Air Cadets grounded?
I could be mistaken....but I believe reading the post that Cats is merely saying that rather than tack this on to the 'Grounding' thread...he might have one of his own?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hampshire
Age: 69
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Brokenlink. Just browsing on here looking for anything to do with 615 gliding school and noticed you were/are linked to 1924 sqn Air Cadets also. I was with them in the late sixties and early 70's for about 4 years and did my gliding course at Kenley. Are you still involved with 1924?
Kenley and 615
As a 'secure' airfield with a fantastic catchment area for Cadets and excellent transport links for 'thousands' of Cadets that can easily access on a day visit one wonders why this was not a 'priority' restart up for HQAC.
Add on to that the RAF 100 and Kenley's part in the B o B and you have an excellent PR opportunity to 'kick start' the new operation.
I know there are plans for a new building on site but that is not required to get the flying going again. The number of Squadrons that can access this location on a day visit is probably the best in the country and would certainly improve on the current Cadet experience level.
Because of the 'pause' the airfield has been allowed to 'encourage' trespass on to the operational area, and indeed 2FTS are actively seeking to support the erecting of a substantial fence on the peri-track as opposed to where it should be many metres away. As public access to the operational area is probably going to be allowed at non flying times what is the point of reducing the available landing options(undershoot/over-run), reducing the size of available area, and destroying the historic element of a scheduled area.
Looking at the design of the proposed fencing it is not 'airframe or occupant friendly' in the case of impact and therefore fails the safety case for a training location.
JM and his band are not used to such 'tight' locations and therefore not the best people to be in charge of such proposals.
Add on to that the RAF 100 and Kenley's part in the B o B and you have an excellent PR opportunity to 'kick start' the new operation.
I know there are plans for a new building on site but that is not required to get the flying going again. The number of Squadrons that can access this location on a day visit is probably the best in the country and would certainly improve on the current Cadet experience level.
Because of the 'pause' the airfield has been allowed to 'encourage' trespass on to the operational area, and indeed 2FTS are actively seeking to support the erecting of a substantial fence on the peri-track as opposed to where it should be many metres away. As public access to the operational area is probably going to be allowed at non flying times what is the point of reducing the available landing options(undershoot/over-run), reducing the size of available area, and destroying the historic element of a scheduled area.
Looking at the design of the proposed fencing it is not 'airframe or occupant friendly' in the case of impact and therefore fails the safety case for a training location.
JM and his band are not used to such 'tight' locations and therefore not the best people to be in charge of such proposals.
As a 'secure' airfield with a fantastic catchment area for Cadets and excellent transport links for 'thousands' of Cadets that can easily access on a day visit one wonders why this was not a 'priority' restart up for HQAC.
Add on to that the RAF 100 and Kenley's part in the B o B and you have an excellent PR opportunity to 'kick start' the new operation.
I know there are plans for a new building on site but that is not required to get the flying going again. The number of Squadrons that can access this location on a day visit is probably the best in the country and would certainly improve on the current Cadet experience level.
Because of the 'pause' the airfield has been allowed to 'encourage' trespass on to the operational area, and indeed 2FTS are actively seeking to support the erecting of a substantial fence on the peri-track as opposed to where it should be many metres away. As public access to the operational area is probably going to be allowed at non flying times what is the point of reducing the available landing options(undershoot/over-run), reducing the size of available area, and destroying the historic element of a scheduled area.
Looking at the design of the proposed fencing it is not 'airframe or occupant friendly' in the case of impact and therefore fails the safety case for a training location.
JM and his band are not used to such 'tight' locations and therefore not the best people to be in charge of such proposals.
Add on to that the RAF 100 and Kenley's part in the B o B and you have an excellent PR opportunity to 'kick start' the new operation.
I know there are plans for a new building on site but that is not required to get the flying going again. The number of Squadrons that can access this location on a day visit is probably the best in the country and would certainly improve on the current Cadet experience level.
Because of the 'pause' the airfield has been allowed to 'encourage' trespass on to the operational area, and indeed 2FTS are actively seeking to support the erecting of a substantial fence on the peri-track as opposed to where it should be many metres away. As public access to the operational area is probably going to be allowed at non flying times what is the point of reducing the available landing options(undershoot/over-run), reducing the size of available area, and destroying the historic element of a scheduled area.
Looking at the design of the proposed fencing it is not 'airframe or occupant friendly' in the case of impact and therefore fails the safety case for a training location.
JM and his band are not used to such 'tight' locations and therefore not the best people to be in charge of such proposals.
It's an 'Army' thing erecting fencing on the edge of a taxiway; they did it immediately they moved into Abingdon - wait for it - on the INSIDE edge of the taxiway!!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Frangible fencing
Chevvron
..............and at Hullavington as well where they effectively closed off the perimeter track continuity.
However at Kenley I do think it (Frangible fencing) would be a good idea to protect the public from themselves. In a world where people are ringing 999 because KFC have run out of chicken who knows what might happen if they were allowed anywhere near an aircraft movement area or a fast moving 100 yards of cable unsupervised...................
Arc
..............and at Hullavington as well where they effectively closed off the perimeter track continuity.
However at Kenley I do think it (Frangible fencing) would be a good idea to protect the public from themselves. In a world where people are ringing 999 because KFC have run out of chicken who knows what might happen if they were allowed anywhere near an aircraft movement area or a fast moving 100 yards of cable unsupervised...................
Arc
Non frangible fencing Kenley
ARC The problem is that the 'proposed' fence is anything but frangible, and certainly NOT glider (or occupants) friendly in the case of impact.
The other point is the fence could go yards 'away' from the peri-track thereby increasing the usable run off, undershoot, overshoot situation, and also having the added benefit of not despoiling (bore holes, fence, multiple signs, gates, wire netting) on what is already a designated heritage area that is in its original condition as of 1940. As I stated to Historic England this proposal is akin to having a fence at Stonehenge that utilised the stones as part of it !!!!,and would change the open historic character of the location (reduce the operational area) plus entail more damage than the Aug 18th (1940) low level Dornier raid. Apart from a very long term association with the Air Cadets (poss the oldest Gliding School on its original site) we also have it situated on an actual battlefield that held the line in 1940. We may have 'lost the plot' re how to organise Cadet Glider training, but we should not throw away the very history that this location still preserves.
Historic England acknowledge that Kenley is the most complete and original Battle of Britain airfield existing (their words not mine) one would have thought the RAF could at least do their best to preserve that situation.
The other point is the fence could go yards 'away' from the peri-track thereby increasing the usable run off, undershoot, overshoot situation, and also having the added benefit of not despoiling (bore holes, fence, multiple signs, gates, wire netting) on what is already a designated heritage area that is in its original condition as of 1940. As I stated to Historic England this proposal is akin to having a fence at Stonehenge that utilised the stones as part of it !!!!,and would change the open historic character of the location (reduce the operational area) plus entail more damage than the Aug 18th (1940) low level Dornier raid. Apart from a very long term association with the Air Cadets (poss the oldest Gliding School on its original site) we also have it situated on an actual battlefield that held the line in 1940. We may have 'lost the plot' re how to organise Cadet Glider training, but we should not throw away the very history that this location still preserves.
Historic England acknowledge that Kenley is the most complete and original Battle of Britain airfield existing (their words not mine) one would have thought the RAF could at least do their best to preserve that situation.
662's airfield
Not strictly about the grounding, but an article about the future(?) of one of the former Scottish VGS sites:
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news...ure-rm-condor/
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news...ure-rm-condor/
The problem is that the 'proposed' fence is anything but frangible
612 VGS operated at Abingdon for 18 years with an 8 foot high Army security fence (and very solid steel gate) across the runway which reduced 08/26 by a quarter and it was never hit by a glider (and that includes 1st solos). Mind you that can't be said about the sheep fencing on the airfield or squaddies cars, although technically the squaddie hit the glider not the other way around.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Campbeex
I always thought that the Condor airfield was a better glider training field (width, length, hangarage, airspace etc) than Kirknewton (apart from Kirknewton is closer to EDI) for travel. Almost certainly the entire site will close not just the airfield - especially since there are questions about the requirement for RM to protect the northern flank in Norway now (crazy but true)
POBJOY
Like I said - the best place for the fence at Kenley would be aligned with the old AM boundary stones.................
Arc
I always thought that the Condor airfield was a better glider training field (width, length, hangarage, airspace etc) than Kirknewton (apart from Kirknewton is closer to EDI) for travel. Almost certainly the entire site will close not just the airfield - especially since there are questions about the requirement for RM to protect the northern flank in Norway now (crazy but true)
POBJOY
Like I said - the best place for the fence at Kenley would be aligned with the old AM boundary stones.................
Arc
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: LONDON
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
614 Volunteer Gliding Squadron to Relocate to Norfolk
614 Volunteer Gliding Squadron was told on Friday this week that it will be relocating from MOD Wethersfield in Essex to Swanton Morley in Norfolk
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATFQ
Good news and bad news then !!
All they need to do now is re-number it 611VGS, move ACCGS from Syerston and the wheel will have gone full circle !!
Swanton is in the middle of no-where and difficult to get to from any location (roads and rail very badly served. I assume this means that a new hangar will be required at Swanton now - since the old ones have long been knocked down. There is plenty of space there though for a build and the airfield itself is very suited, although I can't help but wonder if the problem will re-occur in a few years time as Robertson barracks is scheduled for closure in 2023.
However in spite of all of that I for one will be glad to see them back.
I await my re-call invitation with great anticipation.
Arc
Good news and bad news then !!
All they need to do now is re-number it 611VGS, move ACCGS from Syerston and the wheel will have gone full circle !!
Swanton is in the middle of no-where and difficult to get to from any location (roads and rail very badly served. I assume this means that a new hangar will be required at Swanton now - since the old ones have long been knocked down. There is plenty of space there though for a build and the airfield itself is very suited, although I can't help but wonder if the problem will re-occur in a few years time as Robertson barracks is scheduled for closure in 2023.
However in spite of all of that I for one will be glad to see them back.
I await my re-call invitation with great anticipation.
Arc
ATFQ,
But Swanton Morley is also due to close and be disposed off.
But Swanton Morley is also due to close and be disposed off.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come Back Swanton
OK; you loose the 'London' catchment (and gain Norwich) but even with the trees Swanton is still a good site,(especially if you compare it with a lot of civvy clubs). When it was No 1 GC only half of the field was used for gliding as it shared the site with the Norfolk and Norwich aero club with no problems. In those days it was regularly sending off 16-20 cadets per week doing 3 solo's each for the badge and A&B cert, plus 611 doing the w-end bit. When you consider how few solo launches are now the 'the norm' and how much dual a cadet does before 1 solo the risk factor is much lower and a few trees on site not really an issue. With a 360 degree launch option the height available and general 'uncluttered' local area makes it superb, and cables do not have to pass over tarmac. Politics aside I would welcome the return of Swanton as its land value for development is low and even if most of the original camp was eventually sold off there would still be plenty of space and buildings for the long term use of the ATC. Should be designated a 2FTSfree zone, and the call sign could be 'Soapy Control !!!' ARC you must be smiling at all this. Famous Mossie base with a very 'rural' pub just off the peri-trac,a great location. Oh by the way for the glass boys; Swanton would be sending solo's off (3) at between 19-24 launches with an average tot training flight time of about 1h 15 min,and many of these had no previous flight training and certainly no useless PTT, not to mention the lack of two way comms.
Last edited by POBJOY; 25th Feb 2018 at 18:46.
Also where Wg Cdr Ken Wallis test flew the replica 'Wallbro' powered aircraft (designed by his father or uncle), in between producing his gyrocopters.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree it's a good location for flying. The Venture was operated there and the Viking too before the move to Watton via Marham.
I am looking forward to the return. As I say, the only issue is remote location which difficult to get to if you don't drive (for cadets and parents).
If someone in MoD had half a forward looking braincell they would be thinking about turning the site into a tri-service cadet training centre when the regular units leave in 2023/2024. It has onsite accom, catering, a range, buildings for lectures, garaging, an airfield, hangars etc, etc.........
.............which means that it'll be sold off in 2024 for peanuts and the VGS relocated yet again I expect. Next stop Sculthorpe anyone ??
Arc
I am looking forward to the return. As I say, the only issue is remote location which difficult to get to if you don't drive (for cadets and parents).
If someone in MoD had half a forward looking braincell they would be thinking about turning the site into a tri-service cadet training centre when the regular units leave in 2023/2024. It has onsite accom, catering, a range, buildings for lectures, garaging, an airfield, hangars etc, etc.........
.............which means that it'll be sold off in 2024 for peanuts and the VGS relocated yet again I expect. Next stop Sculthorpe anyone ??
Arc