been allocated for each house, shock horror, only one garage/off street parking per house. (and by the way, the price of each house has now risen by at least 40% because the developer cannot make enough profit off the lower number of sales.

Which means that the houses are no longer "low cost" but single family homes, which means each house is now at least a two car family.

16000 homes, at least 32000 cars half of which have nowhere to park, where do they go?, I'll tell you, up every little village street, access road, etc.

Ohh the council will need to control parking congestion, better start marking out the bays and putting up the signs, oops traffic will not assign bays or put up signs unless they can regulate the situation, parking charges anyone.

Ditto council tax, think infrastructure, sewerage, water, electricity.

This is pure and simple council revenue enhancement and developer enrichment at the cost of residents quality of life. Nothing to do with serving the "population".

Better start the fight now because it's coming. :=

Imagegear

[Arclite01]

Imagegear

The parking is interesting. The roads on these developments are not triple width (often not even double width) to ensure maximum number of units on any given site. Number of parking spaces per property = 1 (so minimum number of vehicles = maximum number of units for the square footage). Problem is that because property is so expensive kids don't move out (average age is now 30 for kids leaving home in Norfolk for example). They are of working age and have cars............where do they park ? - anywhere they can. Round here they block other people's driveways, park on the pavement, block the roads - they have no choice. often the nearest space can be half a mile away............

Here's the rub. A few months ago there was a house fire on one of the developments round here. The road was blocked with cars parked either side of the road - the gap (1 car width) was not wide enough for the fire engines to get through. They refused to damage the parked cars by trying to get through and told me that if they damage their engine, the engine has to be taken off the road and the driver is either suspended or taken off driving duties until there has been an enquiry into the RTA. They ended up doing the sensible thing. Ran up to the house and made sure no-one was inside, and then left it to burn. God only knows what would have happened if there had been people inside.................. obviously the same applies to ambulances which can't get through the gap either..........

And yet no-one cares and this must have been obvious to the planners when the plans were submitted. There is an easy fix - state a minimum road width and stick to it. No road width minimum = no planning approval, and while we're at it a minimum of 3 spaces per property for car parking............

Wander

Burnham Market now known a 'Chelsea on Sea' or 'Home of the Rangerover' if you live around here......... over 60% of the houses there are owned by people from outside Norfolk. (and double parking of 4WD is rife in the village from 5 on a Friday until 8 on a Monday). You'd be sad to see it.........

Arc

[MPN11]

As an aside, Jersey Development law requires, for new-build, one off-street parking space per bedroom, and an extra one for a visitor. It makes high-densnity developments quite tricky.

That said, Developers and Planning have a 'relationship'. ;)

[Hangarshuffle]

Why cant the RAF simply randomly deploy more aircraft to Northolt more often, and publicise that as well? "Product placement" - is it called that? If its a turf war, and the RAF wants to keep its real estate then it has to surely populate it (with people and aircraft or alternate air defences/assets.
If it cant do that, then take it the land away and use the said land more intelligently for the common good.

* Brexit will mean you come here to work on a Visa. No designated job/company sponsorship = no working Visa. Just like the two non EU countries I recently worked in-this system generally worked well because the host nation applied the rules fully. We all know the present set up here in the UK right now and what that has meant- I could now see through recent experience and observation that many non essential EU people are already leaving UK even pre Brexit. It could be we will see a fall in working youthful population - heaven knows demand for housing of the types being speculated for Northolt may even fall.
Not wanting to get into a Brexit argument but destiny is in our own horny hands....

[FJ2ME]

Why cant the RAF simply randomly deploy more aircraft to Northolt more often, and publicise that as well? "Product placement" - is it called that? If its a turf war, and the RAF wants to keep its real estate then it has to surely populate it (with people and aircraft or alternate air defences/assets.
If it cant do that, then take it the land away and use the said land more intelligently for the common good.

* Brexit will mean you come here to work on a Visa. No designated job/company sponsorship = no working Visa. Just like the two non EU countries I recently worked in-this system generally worked well because the host nation applied the rules fully. We all know the present set up here in the UK right now and what that has meant- I could now see through recent experience and observation that many non essential EU people are already leaving UK even pre Brexit. It could be we will see a fall in working youthful population - heaven knows demand for housing of the types being speculated for Northolt may even fall.
Not wanting to get into a Brexit argument but destiny is in our own horny hands....

All good stuff, and just to enhance your point and without getting into (another) brexit spat, i believe this government, as well as the 27 others, has, since 2010, had the right to deport EU citizens after 90 days, if they are not employed, have not secured a place in higher education, or haven't got the means to support themselves. That legislation came in when one Hon T May was home secretary and not one person has been removed from the UK using it. (Other countries have and continue to enforce it.) So when we talk about uncontrolled immigration, we should also be careful as to who we are implying has failed to control it.

[Melchett01]

If it's anything like the plan to develop Wyton, I wouldn't hold your breath. Talking to a friend based there, the MOD flogged half the base / airfield to developers who are now stuck in arguments with the council over planning permission. The Council insists that 15,000+ new homes (I suspect very tiny homes) need the infrastructure in place before the building starts; funnily enough, the developers just want to get houses up and sold and will think about the supporting infrastructure - roads, water, power, comms, minor points - at some time in the future. The Council are sensibly suggesting this isn't the best of plans.

What is worrying is that with pound signs flickering in front of their eyes, the local council might just end up persuading the MOD to flog Northolt and then end up being left with empty land for ages, a sort of lose lose all round.

[Heathrow Harry]

Mustafa

I 've spent a very large (too large) part of life on the M40, the A40, the M4 and the railways of NW London.

What I am saying is that military considerations are very very low on the political radar - especially when they are not a front line station.

If we started now, with the size of the RAF as it is how many airfields would we build to defend the UK? Germany manages with 11 - we probably have over 40. They are a relic of WW2 and TBH are not really necessary

[ImageGear]

Germany manages with 11 - we probably have over 40

We're not even comparing apples and pears more like apples and onions...Germany simply does not have the political, geographic and military conditions of the UK.

Think what would happen if the UK were attacked, what contribution could Germany make. Then think of the opposite situation in terms of allies coming to the aid of the UK.
Please don't mention the UN, or even NATO, in todays world you don't even know who will be up for helping out.

We should be maintaining at least a decent defensive state for those wars yet to be fought. That means keeping, supporting and upgrading appropriately placed bases.


Imagegear

[GeeRam]

Why cant the RAF simply randomly deploy more aircraft to Northolt more often, and publicise that as well? "Product placement" - is it called that? If its a turf war, and the RAF wants to keep its real estate then it has to surely populate it (with people and aircraft or alternate air defences/assets.

Terrific idea :D

Regular Typhoon detatchment as per the Olympics would do quite nicely thank you, with a good few QRA scrambles thrown in for good measure.....:E

:ok:

[Heathrow Harry]

"Germany simply does not have the political, geographic and military conditions of the UK"

You are of course correct - they have a stable govt, a budget surplus, a higher standard of living

When it comes to aircraft they have more Tornados than we have and almost the same number of Typhoons

Their Army has +60,000 men and +400 MBT's - ours has 84000 men and 227 MBT's

Our navy is bigger and better - more of everything and SSN's and SSBN's

I'd still say looking at the numbers that we have a far larger RAF estate than we'd have if we started from scratch

[MOSTAFA]

HH, why don’t you try reading instead of quoting fluffy political garbage. So I asked you and you either didn’t want to answer or you have never piloted or Air Traffic’d a military aircraft into the centre of London? my guess is the latter. Begs the question why you want to comment on Military Aviation. A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying etc. Hey I admit I don’t fly for the military anymore but I did for 30 years and continue to fly today on the North Sea.

I bow to your vast experience of living on the M40 albeit, who actually gives a ***t and to your experience of the choo choo train journeys into London you are so proud of. Have you ever considered that for the best part those journeys they are made relatively safe, by rough men who stand ready to do violence on your behalf. I doubt it, you are far more interested in the size of the RAF. Do you actually believe its just the RAF that fly in the armed forces? I think I said before I couldn’t give a stuff about military airfields anymore they don’t affect me but.

To lump EGWU into “They are a relic of WW2 and TBH are not really necessary” is utter gibberish, no its actually worse; who appointed you Minister of Defence. If you had ever needed to fly or air traffic a military aircraft into the centre of London you would know why. Have you ever tried to grope over the Chilterns in poor weather, I doubt it. The precision radar head at EGWU on the other side of the Chilterns, is fundamental to the first rule of government. Happen you read all of my posts and you just might understand but somehow - I doubt it.

[Thaihawk]

One assumes the socialist overlords at Ealing Council proposing this do not live anywhere near Northolt, or anywhere likely to be affected by this barmy proposal?.

The traffic is backed up on the local roads 7 days a week before you add some 30,000 plus vehicles into the area with no improvement in the local infrastructure, which even if proposed would be opposed by the local residents.

One wonders what sort of relationship there might just be between said leaders of Ealing council and any prospective developers?.

[Heathrow Harry]

You are confusing Air Traffic with National Security MOSTAFA

I stand by my point - every time someone suggests closing any miltary airfield in the UK this Forum is full of people coming up with the most amazing reasons why said airfield is absolutely essential for the defence of the realm. I understand why people have an emotional attachment to places they've served but they can't ALL be necessary when the size of our armed forces has reduced so far.- correct?

And statements like :_

"The precision radar head at EGWU on the other side of the Chilterns, is fundamental to the first rule of government" are.... amusing. I must have missed that in the last SDR................

In a real emergency the Govt would just take over Heathrow, Gatwick and/or City

If they need to bring troops in to town (to supplmment those already there - which are not inconsiderable) the nearest bases are in Aldershot - you're not suggesting they will fly them from Farnborough or 'Bushe to NW London are you?

[MOSTAFA]

HH, I am confusing absolutely nothing and have the scars to prove it. Try reading what I say, just for once and think from the confines of your fluffy armchair, read; instead of quoting liberal socialist garbage. Stop trying to obfuscate the issue of what I am trying to clarify for you - FGS - we are now going into 'Aldershot' according to your fantasy, where next, oh hang on, we could use EGVO thats only just down the road from there, they could catch one of those lovely trains you are so keen on oh hang on a minute, where is there nearest station?

If you showed just an ounce of common dog and thought about the rubbish you spout, you'd perhaps understand, that bringing Heathrow to a standstill by closing EGLL is not; and never will be an option, 18'ish hours a day, you have as many as 40 big aeroplanes landing at EGLL every hour, and a further 60 on the other side taking off, just think of the queues that involves in the airspace above, even on a normal day, did you know what a fabulous job they do controlling that lot? Add to that the countless helicopters needing clearances through or under that lot. Some of those big aeroplanes left their departure points 13 hours before! I have already tried to explain the reasons for not using LCA!

You would understand precisely what I am trying to say if you listened and answered my very simple questions to you. Do you have a vested interest in EGUW or Military Aviation or are you just on here to agitate. I once, yep, just once, did an ILS in a helicopter into EGLL I think the MOD is still trying to sort out the legal claims from all over the world, not to mention the slot times that I screwed up.

Well I can't be bothered anymore I'd rather try to educate pork. Feel free to come back with some other brilliant plan but I don't think you understand the geographical importance of EGUW and If it wasn't mentioned on SDR, (I certainly didn't read it)!!! I'm surprised, happen it wasn't mentioned for a reason. You certainly cannot lump it in with your 40 RAF stations you consider superfluous around the UK.

[air pig]

So Heathrow or Gatwick would allow a C17 with an Ebola patient in the back to land and disrupt the airport as they would want to close to all operations, well no hope with that. The cost of landing a civil air ambulance into either is extortionate and not really feasible.

[Heathrow Harry]

Air Pig- your example is typical of the sort of arguements everyone makes to retain favourite base - there are many other places a C-17 can land with an Ebola patient for example

I'm sure Mostafa is making a some decent points from an ATC view but my whole point is that it will never be viewed on those grounds by the people who take the decisions. It is not simply a military decision now the politicians are involved - you may dislike the idea intensley but it 's now a fact..

As for UK Defence I think it's currently a b***** discgrace - we desperately need a politcian in a position of power to start banging the drum on this (I'm not holding my breath).

What is needed is more personnel, more money for personnel and a focus on useful kit. Real estate is not even 50th on the list of priorities ..................

[MOSTAFA]

HH, We have one, he's called the Minister of Defence. Personally, I wouldn't trust him, to sit the right way round on a toilet seat. Why? Because of the fluffy liberal mess, our politicians of all parties have got us into; on a utterly false philosophy, a doctrine, thats fostered by delusional minorities, and is promoted by the shady media, that somehow still believes its possible to pick up a turd by the clean end!

That said I'd suggest he is very likely to ensure EGUW remains open as an RAF station for the reason I have tried to inform you of.

I want to make it quite clear I couldn’t give a toss anymore about military airfields but, you cannot include this one in your list, for all the reasons stated, that said, time will tell but the winds in the western worlds a changing, and I think pretty quickly.

[air pig]

HH, Northolt is the nearest to the Royal Free Hospital. Having an Ebola or other haemorrhagic fever patient on transport is risk, should be the shortest possible transfer time.

Ever tried to move a critically ill aeromedical patient, no I suspect not, I have. Biggin Hill is difficult to transfer from in particular with spinal injury patients, Luton is 40 miles away Oxford restricted hours and capability to handle aeromedical flights, Farnborough again distance. All others far too expensive.

Why shouldn't the MoD make money from their airfield?

The owners of Biggin Hill and Kidlington have wanted Northolt closed for a long time and even went to court about it and failed. Is there any form of connection between them and the council?

[Heathrow Harry]

Knowing the ways of local Govt. I'd suggest it was probably a property developer..................

[ImageGear]

Double the guard and watch out for drums of petrol appearing in the bushes.:E

[allthatglitters]

http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/news/west-london-news/proposal-close-100-year-old-12506465