This article first appeared in Aviation Week & Space Technology.
A British Conservative government would revisit Royal Air Force transport and fighter aircraft basing plans — and intended closures — including a move to consolidate all U.K. fixed-wing airlift at one hub.
Gerald Howarth, the shadow defense minister, says reconsideration of the present government’s decision to ax Lyneham — one of the RAF’s two main transport bases — would “absolutely” be part of a strategic defense review, were the party to be returned to power. A national election in the U.K. has to be held no later than June.
“We would put the future basing of our fleets, not just the air transport fleet but the fast-jet fleet, as well into the mix for a strategic defense review, that seems to me to be the sensible thing to do.”
RAF Lyneham is currently slated to close in 2012, with the air force’s 24 C‑130Js and a small number of C‑130Ks being transferred to RAF Brize Norton. The government announced recently that the fighter base at RAF Cottesmore will also close.
Brize Norton eventually will be the long-term home to at least seven Boeing C-17s, 14 Airbus A330-based Future Strategic Tanker Aircraft, 24 Lockheed Martin C-130Js and, notionally, 25 Airbus Military A400Ms. The U.K., however, will almost certainly cut the number of A400Ms it buys (assuming the program survives) to a maximum of 19.
Howarth spoke last week at a Westminster Hall debate in Parliament, held to consider the U.K.‘s tactical and strategic airlift capacity. The war in Afghanistan and the deployment to Iraq, which ended in 2009, have placed the air force’s transport fleet under pressure. This is compounded by delays to the A400M.
Howarth argues that “it seems to me essential — if we are to have a defense review that will assess the real and potential threats to the nation and if, having done so, we are to decide what military capabilities we require to meet those threats — that we must translate those decisions into the aircraft, ships, tanks … that are needed and the places where they will be based.”
Read the rest of this story, get an Osprey update, see Afghanistan’s new flock of Herons and read about the advanced SAMS ending up at the front from our friends at Aviation Week, exclusively on Military.com.
– Christian
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
Yes combine bases but spread out all over the UK for defense would be wise.
Have Cargo & Air Tankers in the mix & Tac Copters.
Merge fighters & bombers at over 3,4 bases alone.
Modernize RAF London Command Center.
Have base in Scotland
Why is the USAF in RAF Lakenheath? Its madness! More here: http://www.g2mil.com/lakenheath.htm
"Yeah" Sit it up where if the radicals of this world or some country that gets a wild hair up their back side and they decided to attack .They could take it all out with one big bang. Are what if There was an Emergency like a fast evacuation or some such threat that you had to get every thing airborne immediately. But no you have to line up because you only have so many run ways facing in to the wind???. That kind of mental aptitude that thinks they can put every thing in one spot and function Is asinine. I don't know why the Military's let the Civilians try to dictate to them. But let a war come along and see who fights. The military.And The civilians That came up with the hair brained Idea of consolidating the bases sit back and point fingers every where else and say "It wasn't Me".
Runway. Singular. At least for unassisted takeoff.
‘Taking Out’ Brize Norton as a whole would require one hell of a ?Marvin-The-Martian style ‘earth-shattering kaboom’, but there is only a single principle runway; temporarily knocking that out is more believable for a creative terrorist.
That said, there are several secondary runways, which (without knowing for definite) I would assume a cargo aircraft could use with a jet-assisted-take-off rig.
No, I’d rather not consolidate all the transport in one location. BUT I’d much rather consolidate the transport fleet than the fighter fleet, and, ultimately, if the government says ‘this is how much money we have to give you’ then, strategic policy or not, you’ve got to cut something….