JCA/JSF Basing - RAF Lossiemouth
Anyhow, there has been a change in the basing plan. Lossie was the original site chosen, as I mentioned before. So something changed at some stage.
Marham must have access to a whole lot of quality training and LFAs that Lossie doesn't.
Wasn't the choice of Lossie as a base also made in the days when we planned to buy 130 odd JSF, as opposed to the 50 odd we will buy now?
I also thought Lossie was chosen because of how noisy JSF is supposed to be. Lossie providing the quickest route for taking the noise out over the sea....
I also thought Lossie was chosen because of how noisy JSF is supposed to be. Lossie providing the quickest route for taking the noise out over the sea....
how noisy JSF is
Wasn't the choice of Lossie as a base also made in the days when we planned to buy 130 odd JSF, as opposed to the 50 odd we will buy now?
The official MOD position is still that the number will end up in three figures (as stated recently to the Defence Cttee) but the official line seems to be that uptakes beyond the initial 48 will be considered in the context of Typhoon OSD - and in any event not as part of the current 10 year planning cycle.
Last edited by Frostchamber; 28th Mar 2013 at 11:38.
Whilst I accept what you're saying, given how broke we are, and that the price per airframe is apparently going up, I think that practically, we will be lucky to get 48!!
Time will tell.
Time will tell.
The whole "it's noisy, so let's put it at Lossie" argument was flawed, IMHO. Those who have ever lived or stayed in Lossie town (actually quite a large place) will know that it is badly affected by noise from the airfield, particularly when Rwy 23 is in use. The circuit patterns are all modified to account for local avoidances, including Gordonstoun School; the Rwy 05 circuit is best described as a nav-ex. F-35B would have been even louder than a Tornado, particularly when conducting STOVL ops.
Marham, by contrast, is comparatively isolated, as befits all the 'el Adem with grass' banter from the old folk. The actual Marham village is dislocated from the airfield by a mile or so, away from the circuit direction. There are a couple of villages just outside the circuit to the SE, and there's Fincham on the 06 approach, but much further away from the threshold than Lossie town is from the runway there. I think the noise impact will be a lot less than it would be at Lossie.
What the aircraft do once up-and-away is going to be pretty irrelevant in noise terms; the notion of 'exporting the noise quickly to the sea' assumes that the aircraft will be at low altitude which, generally speaking, they won't be.
Marham, by contrast, is comparatively isolated, as befits all the 'el Adem with grass' banter from the old folk. The actual Marham village is dislocated from the airfield by a mile or so, away from the circuit direction. There are a couple of villages just outside the circuit to the SE, and there's Fincham on the 06 approach, but much further away from the threshold than Lossie town is from the runway there. I think the noise impact will be a lot less than it would be at Lossie.
What the aircraft do once up-and-away is going to be pretty irrelevant in noise terms; the notion of 'exporting the noise quickly to the sea' assumes that the aircraft will be at low altitude which, generally speaking, they won't be.
Last edited by Easy Street; 28th Mar 2013 at 23:56.
Flawed or not, that was what the planners went for initially. They were aware of the noise issues and had even costed the requirement to install sound-proffing, tripple glazing, etc over a wide area. Doesn't help much when you want to sit in your back garden in the summer - assuming we ever have one.
Regardless of the noise the locals always protest when there's a whisper of closing a base.
Regardless of the noise the locals always protest when there's a whisper of closing a base.
the locals always protest when there's a whisper of closing a base.
In my experience, most RAF airfields tend to have last-landing times of midnight or so for routine night flying... not Lossie though, which is earlier to avoid annoying the locals. Given the northern latitude it makes maintenance of night currency impossible over the summer (a dispensation gets granted). It amuses me that on the one hand, the locals protest loudly about possible base closure, and on the other they are treated with kid gloves lest a bit of night flying upset them... given the alleged extent of their dependence on the base, surely we could push them a bit more and get the equivalent amount of flying time as other bases?
Last edited by Easy Street; 29th Mar 2013 at 20:05.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: UK
Age: 56
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the increase in support that the Scottish independence campaign seems to have (heaven help us!) right now, what would it actually mean for the RAF in the long run if it comes off?
Would the F35 still go ahead given that there are still cuts being made?
A post-independence UK could only be worse off. It's often said here how bad things will be for Scotland but what will the overall effect be on what is left of the RAF given the cuts of recent years.
Posted from Pprune.org App for Android
Would the F35 still go ahead given that there are still cuts being made?
A post-independence UK could only be worse off. It's often said here how bad things will be for Scotland but what will the overall effect be on what is left of the RAF given the cuts of recent years.
Posted from Pprune.org App for Android
OutlawPete, ref your use of the term "UK" for what's left if the vote is for Independence, I refer you to my Post #27. If Scotland votes for Independence there will be no more a United Kingdom of Great Britain.
A slight thread drift here, what has my curiosity burning away like an oil well fire is this; if the vote on 18th September 2014 goes against independence, just what will Big Eck do then? Will his political career and clout both wither on the vine? Will he explode from the pressure of an almighty vessel bursting raging sulk? Or will he retire to Lichtenstein?
Or, as I suspect, he won't accept the result, accuse Cameron of running a dirty tricks campaign and demand a re-vote?!?!?!
FB
Or, as I suspect, he won't accept the result, accuse Cameron of running a dirty tricks campaign and demand a re-vote?!?!?!
FB
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: UK
Age: 56
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FB. Salmonds in a win-win situation. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if deep down he'd be more than happy with a "no" vote.
alwayslookingup. Re post #27. I'm sure that with regards to the original union agreement that is correct. Can't see Wales going it alone post Scottish independence though, they wouldn't last 5 minutes.
The original post raises the issue of F35 basing which we now know will not be RAF Lossiemouth. If Scottish independence goes ahead there will be even less cash in the pot and with the present Westminster government, defence is likely to suffer even more. It makes it more likely that F35, given its cost, will be cancelled.
Posted from Pprune.org App for Android
alwayslookingup. Re post #27. I'm sure that with regards to the original union agreement that is correct. Can't see Wales going it alone post Scottish independence though, they wouldn't last 5 minutes.
The original post raises the issue of F35 basing which we now know will not be RAF Lossiemouth. If Scottish independence goes ahead there will be even less cash in the pot and with the present Westminster government, defence is likely to suffer even more. It makes it more likely that F35, given its cost, will be cancelled.
Posted from Pprune.org App for Android
I don't imagine that LF is in the JSF CONOPs
Will there still be a need for LF for day 2+, or will suppression of IADS on day 1 mean its unlikely LF will be required?
If F-35 LF is needed at all, it would be for things like shows-of-force in support of ground troops or visual aiming of weapons at low-level beneath cloud [which, in the fixed-wing CAS world at least, is already being steadily replaced by the delivery of GPS-guided bombs from medium-level against coordinates provided by the FAC; no LF required]. Shows of force and low-level weaponry are not particularly 'core' F-35 business, which is why I believe LF will be a long way down the training priorities list.
Last edited by Easy Street; 1st Apr 2013 at 16:50.