Binbrook
BINBROOK: Military aerodrome
Note: This picture (2017) was obtained from Google Earth ©
Much of the WW2 airfield layout can still be discerned, and indeed it appears that the infrastructure, hangars etc, have survived and still in use for various purposes.
Military users: WW2: RAF Bomber Command 1 Group
12 & 142 Sqdns (Fairey Battles* later Vickers Wellingtons)
460 (RAAF) Sqdn (Avro Lancasters)
Note: It appears that 460 Sqdn were the only RAAF squadron in 1 Group. Today we can ask why? The answer is that aircrews from the British Empire 'Dominians' were mostly treated in a quite disgraceful way by the RAF, often being given appalling conditions to live in and provided with 'clapped out' aircraft. There was at one stage the next best thing to a mutiny by these aircrews - and then their living conditions, at least, improved.
1 G.G. School
Post 1945: RAF Bomber Command 9(IX), 12, 100 & 617 Sqdns**
50 Sqdn (English Electric Canberras)
101 Sqdn (Avro Lincolns then English Electric Canberras)
Central Fighter Establishment
64 Sqdn (Gloster Javelins)
85 Sqdn (English Electric Canberras & Gloster Meteors)
1965 to 1988: 5 & 11 Sqdns (English Electric Lightnings)
University Air Squadron
Location: About 7nm NE of Market Rasen, and Inm+ of Binbrook on the B1203, roughly 9nm SW to SSW of Grimsby
Period of operation: 1940 to 1988
Runways: WW2: Originally grass. The hard runways being installed during 1942/43
03/21 1828x46 hard 08/26 1280x46 hard
14/32 1280x46 hard
1988: 03/21 2286x46 hard
NOTES: In WW2, (from 1943?), hard standings were provided for 36 heavy bombers.
*The Fairey Battle was perhaps the most useless bomber type employed in the early stages of WW2? It had some stiff competition for this title though, the runners up being the Bristol Blenheim and Handley Page Hampden. The Armstrong-Whitworth Whitley wasn’t too far behind these either.
This said, what is often overlooked is that, apart from the Battle and Blenheim, the Hampden and Whitley and certainly the Vickers Wellington, compared very favourably with the German bombers, and look how much damage they did. The main problem was that initially the RAF sent over their bombers in small numbers, not aided by the fact that many RAF aircrews couldn’t navigate accurately.
THE RAF FOUGHT BACK
After the Luftwaffe were employed on a 'Blitz' campaign against British cities, the British government decided we should retaliate in kind. It took nearly two years before we had the capability to really make a difference, but once started, it did indeed turn the tide of events. Unfortunately for the German population, their Nazi leaders were in denial. They should have surrendered in 1943 after the attack on Hamburg. But, let us not make no mistake, (despite the 'bull shit' being thrown about by fools who do not understand the history), every single bomb dropped on Germany after 1943 was totally and completely justified. Not least when the V.1 and V.2 'flying bombs' started arriving in England. That was outright war of a demonic nature, and everything no matter how diabolical, was a totally fair and reasonable response.
DID BINBROOK PARTICIPATE?
I have no idea if any bombers from BINBROOK actually participated, (but I suspect they might have?) in the '1000' bomber raids.
Hoewver, this does seem a convenient place to add these points made by Patrick Bishop in his excellent book Wings as this Station was pretty typical of the standards most of RAF Bomber Command aircrews had reached by this period: “With the blitzkrieg rippling towards France there was no longer any virtue in restraint. Any remaining hopes that the Germans might choose a more scrupulous approach against Western targets than they had shown against Polish ones were shattered with the mass bombing of Rotterdam."
"After some dithering, permission was given for an attack on road and rail junctions at Mönchengladbach. This was the first of thousands of raids directed at German towns. The results were negligible…” But, of the four people killed, they did manage to kill a British citizen, Ella Ida Clegg.
THE BIG PLAN
“Four days later Bomber Command at last set out to implement its grand design, laid out in the pre-war Western Air Plans: to paralyse the enemy by attacks on its oil supply and transport nexus. Ninety-nine aircraft – thirty-nine Wellingtons, thirty-six Hampdens and twenty-four Whitleys – flew off to attack sixteen targets in Germany’s industrial heartland in the Ruhr."
"Nothing much happened. Most of the aircraft dropped their bombs, but to little effect. The standard of accuracy was abysmal. One bomb apparently aimed at a factory in Dormagen landed instead on a large farm, killing a dairyman, Franz Romeike, who was on his way to the lavatory. Some bombs fell on Münster – even though it was not on the list of towns to be hit. This black farce was the opening scene of one of the war’s great dark dramas.”
IT TOOK A WHILE
It would take roughly another three years before Bomber Command aircrews could navigate accurately enough to hit specific targets such as large factories and chemical works but shortly afterwards they’d developed the means to hit specific targets so accurately, this wasn’t much bettered for a decade or so after.
POST WW2
In May 1951 No.101 Squadron became the first to be equipped with the English Electric Canberra B.2. A most remarkable aircraft (see WARTON in LANCASHIRE for more info and records), and it went on to become the longest serving RAF type with a 55 year service record.
SPOTTERS NOTES
In the 1960s S/Ldr G R Wheeldon based his D.H.87B Hornet Moth G-ADKC here, an aircraft with a chequered history having served in WW2 at ABBOTSINCH (RENFREWSHIRE), DYCE (ABERDEENSHIRE) and HALTON (BUCKINGHAMSHIRE) at least.
Originally owned by Sir Kenneth Crossley and offered to 2CPF at ABBOTSINCH a month before being officially impressed into military service.
OTHER NOTES
**One search of this aerodrome history on the internet states that these squadrons were based here at one time or other after WW2. However, an admittedly fairly brief search of the history of these squadrons revealed that none of them list these squadrons being based here! I include this mention to illustrate just how very frustrating RAF history can be. But, as stated time and time again, this work is purely a ‘Guide’.
To further confuse matters it is of course just possible one, or some, or all these four squadrons made a temporary deployment to BINBROOK? Indeed, anybody being very cynical, (and I now include myself), may well argue that far from defending the Realm, the main purpose of the RAF was, (and possibly still is?), to constantly shuffle squadrons hither and thither.
THE MISSILE ISSUE
Over the years there has been much debate over the wisdom of the UK, at the height of the ‘Cold War’, to mainly rely on a missile based defence system and much derision has been accorded this policy. Hindsight is of course a wonderful commodity and I wish I could find a way to bottle and then sell it. Plus, British government policy rarely extends further than five years and re-election invariably takes super-priority. It seems to me, as per usual in any war scenario, that it is mostly a numbers game. CIA estimates of Soviet bomber strength were, by the mid 1960s:
Jet and Turboprop Heavy Bombers and Tankers: 100 to 200
Jet and Turboprop Medium Bombers and Tankers: 1100
Piston Medium Bombers: 150
Disregarding USAF forces based in the UK the RAF had nothing like enough fighters to counter-attack such a force, and missiles were much cheaper. What would you do? It seems to take ages to discover, for example, the exact number of English Electric Lightnings operated by the RAF in the mid 1960s but if you consider that only 337 were built, including prototypes and exports, it is quickly obvious that, if the Soviets had decided on a one-off all-out war on the west, including their missiles of course, nothing could have resisted it in Europe.
A RETURN TO COMMOM SENSE
In the end it was of course the Soviets, a nation possessing so many very intelligent people, who decided enough was enough and called for an end to this utter nonsense. It appears it is far from certain the USA would have survived either. And, who knows (?), it cannot be beyond the bounds of possibility that those in charge of this manic situation on both sides, possibly watching Peter Sellers in the 1964 film Dr Strangelove, might have been persuaded also?
Without any doubt we definitely do need scientists to enhance the human condition, but when employed in military matters they must be regarded with the greatest suspicion as many of them are utterly deranged. As pointed out elsewhere in this Guide, a considerable number of them happily helped construct an amount of nuclear weapons to destroy the world several times over. I’d have thought once was enough? And of course, exactly what would be the point of doing so?
BINBROOK AND THE LIGHTNING
I might well be mistaken, but in my memory BINBROOK was the 'home' to the Lightning.
Just watching the English Electric Lightning perform remains a very exciting memory and I am so glad to have witnessed it at a FARNBOROUGH air show when, (if memory serves), the Tiger Squadron performed a mass take-off, making the ground shake for miles around, and then appeared to climb vertically until almost out of sight. Doing this of course did not demonstrate the Lightnings best rate of climb, needless to say, but, it was spectacular to see. This said, I think I am correct in thinking the Lightning best rate of climb has never been bettered?
A SMALL NOTE
In the early 1960s the Central Fighter Establishment still had the Spitfire PS853 ‘on strength’ which then joined the Historic Aircraft Flight at COLTISHALL (NORFOLK) in April 1964.
A FITTING END?
During operations the Lightning was notoriously short of range, even with the underwing tanks which were fitted later. Therefore, any kind of extended sortie relied completely on airborne tankers being available. Initially these were Vickers Valiants and later Handley Page Victors, both of which were of course initially designed at bombers.
When Lightning operations ceased and BINBROOK closed in 1988 a Victor K2 tanker from RAF MARHAM (NORFOLK) flew in to load up with the remaining jet fuel on the base.
Rolf Metze
This comment was written on: 2018-01-05 22:40:56Hello, please note, Lightnings had bodytanks and OVERwing-tanks, never underwing tanks! :-)
We'd love to hear from you, so please scroll down to leave a comment!
Leave a comment ...
Copyright (c) UK Airfield Guide
