Lyneham Closure, Westminster Hall Debate 6 Jan 2010
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bill Rammell (Minister of State (Armed Forces), Ministry of Defence; Harlow, Labour)
"It is highly unlikely that any attack could compromise the ability to operate the fleets based at Brize Norton. For example, the length of the runway at Brize Norton is such that it is unlikely that it would be damaged to such an extent that it would be impossible to use."
Four arrested at Australian army base for role in suicide attack plot
I don't want to give the bad guys any help, but could think of lots of ways of making an attack on BZZ simple and highly effective. Adding the contents of LYE to the pot just adds to the profile, vulnerability and attractiveness of the target.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the EU on a small Island
Age: 79
Posts: 529
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Resilience costs money.
Defence money doesn't buy votes.
And the RAF is reaping the harvest of decades of having too much 'wouldn't it be nice'.
Sadly, things have gone too far, and combining LYN/BZN is one of them.
Defence money doesn't buy votes.
And the RAF is reaping the harvest of decades of having too much 'wouldn't it be nice'.
Sadly, things have gone too far, and combining LYN/BZN is one of them.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Equiv, one step ahead of the Tory line on that one 
(not difficult with Cameron in charge). BTW Me and James are not best chums..but the cause is worthy.
I know you are tuned in to the story as well, but the considered view is that decision to purchase significantly more C17s and Js was taken by Hutton on the eve of his resignation, on recommendation by the RAF. A unilateral decision by the UK, which made the loss of Hutton even greater.
It was Hutton's resignation that put the spanner in the works.
Not sure where we are now on procurement windows, (it was certainly possible back then). As you say, all might well be lost, but we'll have some fun trying to change a few attitudes..
(not difficult with Cameron in charge). BTW Me and James are not best chums..but the cause is worthy.I know you are tuned in to the story as well, but the considered view is that decision to purchase significantly more C17s and Js was taken by Hutton on the eve of his resignation, on recommendation by the RAF. A unilateral decision by the UK, which made the loss of Hutton even greater.
It was Hutton's resignation that put the spanner in the works.
Not sure where we are now on procurement windows, (it was certainly possible back then). As you say, all might well be lost, but we'll have some fun trying to change a few attitudes..
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If C-17 was so unjustafiable, why did they just buy no 7? It will be easily able to transport fres + ancils. Or Chinook. Or a host of other bulk loads required at short notice.
And if c-130J is so tiny, how is it regularly dropping 16 tonnes of CDS where it counts?
Cancel A400M. With the entire current budget cost, we could afford loads of C17 and C130Js.
The drive is about capability vs price actually. Something that a 3rd IPT, eng set up and logs chain doesnt exactly give us does it? Civvie accreditation for the engineers will just drive retention through the floor. I think we can afford losing a couple of runs on an austre strip according to CBR. A400M cant even transport FRES. So Whats the point? (apart from governments saving face?)
As I said earlier, commercial contract = give us our money back please or we will see you in court. Airbus have tried to get the terms of the contract re-written. They failed. (I Believe).
And if c-130J is so tiny, how is it regularly dropping 16 tonnes of CDS where it counts?
Cancel A400M. With the entire current budget cost, we could afford loads of C17 and C130Js.
The drive is about capability vs price actually. Something that a 3rd IPT, eng set up and logs chain doesnt exactly give us does it? Civvie accreditation for the engineers will just drive retention through the floor. I think we can afford losing a couple of runs on an austre strip according to CBR. A400M cant even transport FRES. So Whats the point? (apart from governments saving face?)
As I said earlier, commercial contract = give us our money back please or we will see you in court. Airbus have tried to get the terms of the contract re-written. They failed. (I Believe).
[QUOTE]As I said earlier, commercial contract = give us our money back please or we will see you in court. Airbus have tried to get the terms of the contract re-written. They failed. (I Believe)./QUOTE]
We paid up front, for xyz on a commercial contract, Airbus made a big deal out of it, no delays and changing spec halfway through ala wastaspace. You ordered xyz you will get xyz.
We could cancel at certain points, we have reached a point at which we could cancel BUT I believe the problem is one of Airbus not having the money to pay back! If we pull out so probably would the others, leaving Airbus bankrupt. That I think is the real sticking point, as there are a lot of people employed by Airbus/ in jobs linked to Airbus, and an election is looming.
We paid up front, for xyz on a commercial contract, Airbus made a big deal out of it, no delays and changing spec halfway through ala wastaspace. You ordered xyz you will get xyz.
We could cancel at certain points, we have reached a point at which we could cancel BUT I believe the problem is one of Airbus not having the money to pay back! If we pull out so probably would the others, leaving Airbus bankrupt. That I think is the real sticking point, as there are a lot of people employed by Airbus/ in jobs linked to Airbus, and an election is looming.
Was this thread not about the closure of Lyneham. There is a dedicated thread about A400M.
Cancelling A400M will not provide any money for other capabilities, it will just go towards reducing the current deficit.
Eggs in one basket???...The cold war ended in the 1990s, there is one airbase that is under constant threat and that place has more aircraft on one site including ins and outs than the whole of the UK RAF inventory. When Al Qaida get hold of JP233 and a Tornado, then maybe we should get worried about denial of our runways.
Cancelling A400M will not provide any money for other capabilities, it will just go towards reducing the current deficit.
Eggs in one basket???...The cold war ended in the 1990s, there is one airbase that is under constant threat and that place has more aircraft on one site including ins and outs than the whole of the UK RAF inventory. When Al Qaida get hold of JP233 and a Tornado, then maybe we should get worried about denial of our runways.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Puken
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay,
Ignoring the fact that the move to BZN will see a significant reduction in capability and efficiency lets look at some facts that mean more to HMG than anything else; money.
LYE costs £7M per year in infrastructure costs. Manpower savings for the closure have already been made.
£180M to move ac and Sqns across; no significant increase in accommodation. To do that we need to spend £250M+. However we can't afford to pay people disturbance (and thats AFTER we've built the houses we can't afford to build). Bussing people will cost too; financially and manpower-wise (I and countless others will opt out of the service if that comes to fruition). We can't afford home to duty.
So, we spend £180M to save £7M per year. Lose capability too.
What a genius idea!
It takes a total moron to actually think we're doing the right thing by squandering that money for an ultimate loss. (Mind you, these were the same people who thought 232 Typhoon would solve all our FJ, SH and AT woes!
)
Ignoring the fact that the move to BZN will see a significant reduction in capability and efficiency lets look at some facts that mean more to HMG than anything else; money.
LYE costs £7M per year in infrastructure costs. Manpower savings for the closure have already been made.
£180M to move ac and Sqns across; no significant increase in accommodation. To do that we need to spend £250M+. However we can't afford to pay people disturbance (and thats AFTER we've built the houses we can't afford to build). Bussing people will cost too; financially and manpower-wise (I and countless others will opt out of the service if that comes to fruition). We can't afford home to duty.
So, we spend £180M to save £7M per year. Lose capability too.
What a genius idea!
It takes a total moron to actually think we're doing the right thing by squandering that money for an ultimate loss. (Mind you, these were the same people who thought 232 Typhoon would solve all our FJ, SH and AT woes!
)
cripple the AT fleet.......
.......by locating 100% of assets at BZN.
It will be a matter of days before AT fleet is 'diverted' to numerous airfields around the UK with crews spending their time at Bredbury Hall or in a bus somewhere in between.
I think Manchester might have something to say about impact upon their ops also?
AT AOC bod needs shooting for 'allowing' this to happen.
Unlike choppers, large aircraft cannot be easily dispersed around the country without the essentially long logistics trail/tail where empires and jobsworths flourish
It will be a matter of days before AT fleet is 'diverted' to numerous airfields around the UK with crews spending their time at Bredbury Hall or in a bus somewhere in between.
I think Manchester might have something to say about impact upon their ops also?
AT AOC bod needs shooting for 'allowing' this to happen.
Unlike choppers, large aircraft cannot be easily dispersed around the country without the essentially long logistics trail/tail where empires and jobsworths flourish
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what is the entire budget for A400M? Maybe you can tell me how many C17s and Hercs this would buy? Would save me a lot of work....
Fres is simply too heavy for A400M in its heavier forms.
Future Rapid Effects System (FRES) ? Medium-Weight Armoured Vehicles - Army Technology
The FRES utility vehicle was originally specified to be transportable by the C-130J Hercules which carries loads up to about 18t. The FRES vehicle specification has been revised to be transportable by A400M, which can carry a vehicle up to 37t. The A400M will enter service with UK forces in 2011. For vehicle weights of over 37t the vehicle's armour and systems would be transported separately.
Blimey - no more Bredbury Hall - sod diverting to Manchester then, will have to find a new Airfield. Now, Teeside International, is that not near Yarm, Newcastle, Richmond etc etc 
On the few occasions I diverted into Lyneham due to VC10 wet crosswind limits at the Oxonian 'superbase', the availability of the into-wind cross-runway was much appreciated. The trip back to Brize in a white van, less so...
The only other real alternative in such conditions is Birmingham.
When Brizzle Channel grot puts Brize out of Cat1 limits, the higher elevation of Lyneham is also a real boon. Cardiff probably wouldn't be much use under such conditions, so Castle Donington or somewhere else north of Watford Gap would probably be the best diversion. Why not a military aerodrome? Well, basically the problems associated with ground support, fire and rescue cover, passenger handling etc etc.......
A minor point - in my day for the VC10K our min div fuel was often 7 tonnes, assuming Lyneham. If a more distant base has to be nominated as a planned alternate, the available off-load will be less (in a tanker) and the available ZFW less (for AT) - particularly if you load fuel for a second stab before having to divert to an expensive civil aerodrome. Additional fuel burn might also be a factor, so over the years the fuel bill will be greater.
Closing Lyneham would be utter folly. Which is why it is sadly inevitable....
The only other real alternative in such conditions is Birmingham.
When Brizzle Channel grot puts Brize out of Cat1 limits, the higher elevation of Lyneham is also a real boon. Cardiff probably wouldn't be much use under such conditions, so Castle Donington or somewhere else north of Watford Gap would probably be the best diversion. Why not a military aerodrome? Well, basically the problems associated with ground support, fire and rescue cover, passenger handling etc etc.......
A minor point - in my day for the VC10K our min div fuel was often 7 tonnes, assuming Lyneham. If a more distant base has to be nominated as a planned alternate, the available off-load will be less (in a tanker) and the available ZFW less (for AT) - particularly if you load fuel for a second stab before having to divert to an expensive civil aerodrome. Additional fuel burn might also be a factor, so over the years the fuel bill will be greater.
Closing Lyneham would be utter folly. Which is why it is sadly inevitable....
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: South Coast
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok,Interesting points on here. I am not military but do risk assessments for civil aviation. I would be interested to know what risk management model was used in deciding to place the entire transport fleet onto a single runway base. What contingencies do the MOD have in the event of rwy closure in keeping supply chains moving? Civil carriers are busy reducing capacity due to the economic downturn.
I have heard the argument before that it will cost more to close the base than keep it open and attempts elswhere to dispose of airfields has not always been successful. I am intrigued as to why a base such as LYE - ehy not Northolt? restrictions due its location and that of LHR could sell it for a fortune and could use farnborough if needed. I may be wrong but to me this smacks of 'a good idea to get promted on'
I have heard the argument before that it will cost more to close the base than keep it open and attempts elswhere to dispose of airfields has not always been successful. I am intrigued as to why a base such as LYE - ehy not Northolt? restrictions due its location and that of LHR could sell it for a fortune and could use farnborough if needed. I may be wrong but to me this smacks of 'a good idea to get promted on'
I would be interested to know what risk management model was used in deciding to place the entire transport fleet onto a single runway base.
It will have been something like "We're going to close Lyneham. Now, you, boy, write a staff paper justifying my decision and prove that it won't affect our operational capabilities.....I mean, that it will save much money, whilst I send my uniform off to the tailor for another ring".
Back in the latter days of the Cold War, someone came up with A Great Idea. We would practice off-base operations. So The Plan was to fly from Fairford, not Brize......until They worked out how much it would cost to trundle everyone back and forth in the school bus every day....
, there being no accommodation available at Fairford. So then They had another idea - "Let's operate from a different part of Brize and just pretend we've deployed". Not such a daft idea, but ultimately thwarted by the gingerbeering squirearchy who refused to accept 'deployment' servicing rules etc - so all that happened was that everyone was screwed about for no real gain.Quite how the Oxonian Superbase will be expected to cope with all the Herk folk will be interesting to find out. Even something as basic as car parking is currently nigh-on impossible. If the economy has bounced back by then, I doubt whether the closure of Lyneham would be much of a retention incentive.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: South Africa
Age: 87
Posts: 1,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Mr Gray should go to Bournemouth and see how many military aircraft safely and efficiently operate from there
I remember Valiants going back to Vickers for mod's and they landed and took off OK.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: South Africa
Age: 87
Posts: 1,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blimey - no more Bredbury Hall - sod diverting to Manchester then, will have to find a new Airfield. Now, Teeside International, is that not near Yarm, Newcastle, Richmond etc etc 
Airlines are fighting each other to get away from the place.