RAF Leuchars: Closure is a 'daft' decision with political motives, says ex-airman
A former airman has blasted the decision to close RAF Leuchars, branding it "daft" and suggesting it was taken for political rather than strategic reasons.
An airman walks past the sign at the main gate at RAF Leuchars on the day its closure as an air base was confirmed.
Garry Morrison, who served at the Fife base for several years and has now settled in the area, warned the defence of the nation has come a poor second to the machinations of power-hungry MPs.
The decision to remove the RAF from Leuchars, establishing an army garrison in its place, has sparked massive controversy.
Mr Morrison, who served with 56(R) Squadron before a back injury forced him to leave the service, is baffled by the move and warns it is a waste of taxpayers' money and — crucially — heightens the risk faced by citizens.
The former avionics technician pointed out that tens of millions of pounds have been spent at Leuchars in recent years, ensuring it is at the cutting edge and suitable as an RAF base for many years to come.
"I moved to Leuchars in 2003 and we set up base here, firstly in portable cabins while the hangar was fitted to suit the Tornado F3 force from RAF Coningsby," the 30 year-old told The Courier.
"This took nearly 18 months and cost over £32 million just for the runway to be resurfaced.
"Quite a few million more was spent for new buildings to house air crew and ground crew, plus equipment."
Move 'very hard' on families
As campaigners fought to save RAF Leuchars, much was made of its proximity to potential terrorist targets — including Faslane nuclear submarine base and the Grangemouth oil refinery.
Typhoons from Fife could also reach the Torness nuclear power station in less than 90 seconds' flying time.
Campaigners insisted this rapid reaction in the face of any potential terror attack provided the base with a critical advantage over its main rival, RAF Lossiemouth in Moray.
Mr Morrison said, "In my time at Leuchars I learned that there were huge changes taking place.
"I saw the end of the F3 fleet (to be replaced by Typhoons)... but the location of the base remained vital for the QRA (quick reaction alert) service."
He added, "I cannot understand why the Ministry of Defence is going to spend millions and millions of pounds to move an entire new fleet of aircraft and all of their equipment."
Mr Morrison, who served a secondary role as an air cadet liaison team co-ordinator, warned of hard times ahead for local service people and their families, many of whom have settled well in Fife.
He said, "I have seen a full base move in the past and it is very hard on families and the local economy.
"I have friends down at RAF Coningsby who suffered as a result of the move to Leuchars in 2003."
Not a 'military' decision
While he can understand the rationale for moving Tornados from Lossiemouth to Marham in Norfolk, he cannot understand why Leuchars has been axed.
He said, "To refit Lossiemouth and re-role it all is, as many have said over the past week, just daft.
"It was clearly a decision taken behind a desk on the political front and not one taken on military, strategic grounds."
He added, "If they had sense they would realise that RAF Leuchars generates money to the local community by way of private jets landing and paying fees for golf.
"It also raises revenue through the air show, which is the only one of its kind in Scotland."
Mr Morrison believes Leuchars is in the right place to protect the northern half of the UK and is ill-suited for an army barracks.
He said, "Can you imagine St Andrews as a garrison town?
'Waste of taxpayers' money'
"The army would also be an easier option for Lossiemouth as there are already garrisons in the north.
"The Tornado fleet is almost at its end as the jets are way over on flying hours and are currently getting scrapped."
He added, "Moving Lossie to Marham is a good idea as Marham is already a Tornado base and it is therefore a low-cost option.
"Leuchars is already fitted out for Typhoons so retaining it would not rack up any further costs.
"I think Lossiemouth is staying open because MPs are frightened of losing votes if it closes.
"What has been decided is clearly a waste of taxpayers' money."
10.13pm - 30.07.2011 Ian Smith Watson - Welwyn Garden City, United Kingdom Report This
I've nothing to add but to second Mr Morrison's comments. And that I can't begin to fathom just what it is that the Defence Secretary is thinking. None of this makes sense and I post as someone who has a relative stationed at Lossiemouth!
09.31am - 31.07.2011 liney - Dundee, Scotland Report This
Spot on! Political not military decision. Total joke.
11.33am - 31.07.2011 Jim - forfar, scotland Report This
ultimately it's the gov's train set. Yes it's a political decision made by politicians. If these decisions were really simple and easy to make they would use armourers to make them.
06.24pm - 31.07.2011 Scotty - Glenbogle, Scotland Report This
If the decision was political then surely the decision would have favoured Leuchars with a liberal MP! Leuchars jets have been scrambled hundreds of times to intercept threats from the north and not once for terrorist activity. Which base is nearer the potential threat and has 2 r/ways not 1. Lossie
08.10pm - 31.07.2011 KENNETH GRAHAM ESQ - PEMBURY ROYAL TUNBRIDGE WELLS, ENGLAND UK Report This
I see this as a good move but in saying this.. Does this leave Scotland without a airbase and if it does then i in mind now would say that the SNP AND UK POLITICAINS ARE LETTING SCOTLAND DOWN...BIG TIME the Scottish people should show these politicians that Scotland should not be complimised
10.22pm - 31.07.2011 Steve Scott - Dundee, Scotland Report This
The country's bust, so what else is there to do, other than make cuts? Either stump up more tax, or these are the consequences. Also, the article would have more gravitas if it came from a commanding officer, than an aircraft fitter, and didn't reek of snobbery about The Army.
06.05am - 01.08.2011 Dissappointed - Dundee, UK Report This
maybe if this stupid government stopped giving money abroad they could of kept both base's but yet again politicians are scared. Maybe Dr. Fox should go to leuchers and look these guy's straight in the eye and explain why instead of them all jollying off on their holidays in 1k a night hotel's.
04.13pm - 01.08.2011 Unknown - Perth, Uk Report This
Scotty, the location of intercepts is irrelevant,the point is jets from Leuchars can get there equally as well as locations south of Leuchars.Yes lossie does have two runways, & your point? One runway will be well enough for the traffic.With only the one runway, leuchars has lost less weather days.
04.25pm - 01.08.2011 Unknown - Perth, Uk Report This
This article hits the nail on the head, if the gov had to close a base in the name of saving money, then why go for the expensive option?There is no doubt leuchars is better placed for QRA than lossie,so why reduce security at extra cost?I just can't see the positive in moving QRA,it makes no sense.
06.05pm - 01.08.2011 Cory Douglas Campbell - Dundee, UK Report This
They should have closed the bases in Germany as these must cost a fortune. They are outdated trophy's of war. Canada closed all it's base's there over 20 years ago and those savings went straight to it's military for current operations. There isn't any sense having a shiny trophy cabinet in a house without a roof.
Add a comment