Lyneham Closure, Westminster Hall Debate 6 Jan 2010
nigegilb,
"Does anyone have any piccies of the "new" building allocated to the three Lyneham squadrons when they relocate next year? "
Three? What happened to the fourth one then?
"Does anyone have any piccies of the "new" building allocated to the three Lyneham squadrons when they relocate next year? "
Three? What happened to the fourth one then?
nigegb,
Thanks.
Three squadrons to fly 25 A400M and 24 C130J and act as OCU? Isn't that a bit silly, compared to the THREE Nimrod squadrons planned for 9 a/c?
Thanks.
Three squadrons to fly 25 A400M and 24 C130J and act as OCU? Isn't that a bit silly, compared to the THREE Nimrod squadrons planned for 9 a/c?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Proone this is the move that is happening July next year, can't speak for the A400M, Lyneham's "new" squadron(s) building (singular) might be allowed a lick of paint [no cost move] by the time the A400M comes on stream.
Last edited by nigegilb; 3rd Feb 2010 at 08:01.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,077
Likes: 0
Received 144 Likes
on
28 Posts
There will be a coffee bar for XXIV & 30 Sqns on the groundfloor, in the old station mortuary. 47 Sqn will be upstairs. The buiding, currently home to Tanker Training Flight used to be the Medical Centre. LXX Sqn, as the A400M sqn, will get a new buiding as their HQ - out of the A400M budget so it won't be a cost on the bill to close Lyneham.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: roughly near Everleigh DZ
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh for Gawd's sake, dry your eyes wet pants.
Can't you see the scale of the savings here?
What is the scale Darling....
Er 1 to 1 General, oh, look, there's a little worm.........
Load Moving.........
Can't you see the scale of the savings here?
What is the scale Darling....
Er 1 to 1 General, oh, look, there's a little worm.........
Load Moving.........
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LXX Sqn, as the A400M sqn, will get a new buiding as their HQ - out of the A400M budget so it won't be a cost on the bill to close Lyneham.
Yesterday 17:47
Yesterday 17:47
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Wilts
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Ken,
Its 47 that will be on the ground floor - the powers that be have worked out that a room that they need is so heavy (and the building structure is not strong enough) that wherever they put it - it will end up on the ground floor! Still an arrse plan to close 2 of the 3 useable runways.
SFFP - I dont think you will find anybody at all at lyneham who privately thinks its a good plan - but they may spout party line crap in public..............!
m2mob
Its 47 that will be on the ground floor - the powers that be have worked out that a room that they need is so heavy (and the building structure is not strong enough) that wherever they put it - it will end up on the ground floor! Still an arrse plan to close 2 of the 3 useable runways.
SFFP - I dont think you will find anybody at all at lyneham who privately thinks its a good plan - but they may spout party line crap in public..............!
m2mob
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Crossing Charlie
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Removal Of Fittings
Surely you take all the Lynham light bulbs with you. Lots of other trivia also have value like road signs, building signs, swingy up barriers for the snowdrops, street lights, door knobs -why remove the knobs take the doors as well, the list is endless. Aren't these called residuals or offsets. Could be some medals or promotions in this
LB
LB
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: FL 600. West of Mongolia
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chaps, could I possibly post here, as ex-Lyneham Ground Crew?
I first came 'here' in early 1968, there were only 2 Herc' squadrons then 24 & 36!! The rest were at Fairford (30 & 47), Thorney Island (OCU), Akrotiri (70 SQN) & Changi. (48 SQDN). The brand new Hecs initially only 'lived' at C Site, which we shared with 216 SQDN.
I remember in circa 1969 they built a new NAFFI, and the adage then was that once a new NAAFI is built, then the station will soon close. Lyneham has held out for over fourty years from then, I hope and pray that LYN will still be there in another 40, not just the sake of nostalgia on my part, but sheer common sense. (That would be a hell of a lot of eggs in one Brize basket).
Good luck guys, I'll be keeping all my fingers and toes crossed for you.
(Oh, and 217 was always my favourite A/C)
I first came 'here' in early 1968, there were only 2 Herc' squadrons then 24 & 36!! The rest were at Fairford (30 & 47), Thorney Island (OCU), Akrotiri (70 SQN) & Changi. (48 SQDN). The brand new Hecs initially only 'lived' at C Site, which we shared with 216 SQDN.
I remember in circa 1969 they built a new NAFFI, and the adage then was that once a new NAAFI is built, then the station will soon close. Lyneham has held out for over fourty years from then, I hope and pray that LYN will still be there in another 40, not just the sake of nostalgia on my part, but sheer common sense. (That would be a hell of a lot of eggs in one Brize basket).
Good luck guys, I'll be keeping all my fingers and toes crossed for you.
(Oh, and 217 was always my favourite A/C)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good idea about transferring those light bulbs low ball, pity the purpose built squadron buildings on the south side of the airfield can't be transferred along with the light bulbs.
I have got some paint in the garage, maybe we should start up some kind of paint pool for the no cost move?
It's good stuff, Farrow and Ball I think...
I have got some paint in the garage, maybe we should start up some kind of paint pool for the no cost move?
It's good stuff, Farrow and Ball I think...
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Behind you all the way!
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi!
I'm a Civvie Airline Captain with no Military Aviation experience whatsoever, however, that doesn't preclude me from spotting flaws & weaknesses in the current state of the Armed Forces.
I have big,big issues with centralizing the whole of a particular type of aircraft on one site & I'll cite an example & a couple of scenarios.
February 2009, I was based at Brize, working for FlyGlobespan operating the UK-ASI-Mount Pleasant AirBridge & UK-Gulf flights via Hannover, Paderborn, Teeside & Akro'. For a period of about a week we had atrocious weather conditions of ice, snow, freezing rain & the daytime temperature was seldom above -2c, very similar to the 'Cold Snaps' we had recently. The apron, taxyways & runway at Brize could not be cleared of snow & ice due to the lack of staff to operate the equipment who couldn't get into the base & when it did operate, it frequently broke down. RAF Brize Norton was SNOCLO for quite a while.
Inbound transport flights were diverted to Manchester, Brum, East Mids' et al. Now that's fine, if inconvenient, to stick service personnel on coaches & freight or equipment can be moved on trucks to the Air Head or wherever it needs to go. Unfortunately, one particular night the Russians were a roamin'.
Aircraft scrambled from a base in Scotland & a tanker on QRA tried to launch but couldn't due to the condition of the runway at Brize. We were sat on the flight deck of our B767 listening to the conversations between the hapless team in the Control Tower & the frustrated crew who wanted to get airborne. This went on for over an hour, apparently more aircraft were launched from Scotland & some in Eastern England were put on alert as the original interceptors ran low on fuel. We got our pax, closed the doors, taxied &, prior to take off, were asked for a runway condition report. As we turned onto runway 26, I could feel the aircraft slipping slightly, & noted the 'shiny surface' of the runway & the OAT hovering around 0'c. We launched & gave the Tower a report along the lines of "...runway surface WET, runway entry point SLIPPERY... estimated braking action MEDIUM" as there was no visible contamination. When I got back to Brize a few days later I found out the QRA mission had been scrubbed, which to a tax payer in times when the Russians were having a few probes, was not very reassuring. On the way to the hotel, I really felt for the teams hundreds of miles North of Scotland & their thoughts on that dark wintery night, upon being told that their tanker wasn't coming. It's just not good enough.
If the RAF has an obligation to to defend our airspace with teams on QRA then why don't they put the assets needed together? Put a couple of tankers at a frontline QRA station IF the weather looks as though it could hamper ops, or the Russians start upping their activity? During the Bosnian War, Bruggen was full of damn tankers on a 'forward det'. Why not have a QRA det? If this isn't possible, why not put a couple of Tornados with Buddy-Buddy fits as a back-up or emergency measure?
Here's a scenario. So the RAF puts all it's Chinooks in one 'Superbase'. Well what a target that would be for bunch of terrorists, to seriously damage the bulk of the Heavy HeloLift capability that could be used in a current theatre. What would it take? 4? 6? 8? nutters in a couple of trucks? A couple of pairs of bolt cutters to take 30 secs to cut a big hole in a fence. They can drive on through & be on the flightline wreaking havoc with petrol bombs, lump hammers, sledge hammers, crow bars within a couple of minutes doing untold damage with no weapon or mass-fertilizer purchases to flag up with the Security Services, no death to innocent civilians to harm their cause but a blow to the already hard pressed UK Armed Forces & a massive propaganda coup. On a Pacific Island in December 1941, a base commander decided to park all the aircraft on his base slap in the middle of the airfield for fear of saboteurs sneaking through the perimeter fence. His pilots protested, offering that it left them vulnerable to an air raid. Come lunchtime on December 7th over 60 USAAC aircraft were left ablaze after an attack by 8 Japanese dive bombers. I'm merely saying 'Eggs in a basket'.
How about:
Making SAR tri-service.
Operating the Nimrods jointly with the Navy (same as the Joint Harrier Force & Helicopter/Fast Jet training system)
Letting the Army have the RAF's helicopters.
Putting QRA assets (inc. tanker & Awacs) having 'detached flights' e.g. to Leuchars & Conningsby. 22 (SAR) Sqn used to be based at RAF Finningley where all the maintenance, training & admin' was carried out, but operated a network of 'det flts'. Why not operate Awacs, MPA, Tactical Airlift & Tanker assets on a similar set-up?
Co-Locating SF air assets together with the land based units they carry into battle.
Close Scampton & put the Reds into Valley.
Close LOO & Cranfield's runways & put the Dom's & Tuc's into somewhere like Mona & Woodvale where they are relatively close to each other & where they train i.e. the LFA's in North Wales & Lake District & the uncluttered airspace of the west coast. It would save flying time transiting from airfields in the East of the country to their training areas in the West & back again.
Base UAS & EFT units at sections of more provincial civilian operated airports.
Have a select list of established UK owned, based & crewed airlines to operate to places such as Ascension, Nairobi, Mount Pleasant, Calgary, Hannover, Belize, Dulles/Andrews AFB, Patrick AFB, Akrotiri & wherever the UK's Gulf AirHead is. Frequent rotation of tenders among UK airlines will ensure competitive quotes while ensuring British jobs & post-service job prospects for ex-service personnel. At the minute we have the UK-FI AirBridge operated by Seychellians who've just replaced Polynesians who replaced British workers made redundant!!!!
Just the ideas of someone on the outside looking in.
INCOMING!!!!!!
I'm a Civvie Airline Captain with no Military Aviation experience whatsoever, however, that doesn't preclude me from spotting flaws & weaknesses in the current state of the Armed Forces.
I have big,big issues with centralizing the whole of a particular type of aircraft on one site & I'll cite an example & a couple of scenarios.
February 2009, I was based at Brize, working for FlyGlobespan operating the UK-ASI-Mount Pleasant AirBridge & UK-Gulf flights via Hannover, Paderborn, Teeside & Akro'. For a period of about a week we had atrocious weather conditions of ice, snow, freezing rain & the daytime temperature was seldom above -2c, very similar to the 'Cold Snaps' we had recently. The apron, taxyways & runway at Brize could not be cleared of snow & ice due to the lack of staff to operate the equipment who couldn't get into the base & when it did operate, it frequently broke down. RAF Brize Norton was SNOCLO for quite a while.
Inbound transport flights were diverted to Manchester, Brum, East Mids' et al. Now that's fine, if inconvenient, to stick service personnel on coaches & freight or equipment can be moved on trucks to the Air Head or wherever it needs to go. Unfortunately, one particular night the Russians were a roamin'.
Aircraft scrambled from a base in Scotland & a tanker on QRA tried to launch but couldn't due to the condition of the runway at Brize. We were sat on the flight deck of our B767 listening to the conversations between the hapless team in the Control Tower & the frustrated crew who wanted to get airborne. This went on for over an hour, apparently more aircraft were launched from Scotland & some in Eastern England were put on alert as the original interceptors ran low on fuel. We got our pax, closed the doors, taxied &, prior to take off, were asked for a runway condition report. As we turned onto runway 26, I could feel the aircraft slipping slightly, & noted the 'shiny surface' of the runway & the OAT hovering around 0'c. We launched & gave the Tower a report along the lines of "...runway surface WET, runway entry point SLIPPERY... estimated braking action MEDIUM" as there was no visible contamination. When I got back to Brize a few days later I found out the QRA mission had been scrubbed, which to a tax payer in times when the Russians were having a few probes, was not very reassuring. On the way to the hotel, I really felt for the teams hundreds of miles North of Scotland & their thoughts on that dark wintery night, upon being told that their tanker wasn't coming. It's just not good enough.
If the RAF has an obligation to to defend our airspace with teams on QRA then why don't they put the assets needed together? Put a couple of tankers at a frontline QRA station IF the weather looks as though it could hamper ops, or the Russians start upping their activity? During the Bosnian War, Bruggen was full of damn tankers on a 'forward det'. Why not have a QRA det? If this isn't possible, why not put a couple of Tornados with Buddy-Buddy fits as a back-up or emergency measure?
Here's a scenario. So the RAF puts all it's Chinooks in one 'Superbase'. Well what a target that would be for bunch of terrorists, to seriously damage the bulk of the Heavy HeloLift capability that could be used in a current theatre. What would it take? 4? 6? 8? nutters in a couple of trucks? A couple of pairs of bolt cutters to take 30 secs to cut a big hole in a fence. They can drive on through & be on the flightline wreaking havoc with petrol bombs, lump hammers, sledge hammers, crow bars within a couple of minutes doing untold damage with no weapon or mass-fertilizer purchases to flag up with the Security Services, no death to innocent civilians to harm their cause but a blow to the already hard pressed UK Armed Forces & a massive propaganda coup. On a Pacific Island in December 1941, a base commander decided to park all the aircraft on his base slap in the middle of the airfield for fear of saboteurs sneaking through the perimeter fence. His pilots protested, offering that it left them vulnerable to an air raid. Come lunchtime on December 7th over 60 USAAC aircraft were left ablaze after an attack by 8 Japanese dive bombers. I'm merely saying 'Eggs in a basket'.
How about:
Making SAR tri-service.
Operating the Nimrods jointly with the Navy (same as the Joint Harrier Force & Helicopter/Fast Jet training system)
Letting the Army have the RAF's helicopters.
Putting QRA assets (inc. tanker & Awacs) having 'detached flights' e.g. to Leuchars & Conningsby. 22 (SAR) Sqn used to be based at RAF Finningley where all the maintenance, training & admin' was carried out, but operated a network of 'det flts'. Why not operate Awacs, MPA, Tactical Airlift & Tanker assets on a similar set-up?
Co-Locating SF air assets together with the land based units they carry into battle.
Close Scampton & put the Reds into Valley.
Close LOO & Cranfield's runways & put the Dom's & Tuc's into somewhere like Mona & Woodvale where they are relatively close to each other & where they train i.e. the LFA's in North Wales & Lake District & the uncluttered airspace of the west coast. It would save flying time transiting from airfields in the East of the country to their training areas in the West & back again.
Base UAS & EFT units at sections of more provincial civilian operated airports.
Have a select list of established UK owned, based & crewed airlines to operate to places such as Ascension, Nairobi, Mount Pleasant, Calgary, Hannover, Belize, Dulles/Andrews AFB, Patrick AFB, Akrotiri & wherever the UK's Gulf AirHead is. Frequent rotation of tenders among UK airlines will ensure competitive quotes while ensuring British jobs & post-service job prospects for ex-service personnel. At the minute we have the UK-FI AirBridge operated by Seychellians who've just replaced Polynesians who replaced British workers made redundant!!!!
Just the ideas of someone on the outside looking in.
INCOMING!!!!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am in possession of a lengthy reply to James Gray's debate, it is signed off by Bill Rammell, as soon as James agrees to release it to the press I'll post a link up on here. Interesting now that funding for the armed forces has suddenly become a hot political potato, might be a bit of mileage left in this cause. I am yet to meet anyone at Lyneham who thinks it is a good move, aside from one person, who sees it as inevitable. If we can't afford 25mil per year to run an air station then we are in a very sad state of affairs. Compared to the 25 Bil squandered at Abbey Wood. FRES? Where is it?
Be nice to have this as a sticky for a little while, Mods?
Be nice to have this as a sticky for a little while, Mods?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,077
Likes: 0
Received 144 Likes
on
28 Posts
Budget for Lyneham is more like £7M pa purely for the site, not including wages, flying etc. The way the station is being run down, infrastructure wise, it's hard to see where all the £7M gets spent! Ever since the decision to close in 2003 it's been one of the arguments in favour, that's it's too costly to restore the buildings because they've been allowed to deteriorate - perhaps they should've spent a little cash to keep them in the order in the first place although a cynic might say that was always the paln, to run the station down to justify its closure.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is mere speculation, but the potential solution, subject to SDR, would involve the army picking up the running costs for the domestic site and some kind of 2nd line engineering facility continuing, requiring the airfield to be opened from time to time.
The numbers being banded around for Lyneham"s infrastructure need are in the order or 115-125 mil. Considering that, according to my maths, the true spend involved at Brize is in the region of 400mil, Lyneham's bill doesn't seem too bad at all.
I have asked James if he would submit a PQ to ascertain the break even year for cost savings. Trouble is Rammell does not appear to want to include the housing costs in the move. Your estimate of 7mil is the lowest I have heard. The common figure I am hearing, once the station is closed, is a saving of 25mil per year, with an initial planned break even point in year 6. This seems like bolleaux to me, but if anyone else has the figures please pile into the debate.
The numbers being banded around for Lyneham"s infrastructure need are in the order or 115-125 mil. Considering that, according to my maths, the true spend involved at Brize is in the region of 400mil, Lyneham's bill doesn't seem too bad at all.
I have asked James if he would submit a PQ to ascertain the break even year for cost savings. Trouble is Rammell does not appear to want to include the housing costs in the move. Your estimate of 7mil is the lowest I have heard. The common figure I am hearing, once the station is closed, is a saving of 25mil per year, with an initial planned break even point in year 6. This seems like bolleaux to me, but if anyone else has the figures please pile into the debate.
Lyneham's Land Could Be Worthless?
In all this debate, I have not seen any figures gien for the realisable value of the Lyneham estate. Some has been sold/released over the years, but as the land was effectively siezed just before WWII, its net realiable value could be very low indeed.
I have it on very good authority that the majority of land that comprised wartime Lyneham was requisitioned under the Emergency Powers (Defence Regulations) Act. The three sites (FTS, ASU/MU and Transport Command Airfield) were requisitioned from a couple of landowners for c £25,000 in old money; the provisions of the Act required the land to be returned to the original owners at the unimproved value. Given the extensive contamination (fuel, asbestos, heavy metals, possible ordnance, possible radioactive - radium paint, asbestos etc) means that the MOD would ahve to pay the new owners to take on the environmental liability - as was doen with teh Rosyth Fuels Depot a decade ago. The details of the owners, the parcels of land and the purchase prices are given in the Air ministry Terrier, last seen at the Defence Lands Office (now DE) at Durrington Walls, Wilts.
WP
I have it on very good authority that the majority of land that comprised wartime Lyneham was requisitioned under the Emergency Powers (Defence Regulations) Act. The three sites (FTS, ASU/MU and Transport Command Airfield) were requisitioned from a couple of landowners for c £25,000 in old money; the provisions of the Act required the land to be returned to the original owners at the unimproved value. Given the extensive contamination (fuel, asbestos, heavy metals, possible ordnance, possible radioactive - radium paint, asbestos etc) means that the MOD would ahve to pay the new owners to take on the environmental liability - as was doen with teh Rosyth Fuels Depot a decade ago. The details of the owners, the parcels of land and the purchase prices are given in the Air ministry Terrier, last seen at the Defence Lands Office (now DE) at Durrington Walls, Wilts.
WP
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts