Mid 1980s I was involved in planning a trial for dispersing nuke-armed GR1s; all very TS UK Eyes etc. Shortly after I was posted they did the practical element. Mate of mine was in the back seat of a Marham jet which slipped into West Raynham at sunset. As it taxied in he glanced to the right to see a spotter in a hedge with a long lens.
|
Originally Posted by Ninthace
(Post 11083376)
For many years, Norwich was the only city I knew that was at the end of a lane. At least its been dualled now.
|
Originally Posted by Whenurhappy
(Post 11083823)
It was in relation to concentrating everything at BZZ, and answering an earlier question about why was Lyneham kept open, albeit not as an RAF station.
|
Originally Posted by Whenurhappy
(Post 11083775)
. However, the cost of remediating the whole site potentially exceed the net worth; by comparison the huge POL depot at Rosyth was sold 20 years ago for £9M and the buyers were paid a further £12M to remediate it...
|
I think Out of Trim is correct, it will be the recent ex-operational stations. Leuchars has already been used for 'off station QRA' whilst Losiemouth had it's runway upgraded for P-8. using the ones still under military control also gives you the FP and security you would need
|
Originally Posted by Ninthace
(Post 11083898)
I remember the good old days of Gutersloh and the sheer volume of MT needed to roll the support convoys. It might be instructive for someone to do the sums and work out just how much more kit groups of deployed aircraft will need as compared to being on an MOB where sharing is possible, Then there is storing the stores and fuel. Going to be fun!
|
I always thought one airfield we should never have ditched was Saint Athan, it had been extensively upgraded and had the facilities to take the transport fleet if needed, the only disadvantage is probably its location. If you had to close Lyneham then moving it to Saints would probably have attracted Welsh grants etc.
It’s ok saying they would need to invest in the transport to sustain operations off grid, but you would also need people to back that up and operate the fleets of vehicles, catering, fuel, etc.. etc… |
Originally Posted by superplum
(Post 11084227)
and nobody has considered the need for "lots" of electric vehicle chaging points when petrol/diesel vehicles are replaced!
|
Originally Posted by 99 Change Hands
(Post 11083947)
Mid 1980s I was involved in planning a trial for dispersing nuke-armed GR1s; all very TS UK Eyes etc. Shortly after I was posted they did the practical element. Mate of mine was in the back seat of a Marham jet which slipped into West Raynham at sunset. As it taxied in he glanced to the right to see a spotter in a hedge with a long lens.
|
St. Athan had one relatively short runway, narrow taxiways, very limited parking and it also has a very poor weather factor.
Not really much use for AT/AAR aircraft unless at low weights. |
Sweden got it right....
|
So some adaptions to barriers and lights etc, a few exercises and suddenly the M6 finds itself on the initial target list. I can't imagine these sites would be numerous enough to make them hard to find?
|
Originally Posted by bobward
(Post 11083179)
We'll be alright in Norfolk then. No bl**dy motorways anywhere here....
|
Originally Posted by Asturias56
(Post 11083640)
Well it's either this or Amazon Prime I guess.....................
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....de602e5204.jpg |
Originally Posted by bobward
(Post 11083179)
We'll be alright in Norfolk then. No bl**dy motorways anywhere here....
https://scontent.fman2-1.fna.fbcdn.n...b9&oe=6123C7D9 |
They won’t be using roads, far too much road furniture these days, in any case there are plenty of proper runways in the UK, it’s going to be enough of a challenge to get all of the supplies and tech to another airfield. If hostilities do break out satellite surveillance is so fast the enemy would just follow the support convoy, thankfully nobody is likely to start a shooting war with Russia
|
I think if a shooting war with Russia broke out on a scale that required large scale dispersal it's unlikely to last long enough to require a full service support before everything starts to glow in the dark
|
Originally Posted by br9mp81
(Post 11084315)
I was on the fire section,whilst it was welcome excitment, on a very slow camp,i hate to say it was the local pub landlord that told us we would need bigger fire engines.
|
"would lift a tank as well as a fuelled airframe "
to be fair the illustration shows Saladin Armoured Cars - about 11 tons a piece And it was originally to be STOL not VTOL, with a payload of 35,000 lb Still mad but stranger things have flown,,, and been bought - tho why the OR branch kept insisting on UK-Ascension range is beyond me If there hadn't been a knock down fight over the engines that wasted a couple of years it might well still have been in service |
681 was indeed barking mad! For STOL it would (probably) have had 4 x 18290lb thrust BS100 engines under development for P.1154, but for VTOL those would have been supplemented by 2 wing pods each fitted with 9 x 11000lb thrust lift engines....
Fortunately, but to the detriment of the British aircraft industry, the 681 was cancelled in favour of the C-130. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 23:31. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.