RAF Leuchars
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: EU
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
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....!?
"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....!?
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?
FB
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: EU
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ 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.
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.
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!
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!
Originally Posted by 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!
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
Last edited by baffman; 7th Dec 2010 at 21:44.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not that making sense has anything to do with it...
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.
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.
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.
FB
FB
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!
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!
Why have a full station just for QRA?
closing and opening Scampton again!
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.
FB
FB
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
A difficult business case I think.
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.
A difficult business case I think.
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.
FB
Last edited by Finningley Boy; 8th Dec 2010 at 15:18.
"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.
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.
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
I can't see why either has to even be considered
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.