Typhoons begin leaving Leuchars this year
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Doesn't matter what anyone says, the Army always manage to cock up an airfield when they move in. Look at Abingdon; a fence built all round inside the peri track; Catterick, houses built on the edge of the runway.
The RAF decides it no longer requires an airfield. The permanent camp and sheds could be used by an Army unit. A unit is identified and posted in. The airfield, remember, is no longer required by the RAF. In some cases, the Army makes use of the land, in others, it is simply fenced off.
Or are you suggesting that the MOD expend resources on maintaining runways, ATC and fire coverage for airfields that the RAF no longer require?
If a former RAF station were to be returned to flying status, in most cases, there would need to be a complete rebuild irrespective of current use. They have been out of flying use for decades. Examples:
Leconfield
Abingdon
Thorney Island
Waterbeach
Oakington
Swanton Morley
Some never had paved runways in the first place:
Grantham
South Cerney
Then there are those that DO retain the airfield, for RAF use:
Topcliffe
Dishforth
I would also remind you that the RAF is not immune to trashing its own former airfields. Where is the SLAM at RAF Honington? Next to the runway.
Then of course there are those that just get paid off to rack and ruin:
Hemswell
Watton
West Raynham
West Malling
Manby
Would you rather that the first group went the way of the last?
Aah, ATC gliding course at Swanton Morley (during the Cuban Missile Crisis) and Spitalgate became Prince Williaim of Gloucester Barracks, and my TA Reimental HQ and HQ Sponsored Units RCT (as it was then)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Both were well before my time, thanks for the correction.
My point is though that Chevvron was way off the mark in flaming the Army for the subsequent use of former RAF airfields.
I forgot another category. "Currently used RAF Stations left to rot".
Church Fenton
Scampton
My point is though that Chevvron was way off the mark in flaming the Army for the subsequent use of former RAF airfields.
I forgot another category. "Currently used RAF Stations left to rot".
Church Fenton
Scampton
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sometimes north, sometimes south
Posts: 1,809
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
1 Post
"Currently used RAF Stations left to rot".
Church Fenton
Scampton
Church Fenton
Scampton
Yorks UAS should be at Leeds-Bradford. Talk to UGSAS about the value of operating out of a commercial airport.
NS
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Northumberland
Age: 52
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It will be interesting to see who rules with regard to Aircraft operations
when the Army do move in
That is until their building program reduced the length of the shortest run to below the legal minimum, rendering the airfield useless. Thus requiring a type convertion, and a move to Topcliffe.
ginger
Talk to UGSAS about the value of operating out of a commercial airport.
What ARE you talking about?
The RAF decides it no longer requires an airfield. The permanent camp and sheds could be used by an Army unit. A unit is identified and posted in. The airfield, remember, is no longer required by the RAF. In some cases, the Army makes use of the land, in others, it is simply fenced off.
The RAF decides it no longer requires an airfield. The permanent camp and sheds could be used by an Army unit. A unit is identified and posted in. The airfield, remember, is no longer required by the RAF. In some cases, the Army makes use of the land, in others, it is simply fenced off.
The R.A.F. have not quite decided they no longer need Leuchars and Kinloss. They have been told to squeeze up. The airfields, as has been stated, will still be required. I should have thought that the Army would not be allowed to tinker with either if both are to continue as diversions for Lossiemouth.
FB
The reason for the ludicrous decision can be summed up in two words
Danny Alexander
Danny Alexander
I think a more likely reason is that the economy of Moray is highly dependent on its military units. Basing aircraft there demonstrates long-term commitment; army units are much easier to move and would have left question marks over the area, particularly if the Army started having difficulties finding training areas. Meanwhile, Fife can quite easily survive without a military presence.
* - his personal long-term prospects within the party. The long-term prospects of Lib Dems in government are not high on anyone's agenda!
Last edited by Easy Street; 10th Mar 2013 at 23:33.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Finningley Boy and Si -
I highly doubt that the local Army commander (who will be typically a Lt Col, rarely a Col) makes the decision as to where buildings go or don't go. He has an input, sure, but it is not his train set. He only gets to play with it.
The owner is Defence Estates. The Army may well put a request in to DE requesting new blocks in say, Marne Barracks, but it will not be the CO that decides where they go. DE will make the determination of where the blocks go, and the use of the land. It's a little disingenuous to blame the demise of an airfield on the Army. If it is in the wider Defence interest to move a lodger unit (say a VGS) 10 miles down the road, then that decision is made and promulgated. But it's not the CO of Marne Bks making it.
If the RAF need to retain the airfields in Scotland, then that will be one of the considerations in the alterations to the existing buildings to accommodate the new users.
I highly doubt that the local Army commander (who will be typically a Lt Col, rarely a Col) makes the decision as to where buildings go or don't go. He has an input, sure, but it is not his train set. He only gets to play with it.
The owner is Defence Estates. The Army may well put a request in to DE requesting new blocks in say, Marne Barracks, but it will not be the CO that decides where they go. DE will make the determination of where the blocks go, and the use of the land. It's a little disingenuous to blame the demise of an airfield on the Army. If it is in the wider Defence interest to move a lodger unit (say a VGS) 10 miles down the road, then that decision is made and promulgated. But it's not the CO of Marne Bks making it.
If the RAF need to retain the airfields in Scotland, then that will be one of the considerations in the alterations to the existing buildings to accommodate the new users.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Sneaking up on the Runway and leaping out to grab it unawares
Age: 61
Posts: 684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keeping whole airfields open just for a UAS or the Reds is madness.
The usual bean counter B/S; look at short term savings and not the downstream ramifications.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Over here
Age: 62
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sigh
Ming Campbell has no influence anymore - dumped as leader after a brief spell. Voted against the uni fees despite the 3-line whip. Promised to refer the ginger jock for abuse of his cabinet position but didn't.
The RAF was keeping Leuchars until the treasury said no - Danny ******* Alexander is Chief Secretary to the Treasury and the local MP up north - as simple as that. It would be massively cheaper to keep Leuchars as is, put the army into Lossie and Kinloss while keeping the runway at either as a div. Leuchars provides QRA cover for most of the population centres in Scotland, Faslane and a nuke power station as well as providing overlap for Coningsby. It would make as much sense to move it all to Leeming, particularly with the independence vote next year.....
The RAF was keeping Leuchars until the treasury said no - Danny ******* Alexander is Chief Secretary to the Treasury and the local MP up north - as simple as that. It would be massively cheaper to keep Leuchars as is, put the army into Lossie and Kinloss while keeping the runway at either as a div. Leuchars provides QRA cover for most of the population centres in Scotland, Faslane and a nuke power station as well as providing overlap for Coningsby. It would make as much sense to move it all to Leeming, particularly with the independence vote next year.....
