JSF for Marham?
Suspicion breeds confidence
Neither did Yeovilton, but we had all the Shars there. I don't see many Backfires coming in over the North Sea at the moment.
Think HAS and SDB and you will see how useful they are.
Think HAS and SDB and you will see how useful they are.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think of a soft tin hangar with a dozen or more F-35s inside and a single bomb impacting said hangar or maybe a hijacked aircraft hitting hangar, whole squadron of very costly F-35s gone! If in a HAS site assume it would take one bomb per HAS, it would be far harder to destroy as many F-35s if they were in Hardened Shelters. Would assume when sealed in a HAS the jets would also be more safe from a small terrorist squad who if breaking into a single HAS could destroy maybe one or two aircraft, if accessing a hangar of a dozen or so aircraft they could achieve far more!
Putting the most costly warplane we have ever operated in anything other than a Hardened Aircraft Shelter would be insane, so maybe it could happen here in the UK
Putting the most costly warplane we have ever operated in anything other than a Hardened Aircraft Shelter would be insane, so maybe it could happen here in the UK
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Peurile question:
Can you walk up the side of a HAS or is it a little too steep?
More seriously I think that we should base the aeroplanes in HAS sites because some people have submarine launched cruise missiles and we gave away our best way of finding them.
I don't see a manned air threat to the UK being particularly likely to be honest though.
Can you walk up the side of a HAS or is it a little too steep?
More seriously I think that we should base the aeroplanes in HAS sites because some people have submarine launched cruise missiles and we gave away our best way of finding them.
I don't see a manned air threat to the UK being particularly likely to be honest though.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I would have thought HAS's are sooooo Cold War. Any signs of things kicking off and assets would be dispersed, a bit like Northolt just now. We are expeditionary arn't we? Take somewhere like Lossie; Kinloss is still in company hands, a flight sent off to Aberdeen, another to Inverness, maybe a few to Wick or even Stornoway. All these places have space and fuel. Get 202 to shuttle a handfull of lineys to each place whilst the rest road it up. I bet those contigency plans have been worked up and maybe even had a quiet word in the various airports ears. You might as well write 'bomb here' on the roof of each HAS, all it does is make targeting easier.
Anyway, it'll be SLCM's, not manned. Anything coming around Nordkap will be badly mauled by the Noggy's and whatever is in Iceland, enough warning for NATO to launch North to meet them. It'll be a one way trip for the subs too; once they fire and give away their position the Nimrods ....... will ...... er .....
Anyway, it'll be SLCM's, not manned. Anything coming around Nordkap will be badly mauled by the Noggy's and whatever is in Iceland, enough warning for NATO to launch North to meet them. It'll be a one way trip for the subs too; once they fire and give away their position the Nimrods ....... will ...... er .....
Orca:
Can you walk up the side of a HAS or is it a little too steep?
Yep, you throw a rope over and two fool hardy guys (one from each end) walk your way up, hoping your mate on the other side does not let go
. Getting down is much harder heh,heh
Can you walk up the side of a HAS or is it a little too steep?
Yep, you throw a rope over and two fool hardy guys (one from each end) walk your way up, hoping your mate on the other side does not let go
. Getting down is much harder heh,heh
The idea of dispersing assets across the country is fine providing you have the support to make it work. A weapon loading team can move from HAS to HAS, so can spares and fuel bowsers etc. At a time when we have to swop bits from airframe to airframe to keep them in the air and when LEAN has got rid of 2nd line sqn support (e.g extra load teams) I very much doubt that we could split up our assets that far and wide.
Guest
Posts: n/a
dc - I agree up to a point. If we were to try and sustain ops then we might be challenged but as a simply survival scramble then it could work (to quote Robert Shaw - 'don't just stand there, get one up!') It might be worth looking at a version of the Swedish model even. Now, I'm not saying block off the A96 (allthough a C-130 did operate off the A9 last year during the latest Bond film) but something along those lines?
Mr former President, umm Ronnie I mean 
I agree with you with the Lakenheath rumor of JR and his clan being jointness between them and us being there are unsubstantiated as the only place would be the 'Hall as JR Ewings are always there and have been for damn near a few decades. And I also agree that if the other side of Brandon does get the 35 then with the grace of god, and the rest, it would mean Lockheed Martin and the sub contractors being centralised.
Speaking of which when the popular Rhino both reccie and fighter were stationed at Alconbury and Bentwaters through the 70s and early 80s was there much mutual support between the USAFE units and the RAF in terms of parts with the exception of the engines of course!
In that area of the Broads, West Raynham was the home of the Kestrel menage a trois of the unit in the early 60s so why not re open that, dust away the cobwebs,
sort the runway out, re build hangars et voila history will be repeated put up the flags of USA, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Turkey, Italy, Canada outside main hq building so Bob's your uncle and Roberta is your aunt!
In all seriousness, it be even better for the local economy if the basing plan goes ahead. Might even create more jobs stretching across more than one county locally down to Beds.
I think a HAS still has a place in this troubled world of ours, though from what I can see across the pond, the only thing close to that is the alert shelters dotted around various airports et bases, but then its easier to scatter things around.
Can't remember which country or countries in NATO it was but I do recall the HAS layout meant if one or a group got hit by a round, warhead etc then the others around wouldnt get damaged let alone feel the fallout (no I dont mean tactical nukes)
Plus is there enough room space inside the hangars to house a squadron and not keeping your eggs all in one basket comes to mind.
Cheers
I agree with you with the Lakenheath rumor of JR and his clan being jointness between them and us being there are unsubstantiated as the only place would be the 'Hall as JR Ewings are always there and have been for damn near a few decades. And I also agree that if the other side of Brandon does get the 35 then with the grace of god, and the rest, it would mean Lockheed Martin and the sub contractors being centralised.
Speaking of which when the popular Rhino both reccie and fighter were stationed at Alconbury and Bentwaters through the 70s and early 80s was there much mutual support between the USAFE units and the RAF in terms of parts with the exception of the engines of course!
In that area of the Broads, West Raynham was the home of the Kestrel menage a trois of the unit in the early 60s
so why not re open that, dust away the cobwebs, sort the runway out, re build hangars et voila history will be repeated put up the flags of USA, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Turkey, Italy, Canada outside main hq building so Bob's your uncle and Roberta is your aunt!In all seriousness, it be even better for the local economy if the basing plan goes ahead. Might even create more jobs stretching across more than one county locally down to Beds.
I think a HAS still has a place in this troubled world of ours, though from what I can see across the pond, the only thing close to that is the alert shelters dotted around various airports et bases, but then its easier to scatter things around.
Can't remember which country or countries in NATO it was but I do recall the HAS layout meant if one or a group got hit by a round, warhead etc then the others around wouldnt get damaged let alone feel the fallout (no I dont mean tactical nukes)
Plus is there enough room space inside the hangars to house a squadron and not keeping your eggs all in one basket comes to mind.
Cheers
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Over the hill (and far away)
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
digin
There might be a lot of HASs at Newquay, but a quick look at the aerodrome licence map on the CAA web site will show that all but two of them are now owned by Newquay Cornwall Airport (a wholly owned subsidiary of Cornwall County Council). I guess MoD could force compulsory purchase, but they might not be in the same condition as when the sale was made and could need a bit of TLC to make them useable (the HASs that is, not the MoD).
Chopper
I spent a few months in OMQ at West Raynahm when my sqn moved to Marham from LBH (1992); unless it has moved, it certainly wasn't in or near the Norfolk Broads, which are mainly to the east of Mustard City. Even then the runways were a bit shabby, and I don't expect years of neglect will have improved the situation. A lot of work would be needed to bring them up to a useable standard (nearby Sculthorpe might be a better proposition).
Mister B
There might be a lot of HASs at Newquay, but a quick look at the aerodrome licence map on the CAA web site will show that all but two of them are now owned by Newquay Cornwall Airport (a wholly owned subsidiary of Cornwall County Council). I guess MoD could force compulsory purchase, but they might not be in the same condition as when the sale was made and could need a bit of TLC to make them useable (the HASs that is, not the MoD).
Chopper
I spent a few months in OMQ at West Raynahm when my sqn moved to Marham from LBH (1992); unless it has moved, it certainly wasn't in or near the Norfolk Broads, which are mainly to the east of Mustard City. Even then the runways were a bit shabby, and I don't expect years of neglect will have improved the situation. A lot of work would be needed to bring them up to a useable standard (nearby Sculthorpe might be a better proposition).
Mister B
T'was a little tongue-in-cheek dig at the decision to give a once proud station to a County Council with little idea of how to run a coffee-shop, let alone an airport.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't see many HAS's at NAS Oceana or NAS Mirimar. Both stations have more aircraft than all of the RAF FJ combined. Their assumption is that the aircraft will be embarked not ashore...I hope this is the same assumption we are making.
Yeovilton has an empty South side....plenty of room for the NSW and the locals are friendly..
Yeovilton has an empty South side....plenty of room for the NSW and the locals are friendly..
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Americans don't ever seem to have bothered with Hardened Shelters in their own nation feeling 100% totally safe, but USAFE and some PACAF bases have them. If we didn't have any bases with HAS sites it might not be worth the cost of building them BUT as they have already been built and paid for they might aswell be put to use. Also the fact we have such a small air force with such small numbers of costly aircraft its even more important to protect what we have.
I accept some F-35s will deployed on a carrier, about 12 or so at a time it seems, the ones in the UK might aswell spend their time in a HAS. Also long term the possible plan seems to be to replace Typhoon with F-35A, these should certainly be housed in HAS sites simply as we will have so few of them and they are so costly.
I can understand fairly cheap Jaguars and Harriers spending their time in hangers, they were fairly cheap aircraft and would most likely have been deployed during a war situation. But now its only going to be Typhoon and F-35 both are very costly aircraft and should be protected. Even Tornado GR4 and Tornado F-3 aircraft operate almost entirely from HAS sites. Was one of the reasons Coningsby was retained for Typhoon rather than Coltishall that it had Hardened Shelters while Coltishall did not? I was sad to see my local base close at Coltishall but putting all those Typhoons into 4 soft hangers and closing a base with HAS sites would have been insane, so on that reason alone it was the right one.
I accept some F-35s will deployed on a carrier, about 12 or so at a time it seems, the ones in the UK might aswell spend their time in a HAS. Also long term the possible plan seems to be to replace Typhoon with F-35A, these should certainly be housed in HAS sites simply as we will have so few of them and they are so costly.
I can understand fairly cheap Jaguars and Harriers spending their time in hangers, they were fairly cheap aircraft and would most likely have been deployed during a war situation. But now its only going to be Typhoon and F-35 both are very costly aircraft and should be protected. Even Tornado GR4 and Tornado F-3 aircraft operate almost entirely from HAS sites. Was one of the reasons Coningsby was retained for Typhoon rather than Coltishall that it had Hardened Shelters while Coltishall did not? I was sad to see my local base close at Coltishall but putting all those Typhoons into 4 soft hangers and closing a base with HAS sites would have been insane, so on that reason alone it was the right one.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Devon
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did hear that St Mawgan was in the running to become the second JSF base originally untill problems occurred between Cornwall CC and the MOD which eventually saw the closure of St Mawgan.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: troon
Age: 61
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If This is true then maybe F35B going to yeovil wold make sense...
UK slashes F-35B numbers but might look to split buy with F-35As
UK slashes F-35B numbers but might look to split buy with F-35As
Originally Posted by althenick
If This is true then maybe F35B going to yeovil wold make sense...
Being a two headed, four eared Norfolk Spotter I thought I'd drop in a word or two.....
We have a lot of HAS, and not many jets. Surely we could play a variation of the shell game, amd spread the jets around across a lot of HAS, making the targeting a bit difficult?
West Raynham's runway is gradually becoming hardcore for various projects across our noble county, so opening that base up again would cause probems.
Honington is (allegedly) getting the VGS from Watton at some stage, so at least their HAS's might get used .....
Just off to wash out the smock and get a fresh ear of corn to chew.
Dew yew keep a troshing, boy.....
We have a lot of HAS, and not many jets. Surely we could play a variation of the shell game, amd spread the jets around across a lot of HAS, making the targeting a bit difficult?
West Raynham's runway is gradually becoming hardcore for various projects across our noble county, so opening that base up again would cause probems.
Honington is (allegedly) getting the VGS from Watton at some stage, so at least their HAS's might get used .....
Just off to wash out the smock and get a fresh ear of corn to chew.
Dew yew keep a troshing, boy.....
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Over the hill (and far away)
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
footster
When did you hear that rumour about problems between CCC and MoD being instrumental in St Mawgan's closure?
I think the intent to capitalise MoD real estate that was little used was in the pipeline for some time. MoD percieved no further viable use for St Mawgan, probably in the early 2000s or earlier; I attended a meeting at DfT in late 2005 to discuss the purchase of SM by CCC with a view to converting to a CAA licensed aerodrome. At the meeting were represntatives from CCC, CAA, MoD and DfT, plus contractors who would initiate the changeover process on behalf of CCC.
Skipping all the intervening development meetings and work between that 2005 meeting and eventual issue of the CAA Licence in December 2008, the intention was always to facilitate a seamless transition from military to civil use (with a little bit of overlap built in to allow some military ops to continue once the aerodrome was civilianised). So when the aerodrome part of SM ceased to be an entity and "closed", it became Newquay Cornwall Airport. There was small gap after the military left and the licence was issued, but that was unplanned and brought about by "circumstances" (mainly the prolonged wet Autumn and Winter, which delayed infrastruture work, and some contractual stuff with equipment suppliers/installers).
I never heard during our numerous site visits and development meetings any mention of JSF from the RAF guys.
But then this is a rumour network, so I too might have got it all wrong
Mister B
digin
I don't see a problem, Westland Yeovil has about 1300 metres of useable grass runway; it can't be any more challenging than taking off from a tiny moving runway that's bobbing up and down... (and it's in the poor part of town - although everything is relative as far as Yeovil Town is concerned)
When did you hear that rumour about problems between CCC and MoD being instrumental in St Mawgan's closure?
I think the intent to capitalise MoD real estate that was little used was in the pipeline for some time. MoD percieved no further viable use for St Mawgan, probably in the early 2000s or earlier; I attended a meeting at DfT in late 2005 to discuss the purchase of SM by CCC with a view to converting to a CAA licensed aerodrome. At the meeting were represntatives from CCC, CAA, MoD and DfT, plus contractors who would initiate the changeover process on behalf of CCC.
Skipping all the intervening development meetings and work between that 2005 meeting and eventual issue of the CAA Licence in December 2008, the intention was always to facilitate a seamless transition from military to civil use (with a little bit of overlap built in to allow some military ops to continue once the aerodrome was civilianised). So when the aerodrome part of SM ceased to be an entity and "closed", it became Newquay Cornwall Airport. There was small gap after the military left and the licence was issued, but that was unplanned and brought about by "circumstances" (mainly the prolonged wet Autumn and Winter, which delayed infrastruture work, and some contractual stuff with equipment suppliers/installers).
I never heard during our numerous site visits and development meetings any mention of JSF from the RAF guys.
But then this is a rumour network, so I too might have got it all wrong
Mister B
digin
I don't see a problem, Westland Yeovil has about 1300 metres of useable grass runway; it can't be any more challenging than taking off from a tiny moving runway that's bobbing up and down... (and it's in the poor part of town - although everything is relative as far as Yeovil Town is concerned)