Scampton And Linton-on-Ouse Closure
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,755
Received 2,740 Likes
on
1,166 Posts
I find it rather tragic that even before the Station is floggged off, for 1000 a month you too can be the " Station Commander" in home at least.
https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property...-67642868.html
https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property...-67642868.html
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was there; to be fair, the speed of the offload was driven by how quickly they could get the bins out of the hold of the aircraft, that was done by the RAF lads of the Air Movements Squadron; the SAMO was keen to see for TTW planning just how quickly untrained people could do the job as he was being pressured to give up guys to 18 Sqn.
Thankfully this post is anonymous (ish) and I cannot be identified as I would deny I said this to any RAF Regt types 
The RAFR may seem like a waste of time, money & resources, however they do provide 3 niche capabilities that the Army are just not in the same league.
JTACs - having worked with literally hundreds over the last 15 yrs or so from various nations and cap badges, nobody is as professional or competent as the RAFR. This includes SF JTACs and USAF TACPs. Nobody comes close!
CBRN - As with JTACs the world leaders in CBRN are the boys from Honington. The Army just dont get it and I believe dont even train their personnel outside of Phase 1 training with any regularity.
Air aware - The Army do not understand Air or aviation in any meaningful capacity or even how important it is to Land. A case in point. Whilst in Kenya on exercise we ended up very narrowly missing a DH3 UAV as the artillery ‘experts’ decided that as they had gun lines (inactive for a week) and they operated them that they owned the airspace over the entire area.
This was despite us flying down the air corridor separating 2 ranges. The exact reply from the battery commander “we own the air, you arent allowed in to the range when guns are present”. When asked where in the range documents this was written down, he asked what range documents?
The Army have absolutely no concept of aviation or why it matters to them on the ground.... This attitude has stood true in my entire military career.
The RAFR are (and I hate to admit this) an essential capability for Air as they just ‘get it’ when it comes to aviation.
The RAFR may seem like a waste of time, money & resources, however they do provide 3 niche capabilities that the Army are just not in the same league.
JTACs - having worked with literally hundreds over the last 15 yrs or so from various nations and cap badges, nobody is as professional or competent as the RAFR. This includes SF JTACs and USAF TACPs. Nobody comes close!
CBRN - As with JTACs the world leaders in CBRN are the boys from Honington. The Army just dont get it and I believe dont even train their personnel outside of Phase 1 training with any regularity.
Air aware - The Army do not understand Air or aviation in any meaningful capacity or even how important it is to Land. A case in point. Whilst in Kenya on exercise we ended up very narrowly missing a DH3 UAV as the artillery ‘experts’ decided that as they had gun lines (inactive for a week) and they operated them that they owned the airspace over the entire area.
This was despite us flying down the air corridor separating 2 ranges. The exact reply from the battery commander “we own the air, you arent allowed in to the range when guns are present”. When asked where in the range documents this was written down, he asked what range documents?
The Army have absolutely no concept of aviation or why it matters to them on the ground.... This attitude has stood true in my entire military career.
The RAFR are (and I hate to admit this) an essential capability for Air as they just ‘get it’ when it comes to aviation.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you for your considered response and for so eloquently arguing FOR my point.... I spent 5.5 yrs in NI with the SH force so I speak with some authority.
"if you were that good why were you not protecting the many LZ'S in NI?" A few points on this one.
SH working on the battle field, is by the very nature of how the Army operates, not using "LZ'S" that are in fixed locations. This is based on infantry tactics 101; do not become predictable, make yourself a small target, do not stay in the same place for too long etc. etc. By all means the RAF 'could' collect you from fixed "LZ'S" but after a couple of IEDs, IDF, sniper shots and several dozen soldiers being killed, the logic of this would probably be questioned.
The next point. The RAF Regt role is NOT to secure "LZ'S" but to secure airheads and APOE/D based on TESSERAL criteria, if this means nothing to you then you have just scuttled your argument as to why the Army should replace the RAF and just "get the job done."
RAF SH crews are more than able to counter a SMARMS threat without the RAF Regt becoming involved. This is out of necessity as doctrinally SH support the Army on the battlefield, working close to or beyond the Front Line. MANPADS, IDF and TBMs on the other hand are somewhat more bothersome and require specialised knowledge and expertise. With the best will in the world, an Army unit on a 6 month roulemont just do not have the time, expertise or will to focus on these subjects. The RAFR on the other hand are the SMEs on each of these subjects and know the subjects inside-out. Even the Int Corps are largely clueless on the air threat.
Regarding XMG, there was not enough space for the NIBAT1 Bn never mind extra bed spaces being taken by RAFR. Incidentally, as there were no aircraft based within the SF bases, there would be very little for RAFR personnel to do. They did however visit each of the SF bases every year or so to make sure they were still suitable to use. I flew several of them in my time there. Infantry patrol outside their own patrol base, RAFR patrol outside a main airfield. It's all contained in doctrine and decided by the numerous 4* in charge of the individual Services.
"Sitting on your **** at Aldergrove ( i didn't see you at BBK either ) thinking you were a cut above didn't get the job done." 3 Sqn used to patrol around Aldergrove on a regular basis.... Just to be clear, this was their role as agreed by HQNI and Air. Again, this was all written down and formalised in doctrine by the heads of each Service. Nothing to do with thinking they were a "cut above." Just different roles. Remember, everyone chose a trade, some chose the RAF, other's the Army; all life choices...
"Weather Bad .... were not coming .... AAC... we'll get you." The MOD website does not appear to have a copy of the Board of Inquiry regarding a AAC helicopter that crashed due to flying with weather out of limits and trying to "get the job done". Six people died in that crash, all 100% preventable. This example is so extreme that it is now used as a 'how not to do it' case study on the Tri-service Flight Authorisers Course.
This is not the first time the AAC have pushed the limits and suffered as a result. I would recommend that you go through some of the BOI archives and read them. Truly harrowing reading. As an aside, I am not an infanteer, therefore I will not preach about fire and manoeuvre or section attack drills as it would be ill informed and make me look slightly silly.
Heavy weapons shoot on a Wessex ( No CAS, a couple of bullet holes) coming into XMG .... we didn't see the RAF for a week . Whilst I am not sure of the exact reasons for the Wessex disappearing for a week, I am sure this is not a decision that the Sqn Cdr made on his own. HQNI and the RUC/PSNI would have all had a vote in what happened after the event.
As an aside, the incident you are talking about, I am about 99% sure it was an attempted shoot down with an SA-7 MANPAD... Slightly more worrying than a few bullet holes, as you describe. The threat was so great that all aircraft in NI were required to fly with countermeasures hence forth. This again demonstrates why the Army just don't get Air, the threat or how this relates to Land and the big picture. The Army are very good at the tactical picture, not so much at the Operational or Strategic level. Normally the bigger picture is what will win the war, not every individual battle in isolation. Sometimes you have to choose your battles; those that you can win.
"RAF thinking to much ...Army get the job done." I guess this depends on your definition of getting the job done. I can think of 3 examples of the Army getting the job done in my time in NI.
A Lynx crew deciding to solve a problem for the NIBAT1 Bn of removing a Tricolour from R13 after is was dismantled, whilst in the hover..... The aircraft managed to limp back the BBK after it's rotor strike on the flag pole.
A Lynx crew deciding that they didn't need to check the tasking for the day, which would have alerted them to the fact of the USL sitting by the HLS at Forkhill. Fast forward a few hours and a rather sporty approach resulting in a tail rotor strike on the blatantly obvious 8'x4'x9' USL. All because they wanted to get their tasking completed faster.
Another Lynx crash outside XMG after trying to be punchy to get the job done. 6 injured and another airframe written off.
A great example of why the Army just don't get aviation is the frequent Watchkeeper crashes. This is what happens when you employ poorly trained, overworked and unselected personnel to carry out aviation duties, accidents happen. If the Army can't invest time, money, training, doctrine and resources into a £1Bn aircraft programme then frankly protecting airfields will be WAY down the list of priorities....
Frustration at a tactical pause is understandable, but rarely is rushing in the answer in the long-term. To quote Field Marshal Rommel, "“Time spent in reconnaissance is seldom wasted.”
Just to be clear - I will never admit to any Rockape that I think they are a great capability and worth keeping. I will deny this post if I am found out
"if you were that good why were you not protecting the many LZ'S in NI?" A few points on this one.
SH working on the battle field, is by the very nature of how the Army operates, not using "LZ'S" that are in fixed locations. This is based on infantry tactics 101; do not become predictable, make yourself a small target, do not stay in the same place for too long etc. etc. By all means the RAF 'could' collect you from fixed "LZ'S" but after a couple of IEDs, IDF, sniper shots and several dozen soldiers being killed, the logic of this would probably be questioned.
The next point. The RAF Regt role is NOT to secure "LZ'S" but to secure airheads and APOE/D based on TESSERAL criteria, if this means nothing to you then you have just scuttled your argument as to why the Army should replace the RAF and just "get the job done."
RAF SH crews are more than able to counter a SMARMS threat without the RAF Regt becoming involved. This is out of necessity as doctrinally SH support the Army on the battlefield, working close to or beyond the Front Line. MANPADS, IDF and TBMs on the other hand are somewhat more bothersome and require specialised knowledge and expertise. With the best will in the world, an Army unit on a 6 month roulemont just do not have the time, expertise or will to focus on these subjects. The RAFR on the other hand are the SMEs on each of these subjects and know the subjects inside-out. Even the Int Corps are largely clueless on the air threat.
Regarding XMG, there was not enough space for the NIBAT1 Bn never mind extra bed spaces being taken by RAFR. Incidentally, as there were no aircraft based within the SF bases, there would be very little for RAFR personnel to do. They did however visit each of the SF bases every year or so to make sure they were still suitable to use. I flew several of them in my time there. Infantry patrol outside their own patrol base, RAFR patrol outside a main airfield. It's all contained in doctrine and decided by the numerous 4* in charge of the individual Services.
"Sitting on your **** at Aldergrove ( i didn't see you at BBK either ) thinking you were a cut above didn't get the job done." 3 Sqn used to patrol around Aldergrove on a regular basis.... Just to be clear, this was their role as agreed by HQNI and Air. Again, this was all written down and formalised in doctrine by the heads of each Service. Nothing to do with thinking they were a "cut above." Just different roles. Remember, everyone chose a trade, some chose the RAF, other's the Army; all life choices...
"Weather Bad .... were not coming .... AAC... we'll get you." The MOD website does not appear to have a copy of the Board of Inquiry regarding a AAC helicopter that crashed due to flying with weather out of limits and trying to "get the job done". Six people died in that crash, all 100% preventable. This example is so extreme that it is now used as a 'how not to do it' case study on the Tri-service Flight Authorisers Course.
This is not the first time the AAC have pushed the limits and suffered as a result. I would recommend that you go through some of the BOI archives and read them. Truly harrowing reading. As an aside, I am not an infanteer, therefore I will not preach about fire and manoeuvre or section attack drills as it would be ill informed and make me look slightly silly.
Heavy weapons shoot on a Wessex ( No CAS, a couple of bullet holes) coming into XMG .... we didn't see the RAF for a week . Whilst I am not sure of the exact reasons for the Wessex disappearing for a week, I am sure this is not a decision that the Sqn Cdr made on his own. HQNI and the RUC/PSNI would have all had a vote in what happened after the event.
As an aside, the incident you are talking about, I am about 99% sure it was an attempted shoot down with an SA-7 MANPAD... Slightly more worrying than a few bullet holes, as you describe. The threat was so great that all aircraft in NI were required to fly with countermeasures hence forth. This again demonstrates why the Army just don't get Air, the threat or how this relates to Land and the big picture. The Army are very good at the tactical picture, not so much at the Operational or Strategic level. Normally the bigger picture is what will win the war, not every individual battle in isolation. Sometimes you have to choose your battles; those that you can win.
"RAF thinking to much ...Army get the job done." I guess this depends on your definition of getting the job done. I can think of 3 examples of the Army getting the job done in my time in NI.
A Lynx crew deciding to solve a problem for the NIBAT1 Bn of removing a Tricolour from R13 after is was dismantled, whilst in the hover..... The aircraft managed to limp back the BBK after it's rotor strike on the flag pole.
A Lynx crew deciding that they didn't need to check the tasking for the day, which would have alerted them to the fact of the USL sitting by the HLS at Forkhill. Fast forward a few hours and a rather sporty approach resulting in a tail rotor strike on the blatantly obvious 8'x4'x9' USL. All because they wanted to get their tasking completed faster.
Another Lynx crash outside XMG after trying to be punchy to get the job done. 6 injured and another airframe written off.
A great example of why the Army just don't get aviation is the frequent Watchkeeper crashes. This is what happens when you employ poorly trained, overworked and unselected personnel to carry out aviation duties, accidents happen. If the Army can't invest time, money, training, doctrine and resources into a £1Bn aircraft programme then frankly protecting airfields will be WAY down the list of priorities....
Frustration at a tactical pause is understandable, but rarely is rushing in the answer in the long-term. To quote Field Marshal Rommel, "“Time spent in reconnaissance is seldom wasted.”
Just to be clear - I will never admit to any Rockape that I think they are a great capability and worth keeping. I will deny this post if I am found out
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: England
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thankfully this post is anonymous (ish) and I cannot be identified as I would deny I said this to any RAF Regt types
The RAFR may seem like a waste of time, money & resources, however they do provide 3 niche capabilities that the Army are just not in the same league.
JTACs - having worked with literally hundreds over the last 15 yrs or so from various nations and cap badges, nobody is as professional or competent as the RAFR. This includes SF JTACs and USAF TACPs. Nobody comes close!
CBRN - As with JTACs the world leaders in CBRN are the boys from Honington. The Army just dont get it and I believe dont even train their personnel outside of Phase 1 training with any regularity.
Air aware - The Army do not understand Air or aviation in any meaningful capacity or even how important it is to Land. A case in point. Whilst in Kenya on exercise we ended up very narrowly missing a DH3 UAV as the artillery ‘experts’ decided that as they had gun lines (inactive for a week) and they operated them that they owned the airspace over the entire area.
This was despite us flying down the air corridor separating 2 ranges. The exact reply from the battery commander “we own the air, you arent allowed in to the range when guns are present”. When asked where in the range documents this was written down, he asked what range documents?
The Army have absolutely no concept of aviation or why it matters to them on the ground.... This attitude has stood true in my entire military career.
The RAFR are (and I hate to admit this) an essential capability for Air as they just ‘get it’ when it comes to aviation.
The RAFR may seem like a waste of time, money & resources, however they do provide 3 niche capabilities that the Army are just not in the same league.
JTACs - having worked with literally hundreds over the last 15 yrs or so from various nations and cap badges, nobody is as professional or competent as the RAFR. This includes SF JTACs and USAF TACPs. Nobody comes close!
CBRN - As with JTACs the world leaders in CBRN are the boys from Honington. The Army just dont get it and I believe dont even train their personnel outside of Phase 1 training with any regularity.
Air aware - The Army do not understand Air or aviation in any meaningful capacity or even how important it is to Land. A case in point. Whilst in Kenya on exercise we ended up very narrowly missing a DH3 UAV as the artillery ‘experts’ decided that as they had gun lines (inactive for a week) and they operated them that they owned the airspace over the entire area.
This was despite us flying down the air corridor separating 2 ranges. The exact reply from the battery commander “we own the air, you arent allowed in to the range when guns are present”. When asked where in the range documents this was written down, he asked what range documents?
The Army have absolutely no concept of aviation or why it matters to them on the ground.... This attitude has stood true in my entire military career.
The RAFR are (and I hate to admit this) an essential capability for Air as they just ‘get it’ when it comes to aviation.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
It occurs to me that there may be a shortage of manpower when a trooper is inbound with the troops onboard.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,755
Received 2,740 Likes
on
1,166 Posts
Originally Posted by Bob Viking 
It’s easy to find reasons why not but I bet an Army Garrison CO could have found ways to borrow steps and fire engines if it meant helping his Soldiers out.
RAF thinking to (sic) much ...
you cannot pick up a set from your local tool hire company.
CG
PN and Nutty
With regards to my suggestion I’m well aware the ship has almost certainly sailed. I also fully understand the things you’re saying.
However, back when the Army first started to take over and systematically ruin airfields, if somebody had suggested that keeping a set of steps (second hand from Heathrow or wherever), bowsers, assorted kit etc might be a good idea and explain the merits of an active airfield maybe the senior Pongos might have seen the benefits. Sure it might have only been useful for Tac AT, small transports or the occasionally diverted FJ but think of the difference it might have made to interoperability. And if RAF Valley can muster enough military people for a FOD plod I’m sure an army base could have drummed up a few.
I’m sure it was discussed back in the day and I realise it is a moot point but I still think it is unfair to just blame the Army for destroying airfields when perhaps it is the fault of the RAF for not highlighting their uses.
You all know I’m RAF so I’m not ‘crab-bashing’ but sometimes we are so protective of our own organisation we’re too quick to blame others.
Anyway, I’ve probably dragged this thread far too off piste already for which I apologise.
BV
However, back when the Army first started to take over and systematically ruin airfields, if somebody had suggested that keeping a set of steps (second hand from Heathrow or wherever), bowsers, assorted kit etc might be a good idea and explain the merits of an active airfield maybe the senior Pongos might have seen the benefits. Sure it might have only been useful for Tac AT, small transports or the occasionally diverted FJ but think of the difference it might have made to interoperability. And if RAF Valley can muster enough military people for a FOD plod I’m sure an army base could have drummed up a few.
I’m sure it was discussed back in the day and I realise it is a moot point but I still think it is unfair to just blame the Army for destroying airfields when perhaps it is the fault of the RAF for not highlighting their uses.
You all know I’m RAF so I’m not ‘crab-bashing’ but sometimes we are so protective of our own organisation we’re too quick to blame others.
Anyway, I’ve probably dragged this thread far too off piste already for which I apologise.
BV
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 415 Likes
on
218 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hebra Outerdies
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF STATION SCAMPTON...
I've never understood why they don't leave the Reds in situate, move the BBMF from Conningsby, RIAT from Fairford and relocate the the Waddo Airshow and have an 'operational museum' type affair. Retain 313 for practice so no need to find an alternate R313 area..
Plenty of hangar space for a museum similar to the IWM North in Greater Manchester, maybe concentrating more on Bomber Command?
Throughout the year, they could hold open days, concerts with Spit or Hurri (or Reds?) displays to Music... Open days for car clubs, fly ins for civilian flying clubs (without the ridiculous landing fees and handling charges) on certain days with photo opportunities with the aircraft....
A large amount of money would then be raised to fund the museum and other public buildings with the 'Events' held being a paid affair...
Lots of room for other opportunities too...
Motorway network only a few miles away for ease of access all year round, and little disruption to locals, who have a warren of side roads to prevent too much disruption when RIAT and other large events take place...
Lintons FJ training could be relocated to Conningsby where the BBMF have left a gap.
Obviously, some rebuilding and renovation would need to take place but that would be the case where ever they decided to relocate the Squadrons.
More importantly, we would be preserving an RAF Station of major historical interest and importance, rather than just flushing it down the drain....
I've never understood why they don't leave the Reds in situate, move the BBMF from Conningsby, RIAT from Fairford and relocate the the Waddo Airshow and have an 'operational museum' type affair. Retain 313 for practice so no need to find an alternate R313 area..
Plenty of hangar space for a museum similar to the IWM North in Greater Manchester, maybe concentrating more on Bomber Command?
Throughout the year, they could hold open days, concerts with Spit or Hurri (or Reds?) displays to Music... Open days for car clubs, fly ins for civilian flying clubs (without the ridiculous landing fees and handling charges) on certain days with photo opportunities with the aircraft....
A large amount of money would then be raised to fund the museum and other public buildings with the 'Events' held being a paid affair...
Lots of room for other opportunities too...
Motorway network only a few miles away for ease of access all year round, and little disruption to locals, who have a warren of side roads to prevent too much disruption when RIAT and other large events take place...
Lintons FJ training could be relocated to Conningsby where the BBMF have left a gap.
Obviously, some rebuilding and renovation would need to take place but that would be the case where ever they decided to relocate the Squadrons.
More importantly, we would be preserving an RAF Station of major historical interest and importance, rather than just flushing it down the drain....
Last edited by Champagne Anyone?; 25th Jul 2018 at 18:53.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
CA, you obviously missed the earlier point about the age and state of the hangars, not to mention less space than Hendon.
The road access is distinctly below average with a busy dual carriageway to the South and a very ordinary A road to the North.
The road access is distinctly below average with a busy dual carriageway to the South and a very ordinary A road to the North.
Champagne anyone?
Probably because the RAF, or rather the MoD is not a museum running business, it’s hardly core activity is it?
If front line assets are facing the chop then it seems a travesty that the RAF still finds funds to run 5 Spitfires, 2 Hurricanes, a Lancaster and a Dakota when,with the exception of the Lancaster, there are numerous privately operated Spitfires and Hurricanes out there.
The MoD has a real issue in demanding more cash when the general public see the amount of bling and ceremonial on almost constant display in central London.
Probably because the RAF, or rather the MoD is not a museum running business, it’s hardly core activity is it?
If front line assets are facing the chop then it seems a travesty that the RAF still finds funds to run 5 Spitfires, 2 Hurricanes, a Lancaster and a Dakota when,with the exception of the Lancaster, there are numerous privately operated Spitfires and Hurricanes out there.
The MoD has a real issue in demanding more cash when the general public see the amount of bling and ceremonial on almost constant display in central London.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: EU Land
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Everything old is new again
To answer my own question from earlier, apparently 1ACC is moving to <drumroll> Boulmer, which the unit left in 2005-6 on their way south to Scamptom via Kirton-in-Lindsey <boom, tsing>. Well done the estate planners!
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hebra Outerdies
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=Pontius Navigator;10206074]CA, you obviously missed the earlier point about the age and state of the hangars, not to mention less space than Hendon.
The road access is distinctly below average with a busy dual carriageway to the South and a very ordinary A road to the North.[/QUOTE
Point 1. That's why I said costs would be incurred through renovation and relocation, but that will be needed where ever they decide to relocate to... The Hangars would need to be looked at, but are they not listed buildings? Do you not want to see them maintained? If extra buildings are needed, then build them... You cannot make an omlette without cracking eggs!
Point 2. I travel the A46 regularly, at least three times a week and would not say it was particularly busy... The A15 heading North, is as straight as a dye, apart from the Scampton bump all the way to the M180 and only a short drive time to the M18, the A1(M) and the M62, the M1....
Access is probably as good as if not better than Fairford.... The disruption would only be a concern for only a couple of weekends a year when major events were held... i.e RIAT.
And the road structure is perfectly capable of handling the extra traffic if handled correctly.
Just needs a little vision and less negative waves....
The road access is distinctly below average with a busy dual carriageway to the South and a very ordinary A road to the North.[/QUOTE
Point 1. That's why I said costs would be incurred through renovation and relocation, but that will be needed where ever they decide to relocate to... The Hangars would need to be looked at, but are they not listed buildings? Do you not want to see them maintained? If extra buildings are needed, then build them... You cannot make an omlette without cracking eggs!
Point 2. I travel the A46 regularly, at least three times a week and would not say it was particularly busy... The A15 heading North, is as straight as a dye, apart from the Scampton bump all the way to the M180 and only a short drive time to the M18, the A1(M) and the M62, the M1....
Access is probably as good as if not better than Fairford.... The disruption would only be a concern for only a couple of weekends a year when major events were held... i.e RIAT.
And the road structure is perfectly capable of handling the extra traffic if handled correctly.
Just needs a little vision and less negative waves....