LOL. Well done Ken! Amazing how many people forgot about April Fool!
π
TJ
Good luck!!!
π
TJ
No they have new 109’s now.
They haven’t been replaced, as of yet. 2009 is the out of service date according to the following link. The two ex-Argentine Army airframes should still be flying.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080122/text/80122w0011.htm
The replacements are probably these Dauphin’s listed.
http://www.aviation-news.co.uk/ComMilNews.html
“βMARβ has also recently given details of new serial allocations that have been assigned to four, as yet to be delivered, Eurocopter AS.365N2 Dauphin helicopters. These are construction numbers 6808, 6813, 6818 and 6822 and are believed to be ZJ780 to ZJ783 respectively. The future operator is suggested as 8 Flight AAC replacing their now somewhat aging Agusta A.109s”
Great work, Daniel.
Regards
TJ
Some interesting info here.
Presumably when Molesworth, and Greenham, were selected as the sites for mobile cruise launchers, some strategic plan of local launch areas was written up, that the vehicles had to get to prior to an attack. No doubt this would be a relatively concealed and sheltered woodland area well away from the base.
At the time of the plans assumed conception, the A14 was not completed, and the roads around Molesworth are’nt exactly major trunk routes.
I recall at the time seeing cartoon or early CGI, scenarios of these launchers being driven independantly to secret sites and firing off their missiles, all done so easily.
How would they have coped with the traffic on these roads, imagine coming across Farmer Palmer and his combine, would he care about WW3, I doubt it, ‘I need to get back to the farm and fix the bailer, ****** the USAF’.
They must surely have had all sorts of equipment to force the traffic off the roads in order to prepare for Armaggedon, it would probably have been a bloodbath before the Soviet strike arrived, and I’m only thinking of the application to the locals, I’m sure that the peace activists would have gone to all sorts of lengths to prevent these vehicles from leaving the base.
Not a very practical idea, I always imagined a huge traffic jam of cruise launchers trying to get out the base, then, wallop, all gone, goodbye world.
UK Forces were also part of the guard force for use at the base and dispesal points. It was the hosts nations duty throught Europe for force protection and getting them through to their dispersal points. Bases in the UK wouldn’t just stop controlling up to the limit of their fences in wartime or periods of tension. Plans were in force for bases to extend their control over areas beyond their immediate fence line.
There was huge exercises in the UK during the 80s in regards to countering Spetsnaz forces. The threat was taken very seriously indeed. You can just imagine the amount of effort the Russians/Warsaw Pact put into finding out every piece of detail. MI5 must have been seriously busy tracking and monitoring individuals who showed interest in attempting to follow/monitor the exercises.
There was the old rumour that some Eastern European truckers in the UK at the time were intelligence gathering. During the 80s fishing and coastal ports were extremely well watched. Even members of the now disbanded Royal Observer Corps, who lived at coastal locations, were tasked with monitoring foreign fishing fleets and merchant vessels.
Recently there has been a Cold War TV programme with an interview from a former KGB or GRU commander. He detailed the interest and boasted about how well watched and monitored the GLCM activities were.
Whatever the Joint Analysis Centre does, I would quietly suggest, is possibly NOT done in those two, carefully tended – and used – bunkers in the SW corner of the site. Are those vertical pylons security lighting or aerial arrays.
HTH
Resmoroh
Those bunkers are the old GLCM (Ground Launched Cruise Missile) storage areas. The Russians under the INF treaty last inspected those bunkers back in 1999. After the Cruise Missiles were removed the infrastructure was perfect as a storage area.
RAF Molesworth is also home to the NATO Intelligence Fusion Centre as of 2006.
http://www.nato.int/shape/news/2006/10/061016a.htm
http://www.nato.int/shape/news/2006/10/061011a.htm
TJ
Thanks guys. I’ll post this link and the other ones on the group.
Regards
TJ
No Harrier was destroyed in the attack. Both airframes were repairable. The journalist in question ran with the story and used the claim in a later Afghanistan related article.
TJ
Nice shot from a RAF Typhoon
http://www.eurofighter.com/medialibrary/details.asp?sortorder=0&page=0&numimages=18&MediaID=8050
I was up on the hill with the photographer who took that image. Absolutely mad day with lashing rain and gusting winds. The Typhoons were running through for film crews stationed on both sides of the pass.
The Typhoons were just covered in vapour. Very hard to get auto-focus on a fast moving cloud! The following is one I took of the U.S. exchange pilot going high through the valley in a 3(F) Squadron Typhoon. Please expand to regular size if you open it.
A few Saudi Tonkas are operated at BAe Warton. They are fully marked up in UK livery and with UK serials. This one was ZK113 and one of the others is ZH917. These aircraft carry TSP on the fin and ‘Tornado Sustainment Program’ on the sides under the cockpit. The Saudi aircraft are being brought up to essentially GR.4 standard.
There is one fully marked up Royal Saudi Air Force Tornado operating from Warton. It was recently imaged at low-level in the Lake District in full RSAF livery. 6611 was the airframe number. This was apparently on its after conversion shake down flights presumably before eventually going back to Saudi Arabia.
Someone imaged 6611 back in early March on its first post upgrade flight.
http://forums.airshows.co.uk/cgi-bin/ukarboard/ikonboard.cgi?;act=ST;f=9;t=44675
TJ
Thanks for the comments.
John,
The USAF are height restricted on the low-fly routes. It is only on very rare occasions that they are permitted down at lower levels. You can catch them coming through the Dinas Valley on the Bwlch, but you have to be a few hundred feet higher than I was. I was after RAF front liners through the Bwlch Exit, but sadly they didn’t come out in force.
Image of one of the F-15s through the Bwlch on 17th March at the following link. If you are after F-15s with terrain behind, then you have to be on the Bwlch proper!
http://forums.airshows.co.uk/cgi-bin/ukarboard/ikonboard.cgi?;act=ST;f=9;t=45005
TJ
Great images. I’ve really enjoyed looking through your various photo posts.
π
Regards
TJ
No. Not anything new, but in regards to India it probably is. Some of those locations will be pretty remote. The losses ‘Flying the Hump’ must have been terrible in both personnel and aircraft? Hopefully they will be successful and lay to rest those still missing!
Personally, if i was asked to come up with a camouflage scheme for a very large bomber, i wouldn’t immediately think of white, red blue and yellow! (but that might be why no-ones asked me!):D
As Jon has pointed out, possibly anti-flash for the nuclear role?
RAF Vulcans, for example, and other V-bombers were once painted in an anti-flash scheme. Also look at the TSR.2.
http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/tsr2/history.php
http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/vulcan/history.html
http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/victor/history.html
TJ
Agnetha from ABBA demonstrating how to get into a Draken cockpit. (Late 1960s!)
π