RNAS Yeovilton - what if?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I've mentioned before on the Seajet thread, buy / convert a good squadron's worth of Harrier 2+ for the rather long 'stop-gap' period before F-35, give them to the FAA & Yeovilton and a lot of ills are cured at once...
Double Zero,
Two of your statements are in direct conflict.
"A good squadrons worth"
and
"Give them to the FAA"
Seeing as the "FAA" cannot at the moment even man the small JFH squadrons how on earth would they man this lot?
Oh, and why?????????????????????????????????????
Oh yes, that huge air threat that is out there.........................................
Two of your statements are in direct conflict.
"A good squadrons worth"
and
"Give them to the FAA"
Seeing as the "FAA" cannot at the moment even man the small JFH squadrons how on earth would they man this lot?
Oh, and why?????????????????????????????????????
Oh yes, that huge air threat that is out there.........................................
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Oh yes, that huge air threat that is out there......................................... "
Thats right proone, the time to decide you need fleet air defence is after the threat materialises.
Thats right proone, the time to decide you need fleet air defence is after the threat materialises.
Tourist,
Or when the F-35 materialises.
Is an air threat REALLY even a remote possibility before then? If so where and from whom?
Or when the F-35 materialises.
Is an air threat REALLY even a remote possibility before then? If so where and from whom?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Proone
In 1980 I bet that you could have asked a thousand military strategists to write down their top ten "next war" scenarios and not one would mention Argentina or the Falklands. Ditto Afghanistan before 9/11.
Or are you cleverer than the rest of us?
Where and when do you think the next conflict will be?
In 1980 I bet that you could have asked a thousand military strategists to write down their top ten "next war" scenarios and not one would mention Argentina or the Falklands. Ditto Afghanistan before 9/11.
Or are you cleverer than the rest of us?
Where and when do you think the next conflict will be?
Tourist,
Right, let's base our military expenditure on a once in a generation one off. If the Foreign Office had been doing their job THEY would have seen it coming....
9/11, Air to Air threat to the fleet? Sea Vixens or AMRAAM armed Harrier 2 would have helped how exactly?
Right, let's base our military expenditure on a once in a generation one off. If the Foreign Office had been doing their job THEY would have seen it coming....
9/11, Air to Air threat to the fleet? Sea Vixens or AMRAAM armed Harrier 2 would have helped how exactly?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Proone,
If the FAA 'can't man a small squadron of JFH' it will be because the R.A.F. have had their way and p'd off the Navy aircrew.
As to why give AMRAAM capable A/D Harriers to the FAA, that's blindingly obvious and others above have already answered it.
The whole JFH thing is history repeating itself, the same thing happened just before WW2, when the FAA was quickly re-established & escaped R.A.F. Control.
As for perceived threats, could be anything, as others have pointed out; from a surprise war, large or 'small' to having to take out an airliner being used as a cruise missile - which do you prefer, 1 mile range & preferably daylight, or 40 miles + in any weather, VERY accurately ?
BTW I am not ex-Navy, just used to work with them - and the R.A.F. + foreign services - and I know a good asset wasted by internal politics when I see it.
If the FAA 'can't man a small squadron of JFH' it will be because the R.A.F. have had their way and p'd off the Navy aircrew.
As to why give AMRAAM capable A/D Harriers to the FAA, that's blindingly obvious and others above have already answered it.
The whole JFH thing is history repeating itself, the same thing happened just before WW2, when the FAA was quickly re-established & escaped R.A.F. Control.
As for perceived threats, could be anything, as others have pointed out; from a surprise war, large or 'small' to having to take out an airliner being used as a cruise missile - which do you prefer, 1 mile range & preferably daylight, or 40 miles + in any weather, VERY accurately ?
BTW I am not ex-Navy, just used to work with them - and the R.A.F. + foreign services - and I know a good asset wasted by internal politics when I see it.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Southern UK
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Drift (Again!)
Could we please discuss the future of Yeovilton? There are plenty of other threads discussing how the machiavellian and all-powerful RAF spends all its time plotting how to destroy or take over all air capabilities held by the other services and how all the ills of the FAA are due to the RAF.
Or, perhaps we should be moving towards some joint capabilities which actually deliver operational effect? Oh my mistake, I'm in the RAF, therefore I must have an ulterior motive....
Or, perhaps we should be moving towards some joint capabilities which actually deliver operational effect? Oh my mistake, I'm in the RAF, therefore I must have an ulterior motive....
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,132
Received 28 Likes
on
17 Posts
Ah, yet another thread descends into WAFU paranoia.
Poor little Senior Service being plotted against by those nasty crabs again?
Poor little Senior Service being plotted against by those nasty crabs again?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This entire thread is put forward on the premise that Yeovilton is under threat.
I, for one, have not heard these rumours at all. Has anyone other than the thread starter actually got any basis for this theory?
I would say that Yeovilton and Culdrose are about as safe as any airbase in the country due to the sheer number of units based at each and the prohibitive cost of moving them all.
I, for one, have not heard these rumours at all. Has anyone other than the thread starter actually got any basis for this theory?
I would say that Yeovilton and Culdrose are about as safe as any airbase in the country due to the sheer number of units based at each and the prohibitive cost of moving them all.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: London
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats very true shipmate BUT Yeovilton is safe purely because it has the CHF and LHF based there. This thread is discussing the "what-ifs".....
What if Future Lynx is (probably) cancelled and What if the Junglies (possibly) go to Odiham....then what for Yeovilton?
What if Future Lynx is (probably) cancelled and What if the Junglies (possibly) go to Odiham....then what for Yeovilton?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Three Sqns of Sea Kings, 847, Two Sqns of Old Lynx, including the largest sqn in the British Military, which will drag on for a long time if FLynx gets the chop, Naval Grading, NFSF(FW), Heron Flight.....oh... bugger, The Hawks, Historic Flight, the NATO boys.
You might as well ask about any airbase.
ie, what would happen to Cranwell if IOT got moved along with 45 Sqn etc
There is no money for Belvedere whatsoever.
You might as well ask about any airbase.
ie, what would happen to Cranwell if IOT got moved along with 45 Sqn etc
There is no money for Belvedere whatsoever.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Somerset
Age: 69
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My original question was 'What if' and I have heard no rumours what so ever other than those already posted here on this forum over the last few months, all I have done is pose the question of what if 2 of the threads discussed here actually happen.
As for the museum at Yeovilton it would continue as a charitable trust as it does now, yes it does recieve a Grant in Aid from the Navy to help cover some of the costs of its operation, however the majority of the funding comes from its own efforts.
Tourist, sadly one less unit come the end of September don't forget
As for the museum at Yeovilton it would continue as a charitable trust as it does now, yes it does recieve a Grant in Aid from the Navy to help cover some of the costs of its operation, however the majority of the funding comes from its own efforts.
Tourist, sadly one less unit come the end of September don't forget
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Helpfull Stacker,
As I pointed out I'm not ex-services of any flavour, just used to work with you all on Harrier / Hawk projects in my own small way.
I have no bias, in fact I tend to find by experience that senior Naval officers are even worse knobs than senior RAF ones ( quite an achievement ) but I do know, having been very directly involved with the Sea Harrier 1 ( inc Falklands mod's at this safe end,) Sea Harrier FRS then FA2 - we were staggered by the Blue Vixen/ Amraam's potency - and RAF GR5 & 7 + a special 1161 engine time to height trials record winner ( in class, ZD402 with Heinz Frick ) .
The fleet, such as it is, and representing our 'force projecton' needs air defence - as the PROJECTED ISD for the F-35 is 2018, what will it really be ?!
So that's why I suggest some Harrier 2+'s ASAP ... while one may think we are in a period of peace right now, so did countless others, including the U.S. at Pearl Harbour.
As for funding for such a 'good squadron's worth' well I see the government have magic'd up ANOTHER £3billion for 'Northern Rock' virtually overnight, as we are supposed to believe; so as the total so far for the 2 CVF's is supposed to be £4 billion, don't tell me we can't afford a bunch of Harrier 2+'s, which after all share a great deal of commonality with the GR9 - I think I should know, as I photographed both aircraft in detail for and with designers & engineers, inside & out.
As I pointed out I'm not ex-services of any flavour, just used to work with you all on Harrier / Hawk projects in my own small way.
I have no bias, in fact I tend to find by experience that senior Naval officers are even worse knobs than senior RAF ones ( quite an achievement ) but I do know, having been very directly involved with the Sea Harrier 1 ( inc Falklands mod's at this safe end,) Sea Harrier FRS then FA2 - we were staggered by the Blue Vixen/ Amraam's potency - and RAF GR5 & 7 + a special 1161 engine time to height trials record winner ( in class, ZD402 with Heinz Frick ) .
The fleet, such as it is, and representing our 'force projecton' needs air defence - as the PROJECTED ISD for the F-35 is 2018, what will it really be ?!
So that's why I suggest some Harrier 2+'s ASAP ... while one may think we are in a period of peace right now, so did countless others, including the U.S. at Pearl Harbour.
As for funding for such a 'good squadron's worth' well I see the government have magic'd up ANOTHER £3billion for 'Northern Rock' virtually overnight, as we are supposed to believe; so as the total so far for the 2 CVF's is supposed to be £4 billion, don't tell me we can't afford a bunch of Harrier 2+'s, which after all share a great deal of commonality with the GR9 - I think I should know, as I photographed both aircraft in detail for and with designers & engineers, inside & out.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Southern UK
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Double Zero,
despite my comments about thread drift I will respond. You have touted 'We need Harrier 2+ NOW" on other threads, and I will not recycle the arguments over whether it's a realistic option. What i would like to get into perspective is the "...need... now".
Bearing in mind that it is current UK MOD policy to take risk against AD,
We need a CAS aircraft that can work closer-in than GR7/9 and is faster than AH now.
We need some sort of decent SHORAD for land-based units now.
We need better vehicle protection against IEDs now.
We need a SEAD capability now.
We need a CSAR/JPR capability now.
We need more rotary lift now.
We need more strat lift now
We need more AAR now.
We need a better ISTAR grid now.
We need a robust space assurance capability now.
We need an ABM capability now.
We need something better than JPA now.
We need better care for our crippled veterans now.
We need a bigger RLC now.
We need air-portable armoured vehicles now.
We need a robust recognised opertional picture distributed to all units in the JOA now.
We need better combat ID now.
etc
Care to comment where Harrier 2+ comes in the list and whose funding you'd cut to get it? Clearly you see a need for enhanced air defence with an A/G capability so I don't expect you'll want to cut Typhoon.
You'll also note that I have not 'solutionised' and said that we need any particular type - that sort of thing usually leads to big support problems.
Back to the Thread
I had four very happy years at Yeovilton, including time in the old mess, and I'd be very sorry to see it go. It puts me in mind of my mate who lived in Dorset, when Portland closed. Every Thursday morning he would get a stream of Lynx, flying over his house on their way to the channel (via Portland) and back every afternoon. If we moved all the Merlin to Culdrose, would they use Yeovilton as a waypoint on their daily runs to Salisbury Plain, STANTA, SENTA etc (along with the grey Merlin that go over my house every Thursday morning etc). How about making Yoevilton the Merlin superbase?
despite my comments about thread drift I will respond. You have touted 'We need Harrier 2+ NOW" on other threads, and I will not recycle the arguments over whether it's a realistic option. What i would like to get into perspective is the "...need... now".
Bearing in mind that it is current UK MOD policy to take risk against AD,
We need a CAS aircraft that can work closer-in than GR7/9 and is faster than AH now.
We need some sort of decent SHORAD for land-based units now.
We need better vehicle protection against IEDs now.
We need a SEAD capability now.
We need a CSAR/JPR capability now.
We need more rotary lift now.
We need more strat lift now
We need more AAR now.
We need a better ISTAR grid now.
We need a robust space assurance capability now.
We need an ABM capability now.
We need something better than JPA now.
We need better care for our crippled veterans now.
We need a bigger RLC now.
We need air-portable armoured vehicles now.
We need a robust recognised opertional picture distributed to all units in the JOA now.
We need better combat ID now.
etc
Care to comment where Harrier 2+ comes in the list and whose funding you'd cut to get it? Clearly you see a need for enhanced air defence with an A/G capability so I don't expect you'll want to cut Typhoon.
You'll also note that I have not 'solutionised' and said that we need any particular type - that sort of thing usually leads to big support problems.
Back to the Thread
I had four very happy years at Yeovilton, including time in the old mess, and I'd be very sorry to see it go. It puts me in mind of my mate who lived in Dorset, when Portland closed. Every Thursday morning he would get a stream of Lynx, flying over his house on their way to the channel (via Portland) and back every afternoon. If we moved all the Merlin to Culdrose, would they use Yeovilton as a waypoint on their daily runs to Salisbury Plain, STANTA, SENTA etc (along with the grey Merlin that go over my house every Thursday morning etc). How about making Yoevilton the Merlin superbase?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Occasional Aviator,
Despite what I admit appearances may be, I am not rabid pro-Harrier2+ & AMRAAM to the exclusion of all else; just a few choices would be better vehicles, better ID, more rotary, etc as a higher priority 'right now'.
However, we are in a pretty crazy situation where our carriers have no A/D and even if all goes to plan - exactly how often does that happen ? - won't have until at least 2018.
As the FAA are / were the fighter Harrier specialists, and somehow to me seem logical to use at sea, I'd suggest having Harrier 2+ in FAA hands at Yeovilton.
One consideration is that Somerset is desperately short of jobs, so any by-product in that regard would be another good thing.
As for funding, I actually agree with all of your list as higher priorities, the snag with AMRAAM Harriers is we are rapidly losing the skilled people experienced with it.
Whether we - sensibly - buy used 2+ from the USMC, or for political purposes convert some GR9's ( and are ALL Harrier 2 airframes to GR9 standard yet ??? - I very much doubt it ) as I say, if 'we' can bail out Northern Rock for nearly the price of the 2 CVF's AGAIN, the money's there...
If the Navy component of JFH has dwindled to such an extent that they " can't man a little JFH Squadron " then internal politics have won, and the country has lost a great asset - which would indicate that JFH does not work, so let the Navy have their aircraft & pilots - in the past both services happily did exchange tours, which seem to be a better answer.
Yeovilton is ideally placed in several ways, as in free-er airspace, cheaper accomodation, better placed to deploy to carriers, and as I say the area needs a financial boost, if thinking of other things than strictly military.
As for the requirement for a CIS aircraft, that was a proposal from Kingston design office just before they were shut down by the more powerful ( and infinitely more clueless & less interested in our forces needs ) northern section of BAe - I was literally just about to mention it, SABA - Small Agile Battlefield Aircraft - on the 'history & nostalgia' thread.
Despite what I admit appearances may be, I am not rabid pro-Harrier2+ & AMRAAM to the exclusion of all else; just a few choices would be better vehicles, better ID, more rotary, etc as a higher priority 'right now'.
However, we are in a pretty crazy situation where our carriers have no A/D and even if all goes to plan - exactly how often does that happen ? - won't have until at least 2018.
As the FAA are / were the fighter Harrier specialists, and somehow to me seem logical to use at sea, I'd suggest having Harrier 2+ in FAA hands at Yeovilton.
One consideration is that Somerset is desperately short of jobs, so any by-product in that regard would be another good thing.
As for funding, I actually agree with all of your list as higher priorities, the snag with AMRAAM Harriers is we are rapidly losing the skilled people experienced with it.
Whether we - sensibly - buy used 2+ from the USMC, or for political purposes convert some GR9's ( and are ALL Harrier 2 airframes to GR9 standard yet ??? - I very much doubt it ) as I say, if 'we' can bail out Northern Rock for nearly the price of the 2 CVF's AGAIN, the money's there...
If the Navy component of JFH has dwindled to such an extent that they " can't man a little JFH Squadron " then internal politics have won, and the country has lost a great asset - which would indicate that JFH does not work, so let the Navy have their aircraft & pilots - in the past both services happily did exchange tours, which seem to be a better answer.
Yeovilton is ideally placed in several ways, as in free-er airspace, cheaper accomodation, better placed to deploy to carriers, and as I say the area needs a financial boost, if thinking of other things than strictly military.
As for the requirement for a CIS aircraft, that was a proposal from Kingston design office just before they were shut down by the more powerful ( and infinitely more clueless & less interested in our forces needs ) northern section of BAe - I was literally just about to mention it, SABA - Small Agile Battlefield Aircraft - on the 'history & nostalgia' thread.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Southern UK
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair enough. One could make a similar case for marinised Rafale, and since the F3 force are the specialists in AD, and their bases are not exactly in prosperous parts of the country, they should fly it.
I don't really care which service operates the aircraft, as long as they're used effectively and efficiently.
I suppose it comes down to whether you view the carrier as being there to project air power, or the embarked AD aviation as organic weapons for the carrier. Because of my background, I tend to consider the former as a more efficient use of our scarce fast jets, but we can agree to differ. Those that are actually doing the business in JFH seem to think it works as well as can be expected, so I don't think it's failed - regardless of how big or small the RN slice of the pie is.
Anyway, anyone care to comment on my idea for Yeovilton as the Merlin hub? It would certainly make it easier to keep the design authority (for the Mk3, at least) in touch with what's going on....
I don't really care which service operates the aircraft, as long as they're used effectively and efficiently.
I suppose it comes down to whether you view the carrier as being there to project air power, or the embarked AD aviation as organic weapons for the carrier. Because of my background, I tend to consider the former as a more efficient use of our scarce fast jets, but we can agree to differ. Those that are actually doing the business in JFH seem to think it works as well as can be expected, so I don't think it's failed - regardless of how big or small the RN slice of the pie is.
Anyway, anyone care to comment on my idea for Yeovilton as the Merlin hub? It would certainly make it easier to keep the design authority (for the Mk3, at least) in touch with what's going on....
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OA,
Essentially I am in total agreement with you and for some sad reason have given it some thought over night. It appears to be that the we have to ensure that we are changing the 'status quo' for a reason - to deliver more combat effect, while simultaneously satisfying the treasury that we are seen to be delivering real cost reductions for PR 08 and even into PR09.
The other factor for consideration is that 'we' (light blue) have managed to expand our SH assets with the procurement of the Danish Merlin and also the funding to resolve the CH47 HC3 fiasco. However, our dark blue Junglie capability is being viewed akin to the Czech Hip in Bosnia as the last choice by the customer, with its crews shouldering the 'risk' of operating a capability that is both old and operationally tired from many years service.
Therefore in simplistic terms, the capability enhancement can be achieved at the stroke of COMD JHC's pen by re-roling 78 Sqn RAF into a CH47 capability to operate the 'new' CH47s when they come off the line and re-roling the Junglie fleet with a long overdue Merlin SH capability.
But the use of Yeovilton as purely a Merlin hub (as Wattisham is for the AH) actually misses the true potential for also making it a Lynx hub as well. As already identified on this thread, even if FLynx does 'fall over' then both the Blue and Green Lynx capability will be with us for a number of years. Remember that the AAC's Lynx Regiment in Dishforth is currently on the look out for a new home and is reviewing its future options. Before discussion on a Merlin hub, the 'quick win' is a Lynx hub south side at Yeovilton. This includes a common conversion unit for both RN, RM and AAC Lynx pilots. In the current world of PFIs and PPPs the pure 'sticks and poles, stop and starts' could be contractualised. The true 'training to fight' the capability could be conducted by individual role related OCUs, manned more towards QHTIs and HWIs. For the RN Lynx/FLynx this OCU would also cater for RN Observer trg. With one logisitics node the logisiticians would surely be in agreement?
The cost is in the movement and integration of simulators (and with FLynx this would have to be done anyway) and also although south side is under utilised, it could not fit a whole Pongo regiment and 3 RN Lynx Sqns. Ownership of 847 could go on for centuries, but if a true Tailored Air Group is really going to operate in the Littoral, then with CHF it should remain (unless you are going to resource the training of all the Pongos to operate from decks in the Amphib role as well - which I am sure they will just love . Therefore new build hangarage and office space would be required where the Historic Flight/Fire Practice area is.
But before people start rolling their eyes at new build being mentioned in the first few paragraphs - that is the only new build I believe that Yeovilton requires to make it both the Lynx/FLynx and Merlin hub.
Because, now that the 'quick win' has been achieved we can consider your suggestion OA of Yeovilton being the Merlin hub. With 815, 702 and 847 now located south side under this plan, the vacant office space and hangarage can be used for RN grey Merlins from Culdrose. The ex 78 Sqn Merlins combined with the Danish Merlins are located in the current 845/846 hangars.
Again, the real cost saving is in a combined Merlin conversion unit (potentially located in the 848 hangar/office space) that only conducts basic conversion to type training across both Merlin types. Again a fleet specific OCU conducts the OJT and role related tasks (possibly a non deployable OCU Flt that conducts UK tasking and concurrently trains 'new joiners'). Again, if cost is a real issue then this type of 'sticks and poles' conversion training can be contractualised. The 'rest tour' for the front liners is in effect the OCU (because it is non-deployable) and focuses their skill sets on relevant and recent training of TTPs etc from their recent deployed experience.
There appears no cost in this - except the AVTUR to fly the Merlins from Culdrose and Benson to Yeovilton. Not strictly true. Assuming that course design and establishment of a Merlin logisitics node at Yeovilton is relatively low cost, then again it is the Merlin simulators that potentially will make JHC/Treasury baulk. With the green Merlin there is a case to argue to leave it where it is and accept the associated T&S costs. CAE/Serco provide a pretty good 'bang for buck' by having all 3 aircraft types under one roof (4 if the Pongos sorted out the 'plug and play' capability of the AH FDS). Not only does the MSHAFT facility provide conversion trg, but also the likes of Desert Trolley and pre-TLT training that deliver limited collective and combined training. The Junglies were happy to trek all the way to Culdrose for their Sea King tech and simulator trg, Benson must be closer.
The cost with the Merlin hub will be in the re-location of the pinging simulator. Real Estate should not be a problem, as even if there is no room on the airfield, Little Yeovilton across the road has spare capacity.
As to the Hawks and bug smashers - off down to Culdrose to join the SAR Flt (which will soon be privatised anyway) and the Wet Dreams (that will probably be combined with RAF Navigator/RN Observer trg in the future).
The other (often forgotten about) 'cost' is the increase in MQs. Well the local area survived with Lynx, Sea King, Hawks, and 3 Sqns of Harriers - so it is obviously feasible. With Somerset/Yeovil being one of the lowest income areas in the country (why do you think Wastelands are still there and not in Mumbai!) then the local council will probably bend over backwards to assist (planning permission etc) as its local commerce and industry will undoubtedly benefit.
As to 'congestion' in the local airspace - Yeovilton coped very well with SH, Lynx and Fast Jets in its previous life, it should be able to cope with a Lynx/Merlin hub. The beauty of Yeovilton (unlike Benson and Odiham if truth be known) is that the airspace is relatively simple (and yet Bristol and Exeter provide exposure to Procedural IF) and SPTA for the Pongos is right on the door step heading East, and the Moors is to the West for the Junglies and RM. Admittedly, as with Portland, the grey Lynx and Merlin community will have to endure a 25 minute transit to the sea, but hopefully can be filled with interesting training activities in transit
I am with you OA - is this the kind of thoughts you were looking for?
Essentially I am in total agreement with you and for some sad reason have given it some thought over night
. It appears to be that the we have to ensure that we are changing the 'status quo' for a reason - to deliver more combat effect, while simultaneously satisfying the treasury that we are seen to be delivering real cost reductions for PR 08 and even into PR09.The other factor for consideration is that 'we' (light blue) have managed to expand our SH assets with the procurement of the Danish Merlin and also the funding to resolve the CH47 HC3 fiasco. However, our dark blue Junglie capability is being viewed akin to the Czech Hip in Bosnia as the last choice by the customer, with its crews shouldering the 'risk' of operating a capability that is both old and operationally tired from many years service.
Therefore in simplistic terms, the capability enhancement can be achieved at the stroke of COMD JHC's pen by re-roling 78 Sqn RAF into a CH47 capability to operate the 'new' CH47s when they come off the line and re-roling the Junglie fleet with a long overdue Merlin SH capability.
But the use of Yeovilton as purely a Merlin hub (as Wattisham is for the AH) actually misses the true potential for also making it a Lynx hub as well. As already identified on this thread, even if FLynx does 'fall over' then both the Blue and Green Lynx capability will be with us for a number of years. Remember that the AAC's Lynx Regiment in Dishforth is currently on the look out for a new home and is reviewing its future options. Before discussion on a Merlin hub, the 'quick win' is a Lynx hub south side at Yeovilton. This includes a common conversion unit for both RN, RM and AAC Lynx pilots. In the current world of PFIs and PPPs the pure 'sticks and poles, stop and starts' could be contractualised. The true 'training to fight' the capability could be conducted by individual role related OCUs, manned more towards QHTIs and HWIs. For the RN Lynx/FLynx this OCU would also cater for RN Observer trg. With one logisitics node the logisiticians would surely be in agreement?
The cost is in the movement and integration of simulators (and with FLynx this would have to be done anyway) and also although south side is under utilised, it could not fit a whole Pongo regiment and 3 RN Lynx Sqns. Ownership of 847 could go on for centuries, but if a true Tailored Air Group is really going to operate in the Littoral, then with CHF it should remain (unless you are going to resource the training of all the Pongos to operate from decks in the Amphib role as well - which I am sure they will just love
. Therefore new build hangarage and office space would be required where the Historic Flight/Fire Practice area is.But before people start rolling their eyes at new build being mentioned in the first few paragraphs - that is the only new build I believe that Yeovilton requires to make it both the Lynx/FLynx and Merlin hub.
Because, now that the 'quick win' has been achieved we can consider your suggestion OA of Yeovilton being the Merlin hub. With 815, 702 and 847 now located south side under this plan, the vacant office space and hangarage can be used for RN grey Merlins from Culdrose. The ex 78 Sqn Merlins combined with the Danish Merlins are located in the current 845/846 hangars.
Again, the real cost saving is in a combined Merlin conversion unit (potentially located in the 848 hangar/office space) that only conducts basic conversion to type training across both Merlin types. Again a fleet specific OCU conducts the OJT and role related tasks (possibly a non deployable OCU Flt that conducts UK tasking and concurrently trains 'new joiners'). Again, if cost is a real issue then this type of 'sticks and poles' conversion training can be contractualised. The 'rest tour' for the front liners is in effect the OCU (because it is non-deployable) and focuses their skill sets on relevant and recent training of TTPs etc from their recent deployed experience.
There appears no cost in this - except the AVTUR to fly the Merlins from Culdrose and Benson to Yeovilton. Not strictly true. Assuming that course design and establishment of a Merlin logisitics node at Yeovilton is relatively low cost, then again it is the Merlin simulators that potentially will make JHC/Treasury baulk. With the green Merlin there is a case to argue to leave it where it is and accept the associated T&S costs. CAE/Serco provide a pretty good 'bang for buck' by having all 3 aircraft types under one roof (4 if the Pongos sorted out the 'plug and play' capability of the AH FDS). Not only does the MSHAFT facility provide conversion trg, but also the likes of Desert Trolley and pre-TLT training that deliver limited collective and combined training. The Junglies were happy to trek all the way to Culdrose for their Sea King tech and simulator trg, Benson must be closer.
The cost with the Merlin hub will be in the re-location of the pinging simulator. Real Estate should not be a problem, as even if there is no room on the airfield, Little Yeovilton across the road has spare capacity.
As to the Hawks and bug smashers - off down to Culdrose to join the SAR Flt (which will soon be privatised anyway) and the Wet Dreams (that will probably be combined with RAF Navigator/RN Observer trg in the future).
The other (often forgotten about) 'cost' is the increase in MQs. Well the local area survived with Lynx, Sea King, Hawks, and 3 Sqns of Harriers - so it is obviously feasible. With Somerset/Yeovil being one of the lowest income areas in the country (why do you think Wastelands are still there and not in Mumbai!) then the local council will probably bend over backwards to assist (planning permission etc) as its local commerce and industry will undoubtedly benefit.
As to 'congestion' in the local airspace - Yeovilton coped very well with SH, Lynx and Fast Jets in its previous life, it should be able to cope with a Lynx/Merlin hub. The beauty of Yeovilton (unlike Benson and Odiham if truth be known) is that the airspace is relatively simple (and yet Bristol and Exeter provide exposure to Procedural IF) and SPTA for the Pongos is right on the door step heading East, and the Moors is to the West for the Junglies and RM. Admittedly, as with Portland, the grey Lynx and Merlin community will have to endure a 25 minute transit to the sea, but hopefully can be filled with interesting training activities in transit
I am with you OA - is this the kind of thoughts you were looking for?
Last edited by MaroonMan4; 11th Aug 2008 at 09:09.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: London
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But the use of Yeovilton as purely a Merlin hub (as Wattisham is for the AH) actually misses the true potential for also making it a Lynx hub as well. As already identified on this thread, even if FLynx does 'fall over' then both the Blue and Green Lynx capability will be with us for a number of years. Remember that the AAC's Lynx Regiment in Dishforth is currently on the look out for a new home and is reviewing its future options. Before discussion on a Merlin hub, the 'quick win' is a Lynx hub south side at Yeovilton. This includes a common conversion unit for both RN, RM and AAC Lynx pilots. In the current world of PFIs and PPPs the pure 'sticks and poles, stop and starts' could be contractualised. The true 'training to fight' the capability could be conducted by individual role related OCUs, manned more towards QHTIs and HWIs. For the RN Lynx/FLynx this OCU would also cater for RN Observer trg. With one logisitics node the logisiticians would surely be in agreement
Why do we need 28 Sqn for a handful of extra frames? The sqn's contain only aircrew at Odiham these days, and whilst it may be an aspiration to increase the crews, it's proving nigh on impossible.
And does this mean you are leaving 78 Sqn to operate the original 22 Merlins, plus the Danish sticking plasters?
In which world does this make sense? Keep the freaks on the Merlin fleet.
Apart fom that, you can shoehorn whatever you wish into Yeovilton. Realistically, I agree that co-locating the Merlins makes sense, but I think moving assets around is something JHC would like to do, but can't.
JHC is all about short-term savings, and always has been. Projects like Belvedere offer long-term rationalisation, but short-term investment. Wrong aspect of the JHC bell curve.
Odiham is a case in point. JHC desperately want to close the station and Belvedere is only the lastest in a long line of studies posing the same question from different angles. It always involves money, and so the answer is always the same.
If you ask me, right or wrong, the treasury views the 2 carriers and JSF as the RN's investment for quite some time.
Flynx may involve the RN on the back of an Army procurement, but CH47, Apache etc are never going to happen.
And does this mean you are leaving 78 Sqn to operate the original 22 Merlins, plus the Danish sticking plasters?
In which world does this make sense? Keep the freaks on the Merlin fleet.
Apart fom that, you can shoehorn whatever you wish into Yeovilton. Realistically, I agree that co-locating the Merlins makes sense, but I think moving assets around is something JHC would like to do, but can't.
JHC is all about short-term savings, and always has been. Projects like Belvedere offer long-term rationalisation, but short-term investment. Wrong aspect of the JHC bell curve.
Odiham is a case in point. JHC desperately want to close the station and Belvedere is only the lastest in a long line of studies posing the same question from different angles. It always involves money, and so the answer is always the same.
If you ask me, right or wrong, the treasury views the 2 carriers and JSF as the RN's investment for quite some time.
Flynx may involve the RN on the back of an Army procurement, but CH47, Apache etc are never going to happen.