RAF Leuchars

[PanMan69]

The Ministry of Defence has said that no decision has been made regarding the future of RAF Leuchars in Fife.

In a statement, the MoD said: "The strategic defence and security review means that Kinloss and two other bases will not be required by the RAF.
"No decisions have been made on which bases or on any future use."

BBC News - MoD says no decision yet over RAF Leuchars future (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-11804093)

[Union Jack]

As seen in yesterday's Scotsman:

MoD 'to sacrifice Leuchars in jobs trade-off' - Scotsman.com (http://www.scotsman.com/news/MoD-39to-sacrifice-Leuchars-in.6633257.jp)

Jack

[sled dog]

U J, i see that the Scotsman says that Leuchars is home to many Typhoons........ whilst showing Tornados :confused:

[Trim Stab]

U J, i see that the Scotsman says that Leuchars is home to many Typhoons........ whilst showing Tornados


Maybe that photo is rather old? There even appears to be a Bulldog hiding at the back.

[Aerouk]

U J, i see that the Scotsman says that Leuchars is home to many Typhoons........ whilst showing Tornados http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/confused.gif

The BBC are showing Jaguars!

[Rakshasa]

Logic would suggest Kinloss, Leeming and Wittering. Not that this is going to be decided by logic...

[A2QFI]

I don't think Wittering will be closing, it has minimal flying going on now and none as of mid-December. It has taken over many of the functions that used to be carried out at RAF Stafford including

No 42 (Expeditionary Support) Wing

No 71 (Inspection and Repair) Squadron
No 93 (Expeditionary Armament) Squadron
No 5001 Squadron
No 5131 (Bomb Disposal) Squadron



85 (Expeditionary Logistics) Wing
Headquarters Squadron
No 1 (Expeditionary Logistics) Squadron
No 2 (Mechanical Transport) Squadron
No 3 (Mobile Catering) Squadron
Joint Aircraft Recovery and Transportation Sqn



Further to that, it was said when I was there that the airfield is leased from the Burghley Estate and, if closed, has to be returned to them in the condition it was in when it was given to the military in 1916. Ie no buildings and lots of green fields!

[2Planks]

That photo was taken in 2000.

Lets just hope miltary requirement overrules social engineering (retiring for a naivety check!).

[Impiger]

I heard Liam Fox say he wasn't responsible for regional policy and any basing decisions would be founded in hard-headed logic (aka finance). Sub-text was that if for example closing Lossie made a bigger contribution to solving MOD's financial woes than closing Leuchars then to reverse the decision would need additional money from elsewhere to make good the difference - now there's naivety for you!

[Red Line Entry]

Rakshasa,

It's an interesting parallel universe in which the 'logical' basing solution for the future Fast Jet fleet involves 3 stns which don't currently operate the aircraft!

[Biggus]

R L E,

...er, I think you'll find that Rakshasa was saying that Kinloss, Leeming and Wittering are the logical 3 bases to CLOSE!

Especially given the quote from MOD in the original post saying that KINLOSS and 2 other bases will "not be required"!

[Rakshasa]

What Biggus said. :ok:


Although given A2QFI's points, especially the land being part of Burghley Park, my logic might be a tad faulty.

[Red Line Entry]

Oops, my bad!! (as the yoof say). Sorry for doubting your logic Rakshasa!

However, as A2QFI says, I think the A4 Hub would prove v expensive to move - there's a lot of people there.

Regarding the sale of the land, I think the magic date is 2022 and before that we'd have to offer it to the original landowner at a well-below market rate.

[ATFQ]

ZZZZZZZZZZ

[PanMan69]

ATFQ - it may not even be that many yet.

[Finningley Boy]

Absolutely, can you imagine visiting an Infantry Battalion or something like that on St. Andrews, Gosh!

This is why Cottesmore, Kinloss and Leeming should be the three R.A.F. Bases to face the chop.:{ Certainly not Leuchars and Lossiemouth.;)

FB:)

[ATFQ]

This is what the Army (or at least CDS) thinks:

General doubts feasibility of bringing all troops home from Germany | UK news | The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/nov/23/general-richards-military-bases-germany)

"Defence officials today referred to two other air force bases in Scotland - RAF Leuchars and RAF Lossiemouth - which, they said, could be used by troops now based in Germany. However, it is far from clear whether army commanders will want so many soldiers to be based in Scotland."

[Rakshasa]

It's unsuprising to see the SDSR is turning into one giant balls up already. This is what happens when you make decisions before actually looking at all the implications.

One of the reasons I sugested Leeming, (sorry Leemingites,) is it's proximity to Catterick. It would certainly make more sense than shutting Leuchars or Lossiemouth down and all the job losses and expensive moves that would entail.

[cazatou]

It was always thus.

I remember the 1975 Redundancy Scheme QUOTE "Positively the last Redundancy Scheme the RAF will ever have."UNQUOTE.

Within a few years they were writing to people made Redundant asking if they would like to rejoin. A few more years and there was a new Redundancy Scheme.

It wasn't all bad news though as these Schemes did enable the Service to rid itself of some of the Personnel who had been trained during the tenure of the CinC Training who had declared at a CFS Dinner "There is no such thing as a bad Student - there are only Bad Instructors!!" Ergo no Students could be failed.

There will, however, come a time when the reducing number of Personnel still Serving will conclude that there is little chance of a balanced career in a vastly reduced RAF. They will almost certainly then conclude that they should seek a career elsewhere.

[Finningley Boy]

Here's a suggestion which hasn't been run up the old flagpole as of yet; Would it not be likely that the Air Force Board and that, are considering Scampton as one of the codemned 3 bases!?

I hate to suggest it, but historic imperative aside, Scampton has before been described as needing a lot of money bring up its accomodation to an appropriate standard. Also, its nearly all lodger units here. The RAFAT could, I'd have thought, be slid up to Leeming. The HHA Ltd people likewise and I understand that they are already looking for a more suiteable home for the IUKADGE operations.:ok:

FB:)

[PanMan69]

'St Andrews International Airport':

Airport plan for RAF Leuchars revealed - Scotsman.com News (http://news.scotsman.com/politics/Airport-plan-for-RAF-Leuchars.6642327.jp)

[glad rag]

Funnily enough RAF Leuchars already DID a nice wee trade in biz jet handling a few years ago don't, know what the score is today though.

[Green Flash]

be slid up to Leeming

Given that Leeming is on the edge of Europes biggest garrison complex, why not keep it as an airhead and save the ball-breaking journey to Brize? Just lob the Airbus/C-17/A400/EasyCharter into EGXE and pick up/drop off the boys and girls from homeplate. Leeming is right on the A1M. (Make the positioning flight an OCU trip if you like). In fact, why not move the Loggy and AAC Regt's from Gutersloh to Leeming (Hambleton Barracks, anyone? - the Loggy's could run the AMC). If there is any room left at Leeming flog off Fulford Barracks in York and move them up too. Or if Linton closes move Fulford there.

I know, shut up Baldrick.

Nurse, nurse, I havn't had my medication today .....

[Biggus]

If, like FB, we are offering up our own suggestions for RAF bases to close, in order to make up the "...Kinloss and two other bases...." quota, then I suggest.......

ST MAWGAN!

Still an RAF base, although lord knows why. As far as I am aware, any American involvement having returned to the US, all that is left is the survival school (or whatever it is called now). This must have a vastly reduced output these days, given that the number of flying Sqns is continually being reduced, and must be capable of being relocated to a variety of locations elsewhere!

Standing by to be corrected/informed/flamed, as ever!

[RandomBlah]

Dear Biggus,

Believe it or not St Mawgan, survival wise, is very busy. The old system of it being for aircrew mates ended some time ago. Its remit nowadays is training for ALL personell who could be captured buy the bad guys i.e. everybody! It therefore has a lot of students awaiting instruction- 1000's in fact.

[Biggus]

Ok, I'll hold my hand up, I've been corrected/informed (thankfully not flamed)... but could it not still be moved onto a site occupied by other units, as part of a cost saving measure, with St Mawgan then closing?

[Green Flash]

RB

You speak the truth - but SERE doesn't need to be on an airfield.

[red.zebra]

The Scotsman article is yet another one of their contrived pieces, hoping to stir things up a bit.
And anyway, it was Ryan Air who were looking at Leuchars a while back not EJ.

I still suspect that if Cameron 'lets' the MOD close Leuchars, the coalition government could reach breaking point.

According to the BBC tonight, I notice, unsurprisingly, Whitehall cuts have been reduced and there will be around 100,00 fewer job cuts. :mad:

[Biggus]

Apparently the next set of rumours to break will be about the possibility of closing Shawbury....

[serf]

Lossie and Kinloss both BLACK @ 2200hrs, Leuchars OK; better for QRA, or just better equipped?

[Rakshasa]

...Or maybe just further south and not getting it as bad?

[Tashengurt]

If it does close can we have the Treasure pagoda relocate to Newcastle?;) Lovely little take away that!

[sitigeltfel]

Where will Tiger and the others park their jets during the Open/Dunhill etc? :{

[matkat]

Dundee for tiger and friends. Personally I cannot believe that the scotsman even published that piece of fantasy, as was previously mentioned FR looked at this some time ago and it was rejected due to the reasons already quoted, the only traffic that leuchars would handle would be the occasional golf related aircraft, pity mind as would be great for me being 4 miles away.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Lossie and Kinloss both BLACK @ 2200hrs, Leuchars OK


Well given where the current weather's coming from, most Russian airfields are probably Black too, so no need to worry...:}

[PanMan69]

"Lossie and Kinloss both BLACK @ 2200hrs, Leuchars OK; better for QRA, or just better equipped?"

Clutching at straws? Lossiemouth is just in the final stages of building up its full snow and ice clearance capability. Once this is in place (over the next week or so I hear) both runways will be kept open, and all squadron operating surfaces and taxiways - 24/7. So no peace and quiet over the winter period!

[coldbuffer]

Quote:
Lossie and Kinloss both BLACK @ 2200hrs, Leuchars OK
Well given where the current weather's coming from, most Russian airfields are probably Black too, so no need to worry...http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/badteeth.gif

Perhaps they are saving money and not clearing the runway, where as Leuchars has to because of Q

[glad rag]

12" snow fell in Fife yesterday.:rolleyes:

It still is an MDA Yes?:rolleyes::rolleyes:

[sitigeltfel]

Dundee for tiger and friends.

Not enough parking for them all. When Leuchars was out of action some of the golf stars and celebs landed at Dundee, but their aircraft had to leave and park up elsewhere.

[ATFQ]

ZZZZZZZZZZ

[Finningley Boy]

Apparently, both 111 and 6 sqn were aloft at Leuchars yesterday as well!:ok:

FB:)

[PanMan69]

Answers to 2 new PQs:

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2010-12-02a.27581.h&s=Leuchars#g27581.q0 (http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2010-12-02a.27581.h&s=Leuchars#g27581.q0)

No decision yet on future of RAF Leuchars

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2010-12-02a.27579.h&s=Lossiemouth#g27579.r0 (http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2010-12-02a.27579.h&s=Lossiemouth#g27579.r0)

£62 Million less spent on upgrading infrastructure at Leuchars over the past 3 years than at Lossiemouth; explains why Leuchars is looking a little tired and why the infrastructure bill for the future would be so big.

[wouldav]

First post so forgive me but - we all seem to be pondering over whether Lossie or Leuchars should go, there are valid reasons for keeping them both. However, if Leuchars was to close and Lossie kept:

- what would be the practicality of operating live armed sorties from lossie (even an OCU 3Kg terror-weapon sortie) when the nearest mil div is Leeming?

[Green Flash]

Weeeeell - if Leuchars closed as an ops base, and the McArmy move in, could the runway be saved as an emergency strip? Or in extremis either drop the whizzy bang stuff in the oggin and go to EGPE/D/C/A/B/wherever or go to Norway?? (depending whereabouts over the North Sea they are). Or make an arrangement with a civvy field to to take live armed cabs? For instance they could div to, say, Inverness and whilst the jets were en route 202 could take some armourers over pronto to put the pins in etc?

[davejb]

Perhaps a more appropriate question might be:-

If the RAF continues to close bases, then at what point would a single weapon destroy in a millisecond our country's entire offensive and defensive airpower. An advantage of positioning one's forces near to each other is the availability of support and centralisation/rapid comms, a downside is that your eggs are in one basket - eg Egyptian airforce 1967 (how far back do we need to go for an object lesson?) or Hawaii 1941.... or even more an example, Phillipines AFTER the war warnings went out post Pearl Harbour.

The closer together we base an ever dwindling number of assets, the closer we come to becoming a good bet when bad folks consider a pre-emptive strike. We aren't 'only' dicking with defence now, we are entering the arena of being plain foolhardy. Thank goodness we get on so well with the French these days...

Dave

[airpolice]

Wouldav, there will be no issue with weapons on civvy airfileds once the MOD decide that Inverness/Edinburgh/Dundee/Weegietown/Aberdeen are all acceptable divs.

The only problem with 6, 111 & 617 doing it just now is that they shouldn't, so a quick law change [laws being made by the folk asking for the savings] and Robert's your Mother's brother.

[ATFQ]

ZZZZZZZZZZ

[Finningley Boy]

As for weapons, the tiny bomb dump/explosives storage park at Leuchars is probably a factor for the future as well - it can't hold very much.

Isn't this a concern which should have arisen long before a fortnight ago when the press first suggested Leuchars might close!:}

After all, the decision to base 3 sqns of Typhoons, and swing-role units at that, at Leuchars was taken some years back!:ok:

FB:)

[RumPunch]

Lossie based jets are armed when dropping live at the ranges up north, Kinloss always a diversion in the one in a million time things went wrong. Inverness and Aberdeen both could easily get allowences to handle armed jets. Lets face it point in safe direction and follow procedures what goes wrong (I wont mention Leuchars many moons ago) but simple safe risk assesments that can be done.

Teams are in place to sort all this crap out , after all they have got the SDSR correct so far....

[Squawk7143]

.....I wont mention Leuchars many moons ago..... but simple safe risk assesments that can be done.
I will then:E......arm 111Sqn F4 during a routine 12 hour Gen Ex , add torrential rain....allow time to pass...oh and point in safe direction...i.e, in general direction of paper mill......the rest is history and made the national press the next day. It didn't half make a racket when it went off, As Pumba said " Small yet satisfying"

Well theres some kind of wood products factory off the end of 23 at Inverness so it should be ideal.:)....can't speak for Aberdeen ..

Sorry, there's only the X-Factor on telly, couldn't resist.

Tattie Bogle.....

[Green Flash]

Or park em on the disused runway (where the dead Jetstreams used to sit) and then they are aiming straight over the Moray Firth. Might annoy the odd haddock if anything went off assuming they dont hit the ploughed field between the airfield and the sea.

[glad rag]

**** all to do with the rain, more convict labour in US prisons constructing 100 way plugs including swarf and other detritus. The damaged 100 way plugs (4 off found at Leuchars alone) had internal burning tracking underneath the top level of the sealant.

And your general direction is "general" in the extreme.

:cool:

[PanMan69]

Worth a read:

Express.co.uk - Home of the Daily and Sunday Express | UK News :: Ryanair express intrest in RAF Leuchars (http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/215591/Ryanair-express-intrest-in-RAF-Leuchars)

[glad rag]

LOL that lot were interested in Errol Airfield previously...:O

[ZH875]

Strange, it is usually Virgin Atlantic that express an interest.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

202 could take some armourers over pronto


Nice idea except 202 won't exist in a couple of years; I very much doubt that ferrying armourers to stranded FJs at airports various was written into the SAR-H contract!

[ATFQ]

Air Force: Military Bases: 6 Dec 2010: Written answers and statements (TheyWorkForYou.com) (http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2010-12-06a.27580.h&s=Leuchars#g27580.r0)

[BUCC09]

How unfortunate that the Armed Forces Minister who was scheduled to meet Lossiemouth protesters
in person yesterday, had to cancel his flight form Northolt, because of winter conditions at KINLOSS.
Meanwhile it was business usual for the only genuine all weather airfield in Scotland, which is the
reason why RAF Leuchars is the flying station of choice for NQRA, and Kinloss or Lossie, are not.

[Red Line Entry]

Some inverted reasoning there, Bucc. Leuchars is open BECAUSE it is the NQRA stn. If one of the other stns held QRA, they would have the snowploughs, deicers etc that they would need to stay open.

Or is your point that Leuchars gets less snow on average? Personally, I don't know - if so, then it would certainly be one point in its favour. But it's not the only factor that should be considered.

[Biggus]

I don't know what state the runway was in, but the weather at Kinloss was fine on the day in question, with a nice extra big flag waving gently under a clear blue sky....

The problem I had heard was with the weather at Northolt being unsuitable for the aircraft to depart in the first place, fogged out I believe.

I could be wrong....but if I'm not......never let the truth get in the way of something that supports your arguement eh BUCC09!

[BUCC09]

The reasoning is Leuchars enjoys exceptionally mild conditions compared to the rest of Scotland, but if folk want to close that Station to keep snow plow drivers employed during the winter months at Lossiemouth, well, never let that get in the way of the facts eh Biggus!

[Biggus]

I'm sorry BUCC09, I thought your "reasoning" included....

"How unfortunate that the Armed Forces Minister who was scheduled to meet Lossiemouth protesters in person yesterday, had to cancel his flight form Northolt, because of winter conditions at KINLOSS..."

Must be my mistake in misreading your post....!?

[Finningley Boy]

RAF Leuchars is the home to just half the number of service and civil service personnel stationed at RAF Lossiemouth. So, with Lossiemouth having all the capabilities and infrastructure that it does, if we had to choose between them then, from a people and 'minimal movement' perspective, closing Leuchars would seem to be a far less painful option?

Does the Leuchars assessment take into consideration the number of personnel at Leuchars once all 3 squadrons have stood up?

FB:)

[BUCC09]

@ Biggus

No you have not misread the post. I misread the news feed. Flight cancelled at Northolt. But why was the meeting scheduled for Kinloss and not Lossie? and what reasoning could there be to sacrifice a fully operational all weather flying station in one part of Scotland, to preserve a struggling Station in another part of Scotland. Less a matter of proper defence planning, and more a matter of bowing down to pressure from a group of protestors.

[Biggus]

BUCC09

I believe that the VIPs in question had a meeting planned with RAF Kinloss personnel in the morning, before moving on to speak to RAF Lossiemouth personnel in the afternoon - hence the reason for flying into Kinloss to start with...

Not everyone has given up on speaking to RAF Kinloss personnel just yet..

I could be wrong on this, it was what I was told, but I didn't personally have sight of visit instructions, etc, but then as pond life I wasn't personally involved in the visit in any way. However, I suggest you give up on this particular incident, stop looking for conspiracies where there are none, and concentrate on more profitable arguments for the continued existence of RAF Leuchars - of which I am sure there are many!

[BUCC09]

Here’s a lifeline, for those that need one.
Endex.

http://i797.photobucket.com/albums/yy258/BUCC09/lifeline.jpg

[Siggie]

That's it chaps, Bucc09 has called Endex, it must all be over. :ugh:

[baffman]

The reasoning is Leuchars enjoys exceptionally mild conditions compared to the rest of Scotland, but if folk want to close that Station to keep snow plow drivers employed during the winter months at Lossiemouth, well, never let that get in the way of the facts eh Biggus!

Have you ever been to the Moray coast in winter? I am certainly not going to take sides as between Leuchars, Lossie, or Marham for that matter but Lossie and Kinloss, like Leuchars, also enjoy mild and clear conditions compared to the rest of Scotland. That is one reason why they have been RAF bases for so long.

Story here confirming that the problem with Nick Harvey's visit was inability to take off from Northolt: http://www.northern-scot.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/10538/Don_t_even_think_about_closure,_Mr_Harvey!.html (http://www.northern-scot.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/10538/Don_t_even_think_about_closure,_Mr_Harvey%21.html)

[airpolice]

FWIW… I think it would be better to have all the Tornado fleet in Marham, where all of the servicing could be done.

But only if they really need to move at all which I am not convinced of.

Lossie should be retained for the Northern QRA as it is closer to the Faroes Gap and (any) threats coming from the North, East or West. I know it’s no match for what the MRa4 was supposed to be able to provide, but some of the kit on the GR4 could be handy up there at short notice if the Navy need something to take a quick look see.

Coningsby can cover the bottom half of the UK (to the point where our new best pals the French can cover the rest) with Linton (New Tower & Runway) & Valley (great Wx) available as bolthole options for the Typhoons.

That meets a strategic need and a local economy (the folk who pay for it) need.

The Typhoon people could easily move into Lossie instead of Leuchars (runway resurfaced twice in 18 months and still as rough as a badger’s arse in places) since most of them have not unpacked yet.

It makes more sense to have QRA (and all that it needs for supporting it) to be on a big base, with the 24/7 support being used for the operational flying instead of having two airfields to do one job.

With only QRA and the very rare (budget contraints don’cha know) operational training sorties, the RAF are not really getting value for money from 24/7 ATC, Fire and Engineering support.

Basing the QRA with an OCU and the operational GR4 crews doing pre-deployment workups would be much better value.

Even as I write, Leuchars people are at Lossie, training to go to Bastion. There’s more money that could be saved.

I’m not sure what operational benefit that Leuchars has over Lossie, even the UAS & AEF go to Lossie in the summer to fly there. Short transit times to Tain and almost on scene for a show of force over the North Sea oil industry sites. The Moray coast has a lot going for it.

On a financial footing, selling Leuchars would be a lot easier to make money on than trying to sell Lossie at a profit.

As for the noise sensitive issues at Lossie, let’s ask the complainers which side of the fence they are on. Do the locals want the RAF there or not? It would seem that they do, so if they move out entirely, the unhappy punters can take it up with all the folk who complained about the noise of the jets.

Look how quickly they ran down 43(F) and 56 ® and then stripped 111(F) down to a handful of crews for the F3, and still we have not been invaded.

The Typhoon is never going to operate at the same sortie rate as the F3 used to. Why have a full station just for QRA? That’s madness when there is a training need at Lossie who could get the QRA services (ATC & Fire) for free.

If, and I mean IF, the Giant Strike Frightner deal ever works out to produce operational aircraft (which Nimrod 2000 did not do) then we can look at how best to have GR4, Typhoon and F-whatever it gets called then all in one place but a phased reduction of GR4 would make way for F-thingys while the Typhoon holds the fort in terms of Air Defence.

[Finningley Boy]

I do wish people who post on these forums would stop tryng to advance every reason they can think up to close any bases down. It has not been determined that either Lossiemouth or Leuchars absolutely need to go. Anyone who posts on threads like this I'd have thought would be trying to conjur up other alternatives rather than the wholesale sell off of R.A.F. main operating bases.:ugh:

FB:)

[Biggus]

Well said FB!



If we are not careful before you know it somebody will be suggesting that we close Finningley and turn it into a regional civil airport! Ridiculous idea, especially after spending all that money on a new Nav school! :ok:

[Finningley Boy]

Biggus,

They might even consider closing and opening Scampton again!

FB:)

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Why have a full station just for QRA?

Because the Air Commodore has to be in charge of a suitably full base!


closing and opening Scampton again!

...or Wyton:*

[Finningley Boy]

Here's an idea, move the Rock Ape College to Wittering and close Honington along with Cottesmore and Kinloss. Then move the pongos from Duetschland into Cottesmore and Honington and hand Kinloss oer as a civvy airport! Job done.:ok:

FB:)

[airpolice]

Kinloss as a civvy airport, just along the road from an established civvy airport without enough traffic as it is.

A difficult business case I think.

[Finningley Boy]

Kinloss as a civvy airport, just along the road from an established civvy airport without enough traffic as it is.

A difficult business case I think.


Well snap for Leuchars as well! Dundee and Dyce just to the North and Turnhouse less than an hour to the South.:ok:

Indeed airpolice, some of the erudite arguments in favour of closing operational airbases down on these threads is hard to understand. Where do you get arguments like the Typhoons will operate at such a substantially lower rate than the Tornado F3s? I don't quite understand what you mean? Many of these comments made by people sound very clever but fail to make a point. Are you saying that you think Leuchars won't be quite so busy with the Typhoon so therefore it should close? If we move the Leuchars Typhoon wing up to Lossiemouth while cramming the albeit reduced number of Tornados from their onto Marham, will that not make Lossiemouth far less busy and therefore vulnerable to being closed in addition? I've seen so many stations with so many varying number of units over a period of time that trying to apply any kind of, certainly, layman's logic is a waste of time. Leuchars has been dragged into the argument, not by the SDSR, but by the local press, just as Lossiemouth was. Nobody has said that either one "must" go, except peope who post on threads like this and the newspapers whose love of making a vague option sound like an irreversible order. And can really get people going. Hence threads like this and characters making the case, strangely for a forum like this, to shut frontline operational airbases down.:ugh:


FB:)

[A2QFI]

Dundee's 4,600 ft runway isn't going to attract much traffic.

[ATFQ]

ZZZZZZZZZZ

[Finningley Boy]

"If we move the Leuchars Typhoon wing up to Lossiemouth while cramming the albeit reduced number of Tornados from their onto Marham, will that not make Lossiemouth far less busy and therefore vulnerable to being closed"

FB,

I doubt it. The Leuchars Typhoon Wing could easily be accommodated alongside the Tornado OCU and a Tornado Front Line Squadron or two at Lossiemouth. There's no need to move anything into Marham. The truth I am afraid.


ATFQ

The above quote is indeed out of context sir. It was a hypothetical response to an observation by airpolice. If you read it in full it is my take on a post he made suggesting that the Typhoons wouldn't be as active as the F3s. He, like many others, also readily assumes that Lossiemouth or Leuchars must go. The only clammer on threads like this for Leuchars to close has surfaced since a press report 3 weeks ago. It was nothing more than that and in response to the local outcry at the possible yet unconfirmed closure of Lossiemouth. But since then there appears to have been a frenzy on aviation websites to find every intricately thought out reason for closing Leuchars. This I find odd given the length of time the station has continued as the base that it is. My own position is I can't see why either has to even be considered, when there are so many surplus airbases which only house lodger and ground units. These, I'd have thought could be shuffled around far more easily and leave intact the current operational fleet, such as it is.

FB:)

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

I can't see why either has to even be considered


I share your sentiment but sadly the reality of 2010 is that anything that can cut costs will be considered by the powers that be, whether we on the shop floor care to think about it or not. Just because a statement has been made about 3 bases closing is no guarantee that only 3 bases will close, if someone decides that further economies can be made as the dust settles after SDSR.

There is a clear economic benefit to be gained by grouping all the GR4s in one place (if it is feasible to do so), in the same way that every other front-line fleet has already done so apart from Sea King and Typhoon, which have rock-solid reasons for being spread out. Having some Typhoons up north is a given, so the bean-counters will no doubt wonder if we need 2 FJ bases in Scotland, with several sqns at each, when it might be possible to house all at one place.

My impression of this thread is not that anyone wants to close either base, but simply that people are understandably concerned about recent developments and are trying to assess which base might be most vulnerable. Inevitably, the views expressed are rather partisan as people try to defend 'their' base!

Given the RAF's trend of withdrawing from far-flung airfields (St Mawgan, Manston, etc) and given that money is the over-riding concern, then maintaining a single MOB as far north as Lossie begins to look doubtful when the next closest could feasibly be Waddington. People can provide all the reasons they like for the benefits of Moray (I could offer some myself, having done a tour there), but I worry that all will be ignored in the name of cost-cutting. I don't want either to close, but I'm afraid this is the unhappy world we live in.

[just another jocky]

I don't think any of us want any base to close, just like we wouldn't want to see any type taken out of service prematurely, but this is a discussion thread airing views, that's all. No-one is arguing we must close Leu/Los/Kss.

However, in the real world, post-SDSR, with the anticipated ac cuts, can you justify maintaining the current number of bases/runways to support what we have left? I don't think so, hence it's not unreasonable to speculate on where would close and why.

I still think that Leu has the weakest case for staying open. We are going to lose 2 GR4 sqns. Marham is the logical hub due mainly to the extensive engineering setup, so you wouldn't want to end up with only 2 sqns based there. So 2 Los sqns close (maybe their numbers will move to Mar, but that's another discussion), leaving plenty of room for Typhoon. GR4 OCU is a factor you cannot ignore. They need to train (albeit reducing numbers) crews and if you use Leu as the prime div, you can't do rollers due to the fuel weight required for Leu. Kss provides a near-perfect solution as the mil div (for QRA too), leaving little (no?) justification for keeping Leu open. Leu will likely generate a higher selling price than Kss.

Of course this is all just my personal opinion...but that's what this site is about, isn't it?

[Finningley Boy]

Well I suppose we'll just have to wat and see what Christmas brings!:*

FB:)

[airpolice]

Torque

You have hit the nail firmly on the head. One of the reasons that he country is in the pickle it presently needs a way out of, is that nobody has been looking at things in this way before now.

Regardless of whether the SDSR suggested closing one of the bases in Scotland or all of them, the RAF should have been constantly assessing the need for three, or two, or four.

My point about the Typhoon not being as busy as the F3 is based on the precedent set by the drawdown of F3 and the early retirement of Nimrod. Both cases show that with a marked reduction, (stoppage in the case of Nimrod from ISK) the world still turns.

As we, (the nation) have not suffered (in the public perception sense) from the serious reduction in F3 ops over the past 15 months, where is the business case for making the Typhoon Squadrons replicate the sortie rates of old?

A blind man running for a bus can see there is an attraction (for bean counters) in making 6 Squadron a replacement for the current 111(F) not a replfor 43(F) from 2007.

I am not saying this is right, I am just saying that there will be a case made for it. The hard working crews on 111 (F) have shown that the northern QRA can be held with very few jets and a small bunch of really good people. From a bean counter perspective, why would you not just carry on with that?

The effect on the people at the sharp end is a different matter. I can understand people getting upset at the suggestion that they should simply carry on like this, but in the sage old words I was to hear many times in my RAF service, “If you can’t take a joke, you shouldn’t have joined”

I have no doubt that some of the most talented people in the RAF will leave as soon as the much promised civvy job market opens up. When that comes to pass, the Royal Air Force will be a poorer place for this loss, but the bean counters will not care.

[Biggus]

The fact that Typhoon costs have been quoted as £90,000 an hour, whereas no doubt the F-3 was probably at least half that, may also be a reason why the RAF may try to minimize Typhoon flying hours and maximize simulator time!



As usual - standing by to be corrected/informed/flamed with the official cost figures per aircraft type...

[Finningley Boy]

The trouble with your assessments airpolice, is they are based on the assumption that the Armed Forces are a commercial endeavour. They are not, they are an overhead. The problem with defence planning (there is a quote somewhere) is that whatever you plan for never happens. What you don't plan for is what becomes a problem. By limiting the Typhoons to an ineffective flight of aeroplanes to carry out purely inquisitive intercepts of Blackjacks once a month, conveniently puts aside the wider remit of a Fighter Squadron/Force and drastically limits the flexibility of the few remaining assets you have. This means very little training and ultimately pilots who aren't particularly proficient. Ground crews that are overworked and spares which will be all the more expensive and drawn from a greatly reduced budget, are where we finish up. This may well be where, as an example, we find we've got a difficult problem to encounter.

Another point is that whatever the number crunching between the cost of running a Tornado squadron and a Typhoon squadron is, we spend a smaller fraction of GDP, even before the SDSR findings, on defence than at anytime in History. On top of this our elected finest have sught to further reduce that budget at a time when an increasing demand has been placed on the Army in particular, and through bungling poor perception more than anything else, we've ended upenmeshed in aprotracted ground conflict which, perhaps, need not have been. There is a wide enough list of list of official reasons, which the last Government in particular, announced by way of explanation for the deployment in Afghanistan. Now we look forward to Mr Blair explaining to the Chilcot Enquiry in the new year, just what he meant my scribbling that he didn't understand what the Attorney General meant when he wrote that there were no legal grounds for invading Iraq.:uhoh:

FB:)

[airpolice]

Deliverance, it matters not what I want, nor I suppose what you want.

What matters is what the MOD will fund out of the money the treasury give them.

I am not in favour of cutting back, but the need to do less for less money is a fact.

Think back a year, would you have considered that the UK would just give up LRMP?

Did anyone really expec the Harriers to get binned but the carriers to stay on order? The UK Military are engaged in a conflict where the Harrier has been doing a great job, having had a shed load of cash invested in making ot flyable for years to come, and yet they are out of service anyway.

On a suck it and see basis, they stopped the MR2 and since the world kept on turning, they cancelled the MRa4.

Do you really think the same arseholes who came up with that "plan" can't see that the next round of savings involve Typhoon? They may not know much about the Military, but they know cost savings when they see them.

The huge downturn in operational flying at Leuchars has shown that the sky will not fall in if we don't have 3 squadrons of fighters keeping up to speed. When they insist on that being required, their airships will need to explain how they have managed for 18 months without them.


FB, Soviet Bomber intruders are no longer the only thing on the QRA list of things to do, they may not even be on the top of the list, but what do I know?


Biggus, I'd be interested in seeing corrected figures taking into account inflation.

Maybe express it all in 1977 quids. Typhoon at the same cost would be a higher price as fuel is more expensive nowadays, although manpower costs are half no matter when you base the conversion rate.

Typhoon pilots are more expensive to train as the RAF pay them and the QFIs more than they paid the guys in 1977, so your £90,000 an hour may not be comparable with the F3 costs. I read somewhere that the Typhoon flying suit and pers equip per pilot is ten times what a Tornado suit cost.

That I am sure was based on 2010 prices of a Typhoon suit and 1977 prices for a Tornado suit.

[Finningley Boy]

I think General Sir Mike Jackson summed it up, the mass matters!:ok:

Whatever the arguments about how much it costs to launch a Typhoon into the air, and you may well be absolutley right airpolice, but there is so little left to do away with now and so much belief in single capabilities these days. I personally didn't imagine anything would happen necessarily, with the loss of the Nimrod, the Harrier and so many sundry Tornados. Its what we'll be confronted with maybe several years from now that could find us in a hurried and desparate situation.

But like you say when the threat seems utterly unlikely, the bean counters will do what they can to do without. The price of everything and the value of nothing, Eh!:ok:

FB:)

[culzean12]

Do you really think the same arseholes who came up with that "plan" can't see that the next round of savings involve Typhoon? They may not know much about the Military, but they know cost savings when they see them.

The huge downturn in operational flying at Leuchars has shown that the sky will not fall in if we don't have 3 squadrons of fighters keeping up to speed. When they insist on that being required, their airships will need to explain how they have managed for 18 months without them.

Airpolice

If you are interested in the future of the RAFs FJ capabilities then the recent defence review holds the answer. So instead of talking nonsense have a read of SDSR and CAS's comments on SDSR. From the latter:

■The Combat Air Fleet will be streamlined. The Tornado GR4 Fleet will be reduced to a size commensurate with current and contingent operations based on a minimum of 5 operational squadrons and an OCU. The Tornado will retire progressively once the Typhoon Force has the capability and force size to take on the Offensive Support task. The Harrier GR9 Fleet will be retired by April 2011. The Typhoon Fleet will grow as quickly as practicable to become the core of our defensive and offensive combat capability.

That would suggest that the next savings will come with the retirement of GR4. This will happen when the Typhoon force is big enough to support UK QRA, Falklands QRA and the Offensive Task (Herrick). Typhoon is set for growth and the aircraft and pilots will have to deliver an air-air and air-surface capability.

So that is

the business case for making the Typhoon Squadrons replicate the sortie rates of old

With regards to basing, who knows!?

[Finningley Boy]

The former Prime Minister, Mr. Gordon Brown, has thrown his weight behind the campaign to keep R.A.F. Leuchars open as a frontline airbase.:ok:

FB:)

[F3sRBest]

The former Prime Minister, Mr. Gordon Brown, has thrown his weight behind the campaign to keep R.A.F. Leuchars open as a frontline airbase


Farwell Leuchars then ;)

[Finningley Boy]

I didn't expect any flippant or negative comments quite that quick. I hadn't even exited the forum when I read it.:(

FB:)

[airpolice]

has thrown his weight behind


Shurely shum mishtake....

That should read "has thrown his considerable weight"

[Finningley Boy]

Hmmm, me thinks we may risk trapping the campaign underneath his ample hulk.:uhoh:

FB:)

[sitigeltfel]

Leuchars fate may now be sealed...

RAF Lossiemouth to be saved at expense of Leuchars - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/scotland/8199721/RAF-Lossiemouth-to-be-saved-at-expense-of-Leuchars.html)

[sitigeltfel]

How MOD thinking works..............

pressure coming from Scottish politicians and celebrities, led the MoD to reconsider its position, defence officials told The Daily Telegraph. Luvvies are now influencing defence policy. Get out while you can.

[El Grifo]

Bang, bang, bang, as the nails are finally hammered into the coffin !!!

Leuchars doomed as RAF accepts closure - Scotsman.com (http://www.scotsman.com/news/Leuchars-doomed-as-RAF-accepts.6659713.jp)

[ORAC]

WTF?

Scotsman:

Lossiemouth is seen as a clear winner. It was judged to be the better base to keep open because of its proximity to a low-flight training area. It also has better facilities, including a superior flight simulator for training.

There's no real range difference between them to the LFAs, and Lossie hasn't got a Typhoon sim.

In addition, it is better placed for military co-operation with Scandinavian and Baltic countries, particularly Norway which is to have the same joint strike fighters (JSFs) as the UK.

They're just about equally sited for Norway, and how for the life of me Lossie is better for Denmark and the other Baltic states than Leuchars on the east coast baffles me.

Defence analyst Tim Ripley said the recommendation to close Leuchars is based on the fact that the RAF is now likely to have only up to 100 Typhoons, the type of jet based in Fife, meaning it no longer needs two Typhoon bases

QRA means there has to be a southern base, you can't cover the whole of the UK from Lossie, and there's not a whisper of Coningsby closing. if there was going to be only one base it would be Coningsby. As it is, with the reduced size of the force, a maximum of 2 Sqns will be based in Scotland, either base being adequate.

Lossiemouth is likely to get the typhoons from Leuchars and ultimately become the main base for the JSFs.

The Typhoon isn't being replaced by the JSF. if the Typhoons move to Lossie the possibility of the F-35B alsobe based their starts dropping to zero. A base in the south west near the carrier home port looks increasingly obvious.

However, it has also become clear that political considerations have been taken into account by military chiefs.

Probably the most accurate statement in the article.

An MoD source added that Gordon Brown's intervention was "like the kiss of death" because of his unpopularity with military commanders.

And with the PM and Liam Fox because of the carrier debacle.

Afterwards Sir Menzies said: ....."The strategic case for Leuchars is ovewhelming and no-one has sought to challenge it."

I would beg to differ.

[cats_five]

So now we are probably about to have a campaign to keep Leuchars open...

[airpolice]

I thought that the most important part of the press reports was the bit about the MOD saying nothing has been decided yet.

So far this all looks like newspaper folk making it up as they go along..... without any real facts, they just keep going over what might be about to happen and what that might cause.....it is almost as if they are just starting rumours................... Talk about life imitating art.

In the absence of a decision from the MOD the press are getting carried away with "the loudest shouting being the truth" idea of reporting the news.

If a bunch of us said we had been told to prepare for Machrihanish being the only RAF Airfield in Scotland, I wonder how long it would take for the newspaper and local action group people to say the MOD were considering it.

[glad rag]

So far this all looks like newspaper folk making it up as they go along.

:D

I am aghast at the current trend of base closures, those CLOWNS, who crow on here should be ashamed of themselves.

No More Base Closures. :ugh:

[Finningley Boy]

Hear Hear Gladrag old fruit!:{

FB:)

[El Grifo]

Please do not count me with the clowns glad rag !

On the contrary.

[Finningley Boy]

A further announcement is to be made to end the current speculation in the press, according to a new report.:hmm:

FB:)

[airpolice]

wot new report is that then?

[Postman Plod]

Ahh the old deception... feed the media speculation that you're going to close loads of bases, allow the arguments and counter arguments to run and run, do nothing to counter any of the speculation, and that way when you only close 3 or 4 bases you're seen as the good guys who saved the air force and all their bases!

[ATFQ]

ZZZZZZZZZZ

[Biggus]

Nobody seems to have connected this thread to the one stating that the RAF will only have 6 FJ Sqns by 2020.... How many bases will 6 FJ Sqns need? Not many...


The closure of Leuchars, or Lossie, will be but the latest in a contining line of closures. Marham will go with the retirement of the GR4 fleet, etc. For many RAF bases in the years to come it will be a case of not "if", but rather "when".


A sad, but seemingly inevitable, state of affairs!

[Pontius Navigator]

And you need runways. Not just for the old combat redundancy but domestic things like WEATHER. If you have only one Scottish base then you have to rely on all the civilian airfield or hold buckets of fuel for diversion.

Mind you, as there is no war on now (Cold War in Fortress Britain) then there is really no reason to press on in bad weather. Sure, a course output date may slip - so what? What is so essential that a course meets its output date?

Maybe we can switch to good weather training.:\

[glad rag]

My point about the Typhoon not being as busy as the F3 is based on the precedent set by the drawdown of F3 and the early retirement of Nimrod. Both cases show that with a marked reduction, (stoppage in the case of Nimrod from ISK) the world still turns.

ap.

So, one might say that the reduction of "usage" ( to determine these base closures/aircraft levels) has been driven by the very potential foe that these assets were meant to counter.

HMM, some might also say, it's not rocket science, IS IT? :sad:

[airpolice]

GladRag, are you suggesting that the "enemy" have watered down their probing to allow the MOD to be convinced there is no threat so that UK Air Defence will be run down into a state that will take years to rebuild, simply to allow the enemy to be able to over run us? Surely not?

Anyway, whatever will be, will be. The only certainty is honours and rewards all round, at the top table anyway.

We can dredge all this up next winter when the dust has settled, but my colours are nailed firmly to this mast: Leuchars to run down, possibly to C&M but more likey non mil use, and Lossie to be all of RAF Scotland. St. Andrews as a Garrison town is a horrible thought.

RAF Prestwick to be split to send D&D to Swanwick, with the ARCC, and the rest of them to Boulmer to share the Hotspur facilities, like we used to do.

Let's hope I'm wrong.

Anyone else want to state a prediction for what might be left of the RAF by December 2011?

[glad rag]

simply to allow the enemy to be able to over run us?

No mate, all they have to do is screw the taps 1/4 shut.:ugh::ugh::ugh:

[HarrysHawk]

RAF Lossiemouth to be saved at expense of Leuchars - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/scotland/8199721/RAF-Lossiemouth-to-be-saved-at-expense-of-Leuchars.html)

:(

[Finningley Boy]

That article is already out of date Harryhawk, there is still no certainty one way or the other, apart from press speculation and scare-mongering.

FB:)

[airpolice]

harryshawk, read post 97 on the page before this one!

[red.zebra]

I think you will find synthetic trainers have been up and running at Leuchars for some time now, what you mentioned ATFQ, is the full mission simulator, which still requires a new building to put it in, be that at Leuchars or Lossie, and that will take several years to produce :rolleyes:

[ATFQ]

ZZZZZZZZZZ

[KeyPilot]

And you need runways. Not just for the old combat redundancy but domestic things like WEATHER. If you have only one Scottish base then you have to rely on all the civilian airfield or hold buckets of fuel for diversion.

Indeed but here is an unfortunate and possible solution:

- Kinloss disposed of entirely
- Lossiemouth retained
- Leuchars given to army but retained as RLG - can be sold to public and local MPs as "saved"

[Shell Management]

I predict Dundee airport being closed and operations moving to Leuchars. A great chance to compete with the BAA airports at Aberdeen and Edinburgh which is in the national (UK and Scottish) interest. They might even tempt some North Sea helicopter operations from Aberdeen.

[Finningley Boy]

Lets hope none of the above!:(

FB:)

[ATFQ]

RAF Leuchars Airshow Feature Page on Undiscovered Scotland (http://www.undiscoveredscotland.co.uk/leuchars/rafleucharsairshow/index.html)

[PanMan69]

Gordon Brown warns closing RAF Leuchars could put Britain in danger - Scotsman.com News (http://news.scotsman.com/news/Gordon-Brown-warns-closing-RAF.6658418.jp?articlepage=2)

One wonders how much credibility Gordon Brown has.

[Tashengurt]

One wonders how much credibility Gordon Brown has
About zero?

[Finningley Boy]

Well just as a clever cloggs can be wrong occasionally, a clot can be right occasionally. Go get 'em Gordon, all the best matey!!!:ok:

FB:)

[Squirrel 41]

Why do I have the nagging feeling that this is just about the last thing Leuchars needs? Did he ever go to Leu when he was Chancellor or PM? Other than on a 32 Sqn jet to get home faster..... Just asking...:hmm:

S41

[airpolice]

From the BBC website this morning.



Leuchars is one of several bases in Scotland threatened by defence cuts.
But Armed Forces Minister Nick Harvey told MPs no base closure decisions had been taken yet.

The debate follows fears that the UK government's Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) could spell the closure of RAF Leuchars, allowing RAF Lossiemouth in Moray to stay open.

During the debate, Sir Ming said there was an overriding case for the base to remain operational.
He told MPs: "In short, Leuchars is in the right place, at the right time and doing the right job.

"Geographically it is uniquely positioned to fulfil the responsibility for the air defence of the northern half of the United Kingdom, a responsibility which - even as we have this debate - it fulfils 24 hours a day."



Mr Harvey said decisions on the future of RAF bases would be taken as soon as possible.

He told MPs Leuchars carried out a crucial role, but pointed out that could be done from other RAF bases, including Lossiemouth in the north east.

[Finningley Boy]

It also reported that Ming and Fox reckon Defence considerations are the overriding concerns, Cameron and Ozzy say the Finances are what its all about and the Chief Treasurer says Economic/Social considerations are what should come first.:confused:

Nice to know they've thrashed this Brain Teaser out to destruction!

FB:)

[ATFQ]

Link to House of Commons text:


http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2011-01-25a.265.0&s=Lossiemouth#g269.0 (http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2011-01-25a.265.0&s=Lossiemouth#g269.0)

“Today, RAF Leuchars' mission is to deliver and maintain UK quick reaction alert (interceptor) north, concurrent with the growth of Typhoon, while supporting other military operations. The delivery of the northern element of quick reaction alert is RAF Leuchars' top priority and requires Typhoon and Tornado F3 fighter aircraft to hold high alert to scramble and intercept unidentified aircraft approaching UK airspace. RAF Leuchars is geographically well located for the delivery of QRA operations. However, it may be possible to mount northern QRA from another location. Lossiemouth and Leeming in north Yorkshire would be possible options.”

[XV277]

Why do I have the nagging feeling that this is just about the last thing Leuchars needs? Did he ever go to Leu when he was Chancellor or PM? Other than on a 32 Sqn jet to get home faster..... Just asking...:hmm:

S41

As CHancellor, He often flew into Edinburgh on a BA Flight from London City. Been held onboard a couple of times to let him get off.

With his well known 'fondness' for the Armed Forces, I doubt he's been to Leuchars much at all.....

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Leeming in north Yorkshire would be possible options


So it's potentially bye bye Leuchars and Lossie then...:{

[Mach the Knife]

Gets my vote! In fact let's pull all of the military out of Scotland, let them have their independence, raise their own taxes and stop being a sucking chest wound on the UK economy.

[draken55]

Please "moderate" racist nonsense of this thread.

I have no time for those who blame the Jocks, Irish, Welsh, Scousers, Geordies, Brummies etc for a situation that emerged from the "wealth creating" part of the UK. You know, the place where Bankers, Senior Politicians and the Service Chiefs live:mad:

[Finningley Boy]

Hear Hear Draken old budy, all should think on, we are the United Kingdom.

It was the Royal Air Force which fought the Battle of Britain! Not the Royal English Air Force or just the English Air Force as is so often miss-implied.

I also have it on good authority, that Scotland is the component part of the UK which is, proportionately, most heavily subscribed to HM Forces.

FB:)

[High_Expect]

Isn't that because there aren't any other jobs once past Edinburgh?!? :E

[El Grifo]

Other than of course, one the biggest oil operations in Europe :ugh:

[Biggus]

Apparently Sir Ming said...

"Geographically it is uniquely positioned to fulfil the responsibility for the air defence of the northern half of the United Kingdom...."

Could somebody tell me how Leuchars is uniquely positioned, apart from the facts that it is:

a) The only RAF station at Leuchars

b) In Sir Mings constituency

I don't see how its geographic position is unique. Perhaps somebody should tell Sir Ming that we aren't using Spitfires to defend Edinburgh against He-111s any more.

If the threat, which is probably long range bombers with stand off missiles, is from the North, as opposed to Denmark, then Lossiemouth is approx 100 miles up threat, allowing interception either faster, or at a greater range from UK shores.

Perhaps Sir Ming should stick to the plain facts...

[Squirrel 41]

Biggus asked

Could somebody tell me how Leuchars is uniquely positioned, apart from the facts that it is:

Leuchars OM is uniquely close to Ma Bells and St. A's.... does this count? :D

S41

[Mandator]

Hansard report on Tuesday's adjournment debate here:

House of Commons Hansard Debates for 25 Jan 2011 (pt 0003) (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm110125/debtext/110125-0003.htm#11012585000001)

[Biggus]

Squirrel 41,

Visiting Leuchars OM in a few weeks time on a nightstop, and I'm not familiar with the area - is Ma Bells a decent watering hole?

I managed to work out what St A's is.....I'm not a total biff!

[Squirrel 41]

Biggus,

A student dive in St. A's. Allegedly!

Sure the good folk of Leu will make sure you're well looked after.

S41

[Biggus]

Squirrel 41,

TVM....

[bobward]

a report on the Milspotters website says that RAF Marham will stay open. This means that either Leuchars or lossiemouth will be closed. The report quotes a meeting between local action groups and a Government minister, which allegedly took place yesterday

The full item, courtesy of Mil Spotters Forum, and Lowestoft Aviaition Society is here:

Minister of State for the Armed Forces - Nick Harvey M.P. has announced that
RAF Marham is 'safe' from closure and that one of two RAF stations in
Scotland will close. This has caused fury and embarrassment at the Ministry
of Defence, as this should not have been revealed in this way and should
have been announced to the House of Commons by the Secretary of State for
Defence later in 2011.

See below the story from David Ross, Highland Correspondent of The Herald -
Scotland newspaper.

28 January 2011

*Scotland’s RAF bases at Leuchars and Lossiemouth appear to be in a straight
fight with each other for survival after the Government said it would be too
expensive to shut a base in Norfolk.*

The news the bases were fearing emerged yesterday when Armed Forces Minister
Nick Harvey met representatives of the Moray Taskforce, which is fighting to
save RAF Lossiemouth and minimise the impact of the closure of RAF Kinloss.

Both RAF Lossiemouth and RAF Marham in Norfolk are home to Tornado
squadrons, and it had been thought that one would close. However, the
Government had previously said that no decision had been taken.

Six members of the task force met with the minister at RAF Kinloss and
emerged dejected, saying he had confirmed that RAF Marham had been saved.

However, a final decision on whether Lossiemouth or RAF Leuchars in Fife
will survive is not likely to be announced until the summer.

Calum MacPherson, the taskforce’s spokesman, said: “We understand that RAF
Marham is now safe. It is now between Leuchars and Lossiemouth. We were told
it would be too expensive to relocate RAF Marham.”

He said that they were also extremely disappointed that it was highly
unlikely any decision would be taken before “Purdah” started in the run in
to the Scottish elections.

“That could mean we don’t get a decision until mid-July,” he said. If that
was the case it would extend the uncertainty hanging over Moray where
one-in-five jobs is supported by the two RAF bases.

However, on Marham Mr Harvey said: “I think they are overstating what I
said. I simply made the point that the costs of relocating the RAF out of
Marham would be very high and first and foremost the purpose of this whole
exercise is to try and achieve financial savings. We will await the verdict
of the RAF investment appraisal, which we haven’t yet seen yet.”

However, when The Herald talked to the taskforce again, all six members were
adamant the minister had said it was now between Leuchars and Lossiemouth.

Meanwhile, the minister also confirmed that the target date for closing the
runway at RAF Kinloss was August 1. One of the first things to go will be
air traffic control.

Responding to criticism from six former defence chiefs that the scrapping of
the Nimrod programme, which heralded the closure of Kinloss, would leave
gaps in our defences, Mr Harvey said: “There is a gap. Nobody has pretended
any different.”

But he said the Government had to tackle the country’s deficit and that
axing the Nimrod had been the most uncomfortable decision.

He said: “It was one of the options and, it was decided this was an area
where we were willing to take risks over the next few years.

“One respects the view of the retired military chiefs but the decisions are
taken by ministers now on the basis of the current military advice.”

When asked if the decision would affect the UK’s ability to monitor Russian
submarines, Mr Harvey said: “The Russian submarine activity in the North Sea
remains quite busy. I am not going to say any more than that. The Russians
have their sub-marines but the Cold War ended 20 years ago.”

--

[glad rag]

“It was one of the options and, it was decided this was an area
where we were willing to take risks over the next few years.

:mad::mad::mad::mad:!

[draken55]

Nobody in Scotland ever suggested closing Marham to save Lossie! As long as Tornado is in service Marham is essential. Question will be in what numbers and its that which will finally decide Lossie's future.

However, with the F3 about to leave service, Leuchars future is dicey. It would be just as easy to relocate Typhoon further north or in the current climate not at all concentrating on Conningsby.

As for the Scottish Elections, a bit of a red herring as Defence is a matter reserved for Westminster. So take the bl**dy decision and stop the flaffing!

[ScribblyBloke]

Have alookat the photo on todays (28 Jan 11) P&J

http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/ (http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/)

SB

[Biggus]

Before all the locals, and politicians, in the Marham area get too smug, just remember that it will close in turn shortly after the GR4 finally goes out of service......

[Easy Street]

Before all the locals, and politicians, in the Marham area get too smug, just remember that it will close in turn shortly after the GR4 finally goes out of service......

I'm not so sure about that; I can see the F-35 basing decision being revisited once the dust has settled from SDSR. For a start, we are going to get the less-noisy version of F-35. Marham might well end up in the mix again.

[ATFQ]

BBC News - Scottish RAF bases decision 'to be made after election' (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-12291658)

[serf]

The Army are already there.

[lpmunroh43]

Having served at Leuchars and Lossie in ATC and now living a couple of air miles from Marham, I've thoroughly enjoyed reading all the posts re closures over the past few months. Highly entertaining! It hadn't occurred to me, of course, that the GR4 might go out of service - it seems to have been thundering over the house for donkey's years. I think I'll have to change my contact name to Marham Smuggie!

[PanMan69]

Last-ditch bid to save RAF Leuchars and deflect 'devastating impact' - The Scotsman (http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/scotland/Lastditch-bid-to-save-RAF.6707508.jp)

[FlamingFirebird]

ATFQ, yes QRA was carried out from Lossie last year, but as you pointed out the runway was being resurfaced so would have been very hard to carry out from Leuchars. So it was carried out from Lossie but that does not mean that it is the best place to carry it out from when all options are available. Lossie does have two runways, does that mean you can use them simultaneously ? Leuchars does have a second runway, it may be a short one and in need of some tlc but it can accomodate F3's. Equal to One Sqn's flying at the moment ?? So 6 and 111 are equal to 1 Sqn now ?? mmm. I am sorry but economic must come a second to tactical decisions we are not a business we are a military force (alledgedly) and are located to carry out specific tasks in the best locations possible. Most have an element of leeway over location but QRA i.e. defence of the UK must be in the best tactical location possible. Any amount of delay to intercept times increases the risk of mission failure so cannot be tolerated. Hopefully the common sense decision will be that both camps are needed, as both have valid reasons why they are there and cannot do each others tasks as well as the other. So please lets stop this bickering and get on doing what we do best and prove to the numpty's in the government that we are all indispensible.:):)

[grandfer]

Who's Defence Minister Nick Herbert ? As reported in the Scotsman , shouldn't that be Pr**k (sorry I keep getting it wrong) Nick Harvey ?:mad::ugh:

[betty swallox]

FlamingFirebird,
Are you kidding? Have you missed the news from 19 Oct till the present?? Nimrod MRA4. RAF Kinloss. I think you must be kidding, or a member of niaive.com......

[FlamingFirebird]

Betty, I have been right in the middle of the aformentioned incident so no I have not missed anything. Niave ? Yes maybe but I prefer to be a optimist. Foolish I know but thats how I swing

[betty swallox]

FF,
No malice intended. I have been trying, along with many others, to make the "decision makers" see sense about MRA4...that's all.

[NutherA2]

Runway 04/22 is called "The Short" and has no lights.................. and is only for day vfr use by light aircraft.

I landed Phantom FG1s more than once on 05/23 as it was once called; this was before the arrester wire was installed.

[casino335]

Just my opinion as a recent pessimist convert::(

Errmmmm..can't help but feel whichever base goes or stays the decision will be mostly an economic one rather than one based on strategy (sorry, pretty obvious I guess). The Tories have a rich and infamous history of cutting the armed forces - Sir John Knott, anyone? Mind you, so have most governments since WWII.

Read the post about the RAF having just 6 fj sqnshttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/eek.gif:sad: by 2020 and that the GR4 force reduction has yet to be decided in the SDSR. I think PR11 will see the GR4 sliced quite a bit as the door has been left wide open for that in the SDSR - I also can't see the Tories slowly phasing out all the GR4 force between say 2015 and 2020 as they wouldn't save anything, but rather cut a big chunk from the GR4 force soon'ish. I believe the arguments with capability gaps, "we are at breaking point" and "we wont be able to fight another war" will have little effect as seen with the nimrod, harrier and carriers decisions - anyway, I'm sure this government (and the next) will be hell bent on not having anything to do with any type of conventional war due to their mega ££££ and trying to justify it when British lives are being lost. I feel we are heading towards a more French or German approach to any future conflicts, rather than being dragged around on a lead by the US.

So, if they did decide to cut a large slice from GR4 force soon, then I guess Lossie might look vulnerable. Whatever decision the government makes I really can't see it splitting them at all, as defence with the majority of Joe public doesn't really factor into their everyday lives as opposed to job losses, higher taxes, inflation, weak economy, hospitals blah, blah, blah. If hundreds of thousands protested in London about defence cuts, and future planning round defence cuts, then probably the story would be different.

Seems more of a GCHQ battleground today, anyway.

[ATFQ]

Leuchars to land army role because top brass prefer its golf courses - The Scotsman (http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/scotland/Leuchars-to-land-army-role.6714278.jp)

[Green Flash]

If they put the AAC Regt at Gutersloh to EGQL as well it will at least help to keep it as a viable military airfield and maybe prevent the runway from looking like the main at (ex) RAF Catterick! (Isn't there a railway at Leuchars too? And not a million miles from the docks either. Beggining to sound like PRB-on-Sea - Loggytown, anyone?!)

[Squirrel 41]

GF,

(Isn't there a railway at Leuchars too? And not a million miles from the docks either. Beggining to sound like PRB-on-Sea - Loggytown, anyone?!)

There is a station at Leuchars, and there are still transfer sidings in situ (rather overgrown) but the actual link into the base itself went in the 70s/80s (sure someone will know definitively), and though it could be reinstated, the gym is in the way for the old route to be reinstated. Not difficult though to find another way if you wanted to, though it would probably go round the end of the OR married patch and in over what is now VAS.

S41

[glad rag]

The rail lines went once the underground fuel pipeline was commissioned.

Ah YES the Scotsman, not fit to wipe a service persons a**e with!

[NorthSouth]

Not just service!

[Finningley Boy]

That is one hell of s strategic argument for the Army mobing there. What if the R.A.F. don't want to move because they'd miss the Golf Links. Anyway, isn't there a Golf Links at Lossiemouth they could go for a punt about on!?:confused:

FB:)

[Tashengurt]

The rail lines were still there, although unused in '95. Has a new gym been built since then?

[matkat]

The only rail lines still there are the ones from the station and the ones on camp the link across the road was removed years ago due(as previously posted) to the remote fuel lines being opened however they would not be difficult to reinstate the gym was/is no where near the line as the gym was there when the lines were still in use.
I pass there every day so my observation of the rail lines is valid as off yesterday.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

they would not be difficult to reinstate


Difficult? No. Exorbitantly expensive? Dead cert...

[incubus]

Take a look at google maps and follow the line and rail bed yourself.

It peels off from the main east coast line here. (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=raf+leuchars&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=49.57764,66.445312&ie=UTF8&hq=raf+leuchars&hnear=&radius=15000&ll=56.378507,-2.890593&spn=0.001029,0.00305&t=h&z=19)

[Climebear]

That is an old image.

Whereas the line's route into the old Railway sheds in the NW corner of the domestic sight remain clear, the overhead does not show the construction that has taken place on the old track bed from old sheds transiting through the domestic site to the technical site (crossing Main Street). This includes the not-so-new Gym (PRTC in new money), the not-so-new internal access road to the Officers' Mess and the new Cadet accommodation block.

A wider view shows that it does not include the 6 Sqn soft (that was built for the arrival of 56(R) Sqn)) nor the childcare facility, nor Tornado F3 gate guard, nor the Community Centre....


Beware of trusting everything on the inter-web thingy

[ATFQ]

ZZZZZZZZZZ

[glad rag]

So what?
It is unfortunate that the press (and some who should know better) are dredging this trash up.

[PanMan69]

GR,

No one should be disappointed if we get a decision based on facts.

[glad rag]

And what "facts" are those then?

One simple "fact" for you.

Divide et impera

Do not, for one moment, reply that "we have to cut out cloth" either.