At Last!

[buoy15]

6 o'clock news tonight - Brize and Lossie to close - reprieve for ISK ?

Hoorah!!

[Ray Dahvectac]

BBC News website is not reporting it as station closures, only job cuts.

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4337807.stm)

[buoy15]

Raydah

The news report distinctly said Lossie and Brize are closing

[RIS not RAS]

The Stn Cdr at Lossie made an announcement today. Did anyone catch the details?

[6foottanker]

Considering Lyneham is moving to Brize in the next 6 years, i doubt it is closing!

[L J R]

ISK not the base for new fighter due to BIRDS. and will therefore not be considered for future RAF advanced jet (Not stating it will close)

[L1A2 discharged]

Bu:mad: er. Just when I wanted to go 'home'. St Mawgan airfield mothballed wef late 2006 for up to 5 years pending decosions on future use. - BBC News

[serf]

local news for scotland reporting that 1 F3 to go at Leuchars, hence 160 job losses.

[6foottanker]

Jeez, I knew those jets were heavy on engineering, but 160 guys for one jet!!??!!?? :\

However, the jobs going at Brize are because the VC10 2nd line engineering is being moved to St Athan, so where that morphed into 'Brize is closing' I don't know. Possibly a few civvies out of a job, but mainly RAF involved, and there's plenty of need for spare engineers around the bazaars!

[opso]

From one of the many Beeb articles about this:Conservative defence spokesman Gerald Howarth said the job losses could leave the RAF overstretched. He said: "The public are becoming accustomed to this mantra from this government of 'modernisation and efficiency' - words it uses to mask what invariably amounts to cuts and overstretch." ...could leave the RAF overstretched?! Anyone want to break the bad news to Gerald that the bandwagon rolled away empty some time ago, so there's little point trying to jump on at this stage!

[Archimedes]

opso,


To be fair, I rather think that it's the Beeb who need this pointing out to them.

Howarth's comments about terminology masking cuts and overstretch suggest that he's in no doubt. The BBC, however, chose to inject a note of qualification/ scepticism/'balance' by putting 'could' rather than 'would'.

Although the Conservatives' spending plans for defence can be queried (what are they exactly, and where is the hinted-at cash coming from?), it's only dear old Buff who 'refuses to recognise' that there's such a thing as overstretch.

Bunter Soames has been on about overstretch for some time, and he's not only referring to his waistband....

[UpDiddlyUp]

Serf

The 160 job losses at Leuchars are from PSF being closed:D

[16 blades]

Damn it! Where will you send all the beer call invites to?

16B

[Ray Dahvectac]

So are the 180 jobs to go at ISK a result of the already known demise of 206, or is something else going?

(I accept that the remaining Sqns are to grow in size (allegedly) but wondered if losing one of 4 Sqns had resulted in a cutback amongst the blunt end.

I'll get me coat! :rolleyes: )

[totalwar]

Conservative defence spokesman Gerald Howarth said the job losses could leave the RAF overstretched

Exactly....he clearly hasn't seen the RAF web site which proudly boasts of having 69 RAF Stations, close to 500 aircraft and over 52,000 people. That all adds upto 7 aircraft per station and each RAF station being manned by just over 700 people. How on earth can a Station manage with only 700 people?

[engineer(retard)]

got to hand it to you TW, you've raised ignorance to a fine art form

[Widger]

I, know but I sort of...admire....his...style...sort of...anyway there is a dedicated forum to abuse TW!

[engineer(retard)]

Bit too much of the playground level of banter for my taste. Suprised he hasn't got his own website, TW abuse probably warrants a dedicated server

[Down 4 Reprogram]

The job losses are logistics/engineering related according to the MOD website. See here:

http://news.mod.uk/news/press/news_headline_story.asp?newsItem_id=3146

Accouncement on basing for JCA (replacement for Harrier) here:

http://www.news.mod.uk/news_headline_story.asp?newsItem_id=3147

D4R

[vecvechookattack]

The Link (http://news.mod.uk/news/press/news_headline_story.asp?newsItem_id=3146) seems to back up Totalwar's comment.

It seems that by closing StM will mean losing 175 military jobs and 40 Civilian jobs. That can't possibly be true though. Surely there are more that 175 servicemen at StM and there just has to be more than 40 Civilians. If those figures are a true reflection and IF StM was being run by just over 200 people then it clearly was a scandalous waste of money....

whats worse is the fact that with only 175 service men the place was run by a Group captain !!!!!....Good god. Anything else the RAF can waste money on?????

Now, Ive got a question for serving RAF Officers. Would you (as a cost cutting measure) relinquish your rank to the next one down in order to save money? I.E. If you were an Air Commodore and you believed your job could be done by a Group Captain would you put your hand up and relinquish your rank?

This is a serious question as I have heard a rumour that a certain Naval Officer has done just that.

[Regie Mental]

The true position is more likely to be that many units at StM will move elsewhere, those left behind being made redundant.