BBC: 15 military airfields have been earmarked for closure over the next six years.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Undoubtedly there will have been clauses in the purchase/requisition but these are not necessarily open ended. My last unit deeds allowed for the original purchaser to buy back if it closed within 21 years. It closed before the 21 years and I made a point of briefing the prior owner.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of all those on the list only Mildenhall would have any real immediate aviation use in a conflict. The others are largely not in that category. Being realistic if it was a national crisis of WW2 proportions airfields would not be able to be built quickly - the Govt would simply requisition every civil airport/airfield it wanted..........
It's no co-incidence that many of those closing airfield sites (Halton/Abingdon/Wethersfield/Chivenor) were previously very active VGS sites which have conveniently closed as a result of the 'pause' in VGS Operations and the subsequent VGS reorganisation.
Do I smell a rat ? - you can bet that those sites will be sold off to developers who will subsequently make a small fortune. The price of a house in all those areas is astronomical. Building a few hundred more on those sites won't help the housing lists any, only the developers..........and like many on here I dislike seeing capabilities, flexibility and history destroyed because some 'here today, gone tomorrow' politician sees votes and headlines in it for them.
Out of interest how many airfields do we have on 'Care and Maintenance' nowadays ?? - I make it a big fat zero...............
Arc
It's no co-incidence that many of those closing airfield sites (Halton/Abingdon/Wethersfield/Chivenor) were previously very active VGS sites which have conveniently closed as a result of the 'pause' in VGS Operations and the subsequent VGS reorganisation.
Do I smell a rat ? - you can bet that those sites will be sold off to developers who will subsequently make a small fortune. The price of a house in all those areas is astronomical. Building a few hundred more on those sites won't help the housing lists any, only the developers..........and like many on here I dislike seeing capabilities, flexibility and history destroyed because some 'here today, gone tomorrow' politician sees votes and headlines in it for them.
Out of interest how many airfields do we have on 'Care and Maintenance' nowadays ?? - I make it a big fat zero...............
Arc
As I understand it the Jury is yet to report on Linton - if MFTS stays the same number of Texans/Hawks then it will be Valley only. If extra Texans and Hawks are a realistic prospect then Valley will be reaching capacity on movement numbers so Linton might remain - I would also expect the Reds to possibly move to there or Leeming as Scampton is falling to bits!
If Linton closed, the ability of the RAF to respond to any need for a large increase in the number of its pilots would be severely compromised.
But ever since the creeping cancer of contractorisation has been inflicted on the UK Armed Services, there are no longer sufficient QFIs 'in the system', or spare aircraft available to meet a surge.
There used to be a number of QFIs at UASs who could be used in an emergency. I was one of those and was recalled to operations for GW1, as was my co-pilot who had been an EFTS QFI. All gone now, a few civvies are all that's left.
MFTS (which I totally despise and hope will eventually be $hitcanned) is only required to meet some beancounters' target throughput, with no redundancy or surge capability. No doubt BV will leap to the defence of Valley and the Hawk T2
, but if there's ever another large increase in the need for FJ pilots (as there was in around 1972/3...and again for Tornado), what would be the outcome?
UAS and BFTS tours were once available as a break from the pressures of front-line flying. Not now though - and I can't see many RAF pilots volunteering to fly the Ford Prefect on an island whose weather factor is far from ideal for basic flying training.
Squaddified aerodromes such as Abingdon, Brawdy and Chivenor should only have been released from RAF use with an overriding requirement to maintain the runways and ATC facilities on a care-and-maintenance basis.
Sometimes I wonder whether some VSOs even know which RAF airfields are still open. In 2001 I was asked to fly a Gp Capt and a Wg Cdr to Newcastle in a PA-28. "Can't we land at Acklington or Ouston?", one of them asked....
But ever since the creeping cancer of contractorisation has been inflicted on the UK Armed Services, there are no longer sufficient QFIs 'in the system', or spare aircraft available to meet a surge.
There used to be a number of QFIs at UASs who could be used in an emergency. I was one of those and was recalled to operations for GW1, as was my co-pilot who had been an EFTS QFI. All gone now, a few civvies are all that's left.
MFTS (which I totally despise and hope will eventually be $hitcanned) is only required to meet some beancounters' target throughput, with no redundancy or surge capability. No doubt BV will leap to the defence of Valley and the Hawk T2
, but if there's ever another large increase in the need for FJ pilots (as there was in around 1972/3...and again for Tornado), what would be the outcome?UAS and BFTS tours were once available as a break from the pressures of front-line flying. Not now though - and I can't see many RAF pilots volunteering to fly the Ford Prefect on an island whose weather factor is far from ideal for basic flying training.
Squaddified aerodromes such as Abingdon, Brawdy and Chivenor should only have been released from RAF use with an overriding requirement to maintain the runways and ATC facilities on a care-and-maintenance basis.
Sometimes I wonder whether some VSOs even know which RAF airfields are still open. In 2001 I was asked to fly a Gp Capt and a Wg Cdr to Newcastle in a PA-28. "Can't we land at Acklington or Ouston?", one of them asked....
Built 4 new hangars at Bovingdon in '67(actually re-clad the existing ones). 'Oh dear that airfield is costing too much; must close it' said the beanconters.
Closed it late'68.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: England
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airfield Closures.
We can’t afford to keep an estate in its current guise. Places like Waddington are falling apart so, the plan to shrink the estate and keep the money saved within the defence estates budget makes perfect sense.
Can’t help but think it’s a false economy, clearly at the behest of an organisation that knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
Operationally the risk being built into the system is huge. The eggs/basket argument is well covered elsewhere so I won’t repeat it here. But that aside, once we’ve pulled out of areas no doubt some senior types in recruiting and media/comms will complain that large swathes of the country have no exposure or awareness of the RAF - not helped by dwindling numbers of air shows - whilst recruiting is difficult from the masses. Then there’s FAM and the potential options to rent nearby rather than buy/live on base. How affordable do you think property will be around these ‘superbases’ with everyone chasing the same property? Don’t be surprised if people fight postings to certain locations because property is unaffordable and they don’t want to live on base in a shed.
There are so many factors beyond the bottom line on a spreadsheet that need to be considered when coming up with an effective operational basing strategy. And I bet none of them have been considered as more important than a spreadsheet. They’d rather we were cheap than effective.
Last edited by Melchett01; 22nd Apr 2018 at 17:01.
Further, these 1930s buildings were built to last. Whenever we build some nasty glass carbuncle they are lucky if they last 25 years. The studes absolutely hate Daedalus Officers’ Mess at Crantanamo and all can’t wait to move into York House. Some label DOM as the ‘Happy Eater’ and I can see why.
So sack DIO and C-A, get some local contractors into Waddington and see the difference it makes. If it looks half as good as the ex-RAF Bicester site was today people would be happy
Linton may yet get a stay of execution. There was a rumour circulating that the Typhoon "ramp up" (ie retention of single seat Tranche 1 jets) is too much to squeeze into CGY/LOS with the other units; one option was to move the Reds and 100 to LoO, freeing up Leeming for a couple of Typhoon squadrons - would make far too much sense however.......
Once the tucs go and the plan to put all the eggs into the Valley basket is implemented then they will realise the folly of that plan. I personally don't think Valley can cope with the Hawks and Texans.
I like the idea of the Reds coming to Linton as mentioned by Evalu8ter, keeping the Texans here and retaining Topcliffe as the training RLG. Good clear airspace all round and a short hop to Class A for when the training requires it, or some great LL out to the East and West for variety. Relatively new tower cost a lot of money but therein lies the problem; on paper Linton looks expensive and flags up to the bean-counters as too costly to justify it.
Time will tell.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: England
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keeping money within the DE budget is a huge assumption. If we’re lucky it will stay somewhere in Defence!
Can’t help but think it’s a false economy, clearly at the behest of an organisation that knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
Operationally the risk being built into the system is huge. The eggs/basket argument is well covered elsewhere so I won’t repeat it here. But that aside, once we’ve pulled out of areas no doubt some senior types in recruiting and media/comms will complain that large swathes of the country have no exposure or awareness of the RAF - not helped by dwindling numbers of air shows - whilst recruiting is difficult from the masses. Then there’s FAM and the potential options to rent nearby rather than buy/live on base. How affordable do you think property will be around these ‘superbases’ with everyone chasing the same property? Don’t be surprised if people fight postings to certain locations because property is unaffordable and they don’t want to live on base in a shed.
There are so many factors beyond the bottom line on a spreadsheet that need to be considered when coming up with an effective operational basing strategy. And I bet none of them have been considered as more important than a spreadsheet. They’d rather we were cheap than effective.
Can’t help but think it’s a false economy, clearly at the behest of an organisation that knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
Operationally the risk being built into the system is huge. The eggs/basket argument is well covered elsewhere so I won’t repeat it here. But that aside, once we’ve pulled out of areas no doubt some senior types in recruiting and media/comms will complain that large swathes of the country have no exposure or awareness of the RAF - not helped by dwindling numbers of air shows - whilst recruiting is difficult from the masses. Then there’s FAM and the potential options to rent nearby rather than buy/live on base. How affordable do you think property will be around these ‘superbases’ with everyone chasing the same property? Don’t be surprised if people fight postings to certain locations because property is unaffordable and they don’t want to live on base in a shed.
There are so many factors beyond the bottom line on a spreadsheet that need to be considered when coming up with an effective operational basing strategy. And I bet none of them have been considered as more important than a spreadsheet. They’d rather we were cheap than effective.
Folks saying that Valley won't cope with Hawks and Texans don't seem to remember a matter of 10-12 years ago with "target 160" and the huge output of Hawk hours there. I'm pretty sure it'll be fine.
Linton's wonderful and here's hoping it gets a stay of execution, but it won't be because Valley can't handle 10 Texans on top of a small handful of Hawks.
If they decide to keep BFT there they can give me a call...!
Linton's wonderful and here's hoping it gets a stay of execution, but it won't be because Valley can't handle 10 Texans on top of a small handful of Hawks.
If they decide to keep BFT there they can give me a call...!