Talk:RAF Digby

Gate Guard

Hi,

My name is Terry McSweeney and I was a Sgt instructor at the Aerial Erector School and the Treasurer and Tour Guide of the Museum at RAF Digby from 1998 – 1999 and gave many lectures for the tours held there. At your site under “Article” for RAF Digby you describe the “Gate Guard” as a Hurricane. This is incorrect as it is most definitely a Spitfire (I think it is a Mk5 to be honest).

Also describing the “Sector Operations Room” as an ex-nuclear bunker is no where near the mark. We reverted it back to its near replication of the role of the original building of 1939 as a Sector Operations Room of the time.

Please take time in assimilating this information and look at other web-sites to confirm the information I have imparted to you.

Regards

Terry McSweeney

Further on the Sector Ops room, this is now fitted out as it would have been during WW2 and is viewable by the public on Sundays by pre arrangement. How you "pre arrange" I do not know but a call to RAF Digby will probably resolve that question. GTX958

Douglas B-18

This is the station where the RAFs interwar bombing experiments were carried out and is also what the RAF's version of the Douglas B-18 was named after. Ian Dunster 22:40, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

So when is an RAF Station not an RAF station?

Digby remains an RAF station and is listed as such by the RAF. The fact that it's operated by ICG is really neither here nor there. The nature of the Defence Estate in the UK is such that a great many sites are owned by one service and occupied or operated by elements of another or in many cases a "joint" organisation. That's a reality of jointery, the site still needs to be owned by someone, and few of the joint organisations have the resourcing or the appetite to get into property management.

Compare with Chicksands for example, that's very firmly an Army camp, operated by the Int Corps and home to a number of joint organisations. It's owned and operated by Int Corps not DI. In the same way Digby remains owned by the crabs.

ALR (talk) 04:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Can we call a temporary halt on the article's current edit warring and try and iron out an acceptable form of words here on the discussion page first? There must be a compromise in here somewhere. 21st CENTURY GREENSTUFF 10:16, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

My personal view is that the command and control issue is not contested but 'the name on the tin' is still RAF ... there is an RAF webpage, The RAF still list it as a current station and there is an RAF station commander (albeit in a minor command role), plus the sign on the roadside still says RAF Digby. Can we find a form of words that says RAF Digby IS an RAF station but then fully explains the command status? It can can change to the past tense WAS when and if the signboard outside the facility changes. 21st CENTURY GREENSTUFF 11:00, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Tbh the wording that I put in this morning was probably the most concise and accurate reflection: It is an RAF station, it's operated by ICG. I'm not entirely sure what the issue is here, there is a body of evidence that identifies it as an RAF station, and it's a well exercised model that one service owns a site whilst other services may have the majority of responsibility for the operations.

Elements of the Armed Forces Act allow for the Station Commander to be subordinate to the Commander of the dominant lodger unit. MEnwith Hill is a useful comparator, the Station Commander is a crab who looks after the basic infrastructure, liaison with UK authorities and fulfils national responsibilities, whilst the most senior individual responsible for the operations of Menwith Hill is from another organisation.

ALR (talk) 12:47, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Interestingly last year (2011) the roadside signboard changed to one indicating 'JSSO Digby' but a few weeks ago I noticed that the sign has again changed back to read 'RAF Digby'. Is there some form of internal power struggle going on there? 21st CENTURY GREENSTUFF 17:22, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

There seemed to be a consensus here that the station was still an RAF station and should be referred to as such in the article. Going by the RAF Digby website wand the Digby Digest magazine(which indicates an RAF Wing Commander is in charge of the station) it would appear to still be the case that the station is operated by the RAF, although the vast majority of its operations are through the Joint services signals organisation which is known as 'JSSO (Digby)'. The intro paragraph currently says 'JSSO Digby', I propose it is changed back to 'RAF Digby'. Thx811 (talk) 19:21, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

The updated RAF website confirms that the station is named RAF Digby (https://www.raf.mod.uk/our-organisation/stations/raf-digby/). I've updated the intro to reflect this. Thx811 (talk) 15:27, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on RAF Digby. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120304162916/http://www.rafbdhistory.co.uk/new_page_6.htm to http://www.rafbdhistory.co.uk/new_page_6.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:41, 20 May 2017 (UTC)