Ken, when your secret base, soon to become a housing estate, gets a shed load of helicopters instead of fixed wing trucks, will that make a difference?

Viz, given Ken's knowledge of FW and a Secret air base I anticipated, possibly wrongly, that he was at a base soon to become a RW base.

Fellas

As an AT operator it all boils down to best use of airframes from MOB's with full organic support. I have been to many airfields to collect pax and freight and on more than one occasion been delayed due to u/s loading equipment at airheads not used to large AT moves.

Lack of engineering support has also led to tasks being delayed as we don't have the specialised trade cover or personnel at outlying airbases to fix snags that would possibly be dealt with at Lye or Brize. In the good old days there even used to be spare airframes that you could crossdeck onto and still get the job done!!!

Not to mention airfield opening hours,crash cats,ACN/PCN,GSE and movements support.

We would love to come to you and get you home quicker but in the current climate it ain't gonna happen!!

Truckkie (and others) you are being a bit disingenuous when you say 'Not to mention airfield opening hours,crash cats,ACN/PCN,GSE and movements support.' True there is not a lot that can be done about ACN?PCN, but I don't think there are many MOBs certainly FW that can't take a large aircraft, in my experience moving Fast Jets around the world on fairly major (including operational) deployments most loads tend to bulk out rather than weight out. Airfield opening hours WILL be changed if the staish decides it will be so and the Ops staff (much maligned) have been known to cut all sorts of deals to get an extra crash wagon in place. By not practicing moves at units then it is not surprising that movements sections are rusty at the final handling point- bit of a self fulfilling policy there. As for Been There 'Because it costs money to keep an airfield open for large aircraft operations eg taxiways have to be repaired and kept FOD clear.' that rather begs a question as to how you think aircraft operate on airfields.

Kitbag,

Please PM me.

Pontius: Maybe I should change my location description, events may overtake the housing estate proposal!
However I doubt it would much change how things currently operate, except it would be a shorter road move for the helicopters if they were prep'd at home base, or a short flight to Bzn to be done there. Would be a tad ironic if we ended up flying backto Lyn to load up!

Kitbag - if you can find any rusty movers out there, I'll be damned impressed! They are all rotating through ops rather frequently where they can practice their arts. Also - having spoken to many MSFs recently, I can tell you they are pretty switched on cookies. Oh - most freight now goes by surface means - so the more of them who practice that, the better it is really.

Mr C, I apologise if I have upset any of the movers, that was most certainly not my intention having worked with some good guys in the past. I was rather trying to rebut the assertions of Truckie et al as far as the availability of station support for AT was concerned.

True, but if you reduce the number of operating surfaces you require the aircraft to operate on, you can reduce the maintenance costs. This might be why the majority of the taxiways are not cleared for large aircraft use at Wattisham and they use the ORPs to load/unload instead. That is what I was trying to explain.

BT

Understood, however use of an ORP by AT at a RW base shouldn't cause too much hassle to other users should it?

Shouldn't affect the RW assets but because the AT asset will now be blocking the active runway, the airfield will be black to FW assets.

However, as has been alluded to above, using the deployed airfield isn't the major issue. It is the lack of assets generally; AHE, airframes, crews. Also as has been stated above, most crews would rather go to 'home base' to pick or drop off personnel/equipment as most of them have been pax themselves, but we now longer have the assets to pre-position an aircraft the day before and load it there. Most aircraft come back from a route, get unloaded, prepped and then reloaded overnight for the following days trip. To preposition means losing a days flying which we can't afford at the moment.

Another point which has sort of been touched on is that the costs for deployment from a home base lie with the user unit/HQ. If they have have to up the crash cat, bring in extra staff, pay for HOTAC for the crew and movers/engineers/support personnel, those costs lie with deploying unit/HQ. Most of the time they would rather pay c*ck all and ship people by bus to the airheads. Sorry but that is the way the bean counters work as they have no concept of the morale!

Kitbag: "...use of an ORP by AT at a RW base shouldn't cause too much hassle to other users should it?"

No hassle at all whenever it's been done at Wattisham.

At Wattisham the taxiway LCGs and widths are OK for larger aircraft. They are also maintained to a good standard and swept regularly, as is the runway.
Unfortunately a new hangar was built after the RAF left which makes access on to the main apron a bit tight for anything larger than a C130, hence the use of the ORPs for parking larger aircraft.

BT all points raised seem valid, except...

blacking a RW airfield for a day to FW is how important or how inconvenient?

and 'Another point which has sort of been touched on is that the costs for deployment from a home base lie with the user unit/HQ. If they have have to up the crash cat, bring in extra staff, pay for HOTAC for the crew and movers/engineers/support personnel, those costs lie with deploying unit/HQ. Most of the time they would rather pay c*ck all and ship people by bus to the airheads. Sorry but that is the way the bean counters work as they have no concept of the morale' Is there really a need for HOTAC?

As I said earlier and I think you agreed, if the Staish is prepared to make it happen for whatever reason a lot of the Station based objections go.

Note, not trying to pick a fight here, just questioning assertions made. It seems that in reality the lack of AT is the crux, not the will or ability to make it happen.

One thing all of you who seek the lay any of the blame for this home base crock at the feet of the AT crews need to understand is that PILOTS LOVE TO FLY! If you can get your head round that simple concept you will soon realise that the "blame", for want of a better descriptor for the home base policy lies firmly at the feet of the bean counters :}

Ask any AT drivers if they would like to increase their P1 time, quicken their time from Co to Captain, hasten their ATPL point etc etc and they will bite your hand off. Never mind the enjoyment they get from going somewhere different, flying new approaches/departures more take off's and landings etc etc. Pilots love to fly and given the chance thats what they would do pretty much most days of the year. So next time your on a bus for 12 hours heading to/from Lyn/Bzn and chuntering about feckin Albert/Shiney crews trust me it's not their fault :=

SFFP, very true and also, oddly, for navs too who far rather land at a base they did not take off from. Pilots, OTOH, really don't mind if they only land at the base they took off from as long as the take-off is not too long after the landing.

Another masterpiece of planning and forward thinking! I wonder where that came from?

LFFC, the same team perhaps that put the F4 hush house on the lazy runway at Coningsby which put a bit of a damper on BBMF using the runway.

*Faints*

CC

Thanks for the opinions,
It seems that this all lends itself to the AT having a hub in Cyprus and then both other ends could be serviced the same way, pick up and drop off where convenient.
It still amazes me that when Apache are changed over in theatre, with C17 parking about 100 metres from the Apache servicing hub, we cant drop one and pick one up at the same place, if not two at a time. With the bill that delivery and recovery from Brize attracts does anyone look at the overall impact to all parties rather than just the AT impact?
I dont pretend this is a panacea but where appropriate that it should not be discounted when other MOD issues are taken into the equation.
Wattisham: Runway, ILS, PAR, ORP parking, C130 can get on the apron etc. Also a plan discussed, but awaiting funding, to demolish a HAS site and establish a purpose built AT apron in support of 16X. Now there would be a capability, the largest Bde not having to troop through SC to BN taking god knows how long and arriving wherever they are going fit for f*** all. All when they are the lead Bde for rapid response!
Not to mention having a Bde Para Sqn for jumping that has bugger all to do for the foreseeable future.:E
HEDP

Wattisham = LCG IV

No good for heavy-ish VC10 or medium-weight TriStar. C17 - not sure.