The range and associated radar tracking station on South Uist and Hirta (St Kilda) are reported to be a source of concern regarding the 250 jobs they support.
Good grief, you'd think they were being thrown out on the street tomorrow to read the reaction to the loss of 125 jobs.
(Ah, I'm forgetting MPs, councillors etc have to do something to justify their own jobs).
Nowadays, I think there are a lot of people who would over the moon to hear their jobs were secure until 2014 and 2028.
Most will probably go naturally with than timescale.
Still, the folk that have made it their job over the past years to predict closure and job losses at the ranges will be stuck for something to do for a while - they'll just have to lie low faor few years, and then start all over again
125 jobs might not be many when compared to all the other job losses in recent times but in a small community it is much more significant.
Many might be lost to natural wastage, though I suspect there is a low turnover there, but it means less job opportunities for the young people and many more might move to the mainland.
2014 is five years away, and 2028 is 19 years away. that's a loss of seven jobs a year over the piece.
And these are not local lobs for young people to build their lives on.
Hirta has a dozen QinetiQ staff, the other ranges monitoring stations will no doubt be similar. These are not job opportunities for locals.
The MoD staff working at the ranges will be posted there, and you can only guess at the numbers. These are not job opportunities for locals.
Military staff operating the weaponry and any classified equipment will be posted there, again numbers can only be guessed at. These are not job opportunities for locals.
Local jobs within the range will be largely domestic and unskilled, not careers. I imagine even the support facilites will be sub-co0ntracted to SerCo, so even maintenance work will provide little local opportunity.
(And my company did the technical maintenance of the moveable range equipment, so anything needing technical expertise at the equipment level wasn't even handled locally).
I suspect this will become another Dunoon, with the political rhetoric flying, promises of the death of the area if the ranges are allowed to close, and then the same damp squib that went of when the sub base close at Dunoon, and the place is still there, and little better or worse than it was before.
I wonder if the news will soon carry counts of the number of local traders, shops, garages, hotels, etc that will be going out of business, and the hundreds, or even thousands, of locals that will be thrown on to the breadline as a result, and the thousands of £s that the local economy will no see being poured in thanks top the MoD?
I hope the real, not my imagined (and cynical) version plays out in the media, but I suspect that an eagle-eye will be needed due to the remoteness of the site, the numbers involved, and the timescale.
But I will be watching, because like RAF Buchan for example, the facility is largely still there, just the staffing is changes to suit modern technology.
I didn't expect the various groups to jump in quite so fast, but the following have all got in early to have their respective cards marked as "concerned":
UK government SNP Labout Highlands and Islands Enterprise Comhairle Nan Eilean Siar
Because I already knew the MoD was committed to paying £100,000 per annum to the National Trust for Scotland (NTS) for Hirta (St Kilda) until 2030, and the story currently places the base there (unmanned, but still in need of visits) until 2028, I wasn't sure what the reaction would be to this aspect of the story.
Although the usual cry is for the removal of the blot and scourge of the MoD installation from the haven of Hirta, as expected, the coin has been flipped now that the writing is on the wall for the base, and the wailing has already begun, with the first tale of woe regarding the departure of the base appearing in the news:
By the time this story dies, there will probably have been enough money wasted in meetings, campaigns, hearings and enquiries to have kept most of the jobs - well, maybe not, but I'm sure you know what I mean. The jobs will still go, but a lot of hangers-on will now see their jobs secured for the next few years as they keep this story on the boil.
Still, at least we can follow it, and see what happens.
It is a bit like the predominantly very left wing Labour and SNP MPs and MSPs who are intrinsically anti-nuclear weapons and generally anti-military but want the continued presence of the armed forces (including Faslane / Coulport) because of all the jobs!
Incidentally before Rosyth was built (just before WWI) there were very few Scots in the Royal Navy because of the RN system of a home port. All the home ports were in the South of England so anyone joining the RN would have to either move his family there or have a long journey home to visit them.
Remarkable, previously you would have had little trouble in finding references to people calling for the military to be run off Hirta (St Kilda) because of all the environmental unnaturalness they bring to the island, and the disruption things like the base lighting causes to the natural life cycles of the birds nesting there, and their young.
Now, the suggestion that the base be removed (many years hence, not tomorrow) is bringing all sort of wailing and moaning about the future of the island, and all of a sudden, the sustained presence of the military base is now apparently essential to the survival of the island.
Now, we are told, The National Trust for Scotland (NTS) has said the move could affect the islands' dual Unesco World Heritage status. Without the assistance of the MoD and QinetiQ the trust said the islands could lose their status as the UK's only dual heritage site.
Now, NTS has said radar personnel are a deterrent against vandalism by visitors and assisted in monitoring potential environmental threats.
Then again, the NTS might be more worried about losing their further benefit in that the military shares travel costs of getting to the archipelago, 41 miles offshore from the Western Isles, and in Atlantic water that can often see a trip aborted due to the weather, just as you arrive.
Odd, I thought I was the only person that had made the observation jmb made above about those military jobs on the Clyde (Shhh... don't tell anybody else ).
It sounds as if they could be losing the two jobs on the Clyde by combining control functions between several sites
Quoted Text
Elsewhere, control arrangements for the underwater sonar and magnetic ranges around the Clyde will be managed in a single range-control building.
One thing that I always find annoying about announcements like this is that if you go to the company's website in the hope that you might get the full story then you rarely find the press release there. The last news item on the QinetiQ website seems to be 28th May. The press nearly always either don't report the full details or mess them up so why can't we have access to the actual press release?
No point in looking at QinetiQ though, it is only a subcontractor to the MoD, who are making the current announcements - you need to look the MoD's press releases. They're the ones in control at the moment, and calling the shots - QinetiQ will just do what it is told when the time comes.
Which you can't do at this moment in time... as I write, all their servers are down (must be a conspiracy - they are monitoring this thread, and removed the information so it could not be discussed ).
QinetiQ only issue "good" news in their news releases, being a business seeking to win contracts and grow confidence. I doubt any of the items discussed here will ever appear in their news section. Loss of business, even if not under your control, is not good news. On a side note, recalling an earlier topic that spread into the old myth of reading car number plates and newspapers from satellites...
If you go back to the 2007 news archives maintained by QinetiQ, there are TopSat images on offer in reasonably high (300 dpi) resolution, and these show what it does.
TopSat was launched in 2005, and carries out imaging with a ground resolution of 2.5 metres, which seems about right for the images provided.
The intelligence agencies rarely publish their best images and even then usually reduce resolution. I am sure the National Reconnaissance Office have far better resolution that 2.5m - there is no way that Western intelligence agencies would allow one of their current satellites be launched on a Russian rocket.
The KH-13 was believed to have resolution of around 0.1 to 0.04 metres in 1999 so it is certain to have improved since then. Some seem to think about 2 cm or 1" is about the probable best possible resolution.
Sorry but unless someone puts an image in my hand that proves even 0.1 m let alone 0.02 m then as far as I'm concerned these are fantasy numbers pushed out by the agencies to keep their opposite number guessing.
It could be argued that it would make sense to release "best resolution" images (of non-sensitive subjects) on the basis that the other side will make the assumption that yet better resolution is available but withheld, and will waste money and resources chasing an all but unachievable goal.
After all these years there should be "leaked" pics floating about on the net, showing the secret capabilities of the spy satellites, and none of those that can be found have resolutions anything like the fantasy numbers like 2 cm.
It's interesting to compare spy plane images with satellite images, and if we restrict these to operational images taken from around 80,000 feet, then the images are remarkably similar in terms of resolution. Is there a little gnome in a back room carefully matching these to make sure nothing too good is released?
I have some other images taken at lower altitudes, but although these show relatively stunning detail and would certainly go below 1 metre or better (can't tell how much from the quality of the reprint of course), their lower altitude would put them well within missile range, so would not (have been) practical in a real world mission.
The beauty of the silly resolution numbers the "expert writers" pull from thin air is that they have no need to justify them, or provide any evidence.
Here's a thought...
These fantastic resolutions have to be achieved during daylight hours, when the atmosphere is at its busiest and most turbulent thanks to the sun and land/sea temperature variations.
That said, if this subject pops up in say ten years time, when new satellites are aloft, and using digital imaging image stabilisation and CCDs that are being used on the ground at the moment, then if the daytime atmospheric effects are not some kind of ultimate limiting factor (and it may be that reverse astronomy techniques might be employed to overcome them) then I wouldn't be surprised to see the fantasy resolution numbers being achieved.
I think the 2cm figure came from a calculation allowing for atmospheric disturbances and size of optics, presumably there is also now a lot of computer processing using multiple images - things have changed a lot from the days of the Wild A5!
There would be no point in releasing a sample image to scare the other side, they would never know whether taken from space or a low flying aircraft.
The same applied to computers, people like NSA and perhaps GCHQ have always been said to have computers significantly more powerful than those used by anyone else. The difference is probably not as great now but is sure to be still the case. I know someone who is involved in the software supplied to an academic application, the size and speed of their database is mind-boggling. He also does a lot work for other agencies so I can imagine they have even bigger and faster systems.
I have a saying that I get to use every so often, and I think it's due to be dusted off and brought out again...
Be careful what you wish for... you just might get it!
The reductions around the Benbecula ranges are once again being heralded as a "bad thing", and probably by those who we could probably dig into the past of, and find that they used to hail the presence of the ranges as "bad thing".
Quite a common effect really. I understand Salisbury Plain is home to several rare species whose habitat remains untouched appart from the odd tank or two.
Plans to cut missile testing facilities in the Western Isles should be subject to a longer consultation, according to Scotland's finance secretary.
...
John Swinney welcomed a three-week extension to the consulation period, but said it should last 90 days.
...
Mr Swinney said: "The case against these job cuts and the effect they would have on the Uists as remote island communities is compelling. Both at a local and national level, the taskforce set up to push for alternative solutions is compiling strong evidence that this course of action is the wrong route to take."
Hope this "compelling case" is published somewhere, soon.
There are signs and portents of doom though, as jargon has been spotted on the horizon :
A socio-economic study has been commissioned by Highland and Islands Enterprise (HIE).
I may be wrong (although I know I'm not ), but didn't we see a news item a few months ago, calling for jargon to be dropped by authorities, and simple, plain language that means what says should used when communicating with the public?
125 jobs might not be many when compared to all the other job losses in recent times but in a small community it is much more significant.
While jmb's comment was reasoned and makes sense, is the following ridiculous, and does it do more damage than good?
Quoted Text
Campaigners have warned that a loss of defence jobs in the Western Isles will have an impact equivalent to the Royal Bank of Scotland and the Bank of Scotland both closing their doors in Edinburgh, or 300,000 jobs being axed in London.
Sad to note that the campaigner's have also played the Kiddy Card, and trottet children of range staff to stage a protest to confront visiting ministers.
Unfortunately, this suggests they cannot find a business reason for sustainability, and need to resort to emotional media blackmail. While it's a valid card, they should only have to play it later, to emphasise a successful business case, not as an opening shot, which implies they are struggling already.
Odd, since they appear to have identified a potentially valid business case for the range, and a weakness in the MoD review system that recognises cost savings, but not business potential when assessing operations such as this range.
Home
Calendar
Search
Register
Login
South Uist Missile Range
Print Thread
Report to Moderator
Logged
Private message
Site
(Shhh... don't tell anybody else 
:
Thread Tags
