I’m not sure that it’s released to the general public, otherwise you’re probably getting into public safety etc sort of issues.

Do you have the GE lat/long for that?

Flashearth – Kolpiensee

But I agree on the Airtanker PFI. Buy outright, & more than 14. But . . . AFAIK, there is no sudden rush of low-mileage A330s onto the market at knock-down prices, as airlines which were expecting to get 787s are having to wait – much to the delight of Airbus & the A330 sales team.

There’s also the minor headache, with Lyneham moving to Brize, and A400M arriving one day in the next ten years, of where one would put them all. 10’s going to be bad enough!:)

Oh, and when I said airliners I didn’t mean A330s, I meant any airliners which could replace the tristar fleet for shunting bodies around, a lot of low cost airlines have gone to the wall and loads of 737s and A320s are now on the market cheap

Not ideal for the long haul Tristar (and to and extent VC-10) transport trips then really? The RAF have chartered in the past where necessary anyway, and purchasing such types wouldn’t really provide a solution in any useful timescale.

Not at all. I have already addressed this, service in the Armed Forces is about loyalty to state and the sense of duty and comradeship. If someone states they will leave the armed forces because a decision is taken to create a more rational force structure it suggests that they do not have the correct mindset to be a soldier, sailor or airmen in the first place.

But the realities are always different to the perceived perception – it could well just become another “push” factor. Armed forces retention is bad enough as it is (although the current credit crunch is probably helping), without messing people about even further, telling people to ditch the customs, traditions and (relative) stability they value in their service, and asking them to adopt those of a service they didn’t particularly want to join the the first place.

As I said, each of the services has its own ways of working, and the reality is a lot of people wouldn’t want to make the change, and when the opportunity arose, may well vote with their feet.

So why should those service not provide their own support? Surely they would be much better tailoring their own requirements than allowing a third party with its own desires of grandeur to do it?

I think you’ll find the great majority of us in light blue know we primarily exist, and do their very best, to provide the best service possible to those who need it from any of the services, UK or coalition, and have no “desires of grandeur” as you so ridiculously talk about.:(

We’re there to do a job and provide a service. We do it to the best ability.

Or, purchase this field here, and build a facility big enough to become the RAF Museum of Air Transport – a safe home for a C-130, Lyneham’s Comet, a VC10. Repositioning of suitable (movable) airframes would then free up space for future arrivals at Cosford (Nimrod) etc.

If only it was that easy!

Would the Snoopy Hercules actually be that representative of the Hecules in military service? Surely if the RAFM get one a C-130K would be the one to go for?

Certainly a line K would be far more operationally and historically relevant.:)

Of course no airfield’s future can be assured but RAF Church Fenton is fit for purpose and I can’t see its role changing while the current training system continues – I also don’t see a problem with ‘bussing’ personnel over from Linton, afterall, most of us commute to work in one way or another in civvie street.

Have you tried the Linton to Fenton commute?:D

It’s inefficient, particularly in a flying training job which is draining and stressful enough without having a couple of hours in an LDV everyday (and of course something that your competitors don’t suffer at Wyton and Cranwell). If downscaling elsewhere would allow the resources to be more efficiently pooled elsewhere, then there’d be little point in keeping it open.:)