The aircraft are on their way though, slowly but surely we are told.
I am going to stick with a good sign, at last some positive signs. The Vikings are being fixed so the engineers must exist 
I wonder if I can buy a yellow land rover soon, not been used for two years so should get a deal.
The yellow landrovers have been selling for the past few months on defence disposal sites. The one careful owner tag might be a bit misleading though
No room for their badges now they have to be replaced with the lovely 2FTS ones.
Investment isnāt always a positive.
How many time are many thousands of pounds spent on something for it to be sold, closed, wound up etc? My mate works for the local council they spent hundreds of thousands refurbing a site and within two years it was rubble and is now a small block of flats.
I think the MOD have a history for this as well.
So while it looks good now 5 years time when we might have gliders back it might not.
I suspect the Tutor will get at least another 5 year contract when the current one expires as I doubt theyāll be the appetite to find and introduce a new aircraft whilst the transition the MFTS is taking up capacity.
After that we may see something new. Then again, thereās nowt wrong with the Tutor as a platform now, and their hours arenāt particularly high.
As for protection of VGS/AEF/UAS - I believe a few ārationalisation plansā (and probably associated promotion plans) have been kicked to touch by those more sympathic to the aims and actions of the organisations as opposed to the relatively small budget savings.
http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/news/all-districts/17335/New-aircraft-hangars--vital-for.html
A matter for national security? Really?
The Design, Access & Planning statement.
Such a contract is of utmost importance to national security and the training of RAF pilot recruits to defend this nation needs to be given priority over relatively minor AONB concerns.
What a heap of stinking manure!
That aside, tenders probably havenāt been submitted, planning approval has not yet been granted, the hangars canāt be built = no repairs possible = shall we say 2018/2019 now??
Planning was refused in 2015. Theyāre trying for āexceptional circumstancesā now as the contract has been identified to them as the preferred bidder. It would be a catastrophy if SS Ltd would have to withdraw from the process now itās been awarded. It would cost them a huge amount of money. Very naughty they bid without the necessary infrastructure.
They are taking the āyou know whatā how dumb do they think the planning people are?
Scarily that is extremely common both in the MOD world as private sector.
There is 2 points though you need to remember the quote would probably of said repair 70 aircraft
But gave no timescale so they may of looked to do it 2 at a time got the contract and the MOD said we want it done 10 at a time, hence the big expansion
The navy got some floating concrete pontoons built after the company got the award they had to find a dock to build them inā¦ They hadnāt looked into the fact they needed to put them in the water. They knew the design and they knew how to make them but hadnāt considered where to make them it ended up they hired an old dry dock built them inside and then floated them out and to siteā¦
You can comment directly to West Berks Planning if you think that input will help (you will need to register if using the website). If you donāt want your personal details listed, you will need to send an email + attachment with your comments. In your email state that you do not wish any of your personal details to be available.
Planapps@westberks.gov.uk
Reference: 16/00142/OUTMAJ
COMMENTS TO BE ADDED TO APPLICATION 16/00142/OUTMAJ - Membury Airfield Lambourn Woodlands Hungerford Berkshire RG17 7TJ
Whilst not ālocalā to the relevant area, I slated the ānational securityā aspect but tried to highlight the importance of the application to ACO gliding as a whole.
It does mention gilders and light aircraft. SS do also partake in Tutor repairs, and could conceivably also partake in future Prefect (what a nameā¦) repairs.
Bending the truth maybe?
Weāve had contractors put tenders in without the wherewithall in place and not got the contract, as our managers go to see them and ask pointed questions like how many people do you employ and what work have you got on at the moment and where. When the answers get vague or evasive they are told no thanks, as previous experience of people getting contracts and not being able to commence immediately has not been appreciated.
I canāt imagine there are too many companies who fix gliders and to that end what facilities they had would be well known in the industry. So if the MOD contract managers didnāt know this they should be stacking shelves in Aldi by now. Giving as it seems the contract to a company that needs to build the facility and havenāt yet got the planning permission, isnāt something to instill confidence.
As there arenāt many companies doing glider repairs. Itās also quite unlikely any of them would be running at 50% capacity, therefore any of them would need to expand and itās probably been factored in to the planning assumptions and contract.
This is a preview of contract award: Recovery of up to 48 Viking Gliders that was published on January 19, 2016.
From elsewhere:
Recovery of up to 48 Viking Gliders
The Authority requires an MAA Regulatory Publication (MRP) / Military Part 145 (Mil Pt 145) organisation (or an European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Pt 145 approved organisation, that can achieve Mil Pt 145 with an MAA Maintenance Approved Organisation Status (MAOS) Supplement submission within 3 mths), to carry out the package of maintenance, which is to include a Major Servicing and Special Instructions (Technical) (SI(T)), detailed in this SOR, on upto 48 Viking T Mark 1 (Grob 103A) Gliders, belonging to the Air Cadet Organisation (ACO). The requirement may also be met by a non-compliant Prime Contractor, who is able to sub-contract to a qualified 3rd party. The MOD Designated Officer (MOD Des Off) for this requirement is Gp Capt John Middleton, OC 2 FTS. The Deputy MOD Des Off is Wg Cdr Dave Evans (SO1 Total Safety), with day-to-day management exercised by the 2 FTS CMT. The Project Manager for the requirement is Wg Cdr Charlie Wray, 22 (Trg) Gp Gliders Requirements Manager.
Looking at all the factors that have to be integrated for the plan to work, there seem to be āunder-lapsā in the various requirements. Likewise, I wonder if any engineering personnel would want to be contracted to come on board unless there are firm commitments from the company(s) concerned.
Yeah, Iāll leave my current position to take up a job - that starts when - & where?? Oh, it could be Membury, but you say that the planning permission hasnāt been granted for any maintenance hangars yet. Byeeeeee.
Which would apply to any of these civil sector companies that I would imagine werenāt sitting around with capacity to take on 70/54/48 gliders that might come along?!?!
I quite agree. There is no glider repair business that could expand that quickly without increasing the size of the premises. Letās remember that:
It has taken the service 22 months to decide it even needs Southern Sailplanes to do the work. Most civilian owners/operators will look at a broken glider, ask if anyone was hurt and then phone Steve up for a quote. The glider would be at Membury in a few days, NOT years
It is a highly regarded civilian glider repair business that has come to the rescue of the incompetent (very difficult to call it anything else) military organisation that got it so wrong in the first place.
Rumour control - due to the paucity of flying, perhaps we might go down the āscout badgeā route - have some theory, have a play in a āsimulatorā (if working?), launch off in a Tutor, roll the drums, have a badgeā¦
[quote=āOC 2FTS on Twitter (18/02/16)ā]
Have 5 vigilants and 3 Vikings at RAF Syerston. Working up CGS QGIs. VGS staff then cadets soon to follow. comdt 2fts [/quote]
Who knows when we will hear anything through official channels?