1 Air Division
Deployment Airfields

The runways at each of the deployment airfields are in usable condition but critical items such as POL storage, ammunition storage, and communications are not completed and preclude the airfields being used operationally. In addition, until such time as the warehouses or hangars are completed, pre-stocking cannot be undertaken. Completion and acceptance of the airfields cannot be foreseen before the end of 1959 at the earliest, although limited use may be possible during the summer of 1959.

1 Air Division’s doubts concerning the usefulness of vicinity dispersal sites under conditions of fallout were confirmed by the report submitted by the AFHQ Nuclear Defence Team which visited 1 Air Division during Apr and May.

1 Air Division then informed AAFCE that present vicinity dispersal plans were considered impractical, and recommended that these be discarded. It was further recommended that a percentage of the infrastructure funds, which could be saved by this action, be used to provide the required shelter for personnel, and storage space for material, at the main and deployment airfields.

MOD Belgium, Luxembourg, France and Germany were advised of 1 Air Division’s recommendations to AAFCE and it was suggested that the countries concerned might wish to suspend the development of these areas pending the acceptance or otherwise of these proposals. AFHQ, however, considered that 1 Air Division’s action was premature and directed that 1 Air Division cancel the messages to the various MODs.

A reply has not been received to 1 Air Division’s request to AAFCE referred to in a previous paragraph, but it is understood that the dispersal policy is under review at SHAPE and AAFCE.

No progress has been made, during the 1 Jun 58 to 30 Nov 58 period, with Luxembourg concerning the use of Sandweiler by the RCAF. Luxembourg has an election coming up early in the new year and it is hoped that an agreement will be reached shortly after a new government is formed.

In Jun 58 AFHQ offered Air Division Design Authority responsibility for the Telecom Installation in the new Telecom Convoys to be supplied for the four deployment airfields. Subject to AFHQ agreement with certain provisions and reservations, Air Div indicated willingness to accept the Design Authority responsibility. Air Div was appointed Design Authority effective 1 Sep 58 by AFHQ. Certain items of equipment were to be provided from RCAF stocks and other items, including UHF, Quadradars, Crypto, etc., were to be procured. In Oct 58, action on mobile telecom installations was placed in abeyance pending clarification of the "no-dispersal" concept.

1 Dec 57 to 31 May 58

The present 1 Air Division posture of three squadrons per airfield was developed when the primary threat of attack was from non-atomic weapons. We are now faced with an enemy who has the capability of delivering an attack of mass destruction. As a result, MC-60, a NATO approved document called for the provision of additional airfields to permit air forces to deploy squadrons, and 1 Air Division has been assigned four deployment airfields at Rocroi, St. Hubert, Bertrix and Sandweiler. It is planned to deploy one Sabre Squadron from each Wing, but it is not intended to deploy the CF-100 Squadrons.

The runways at each of the four deployment airfields are in usable condition, and if these airfields were pre-stocked they could be used in an emergency.

The construction progress at St Hubert and Bertrix should permit flying operations by 31 Dec 58. However the construction will carry on during 1959, and any occupancy during 1958 will interfere with the contractors and consequently delay the completion date.

The construction at Rocroi is very slow and little is planned for 1958.

The majority of the facilities called for under the E500 criteria for Sandweiler are completed. These, in many cases, are in use by the operators of the airport but can be used by the RCAF on exercises or in an emergency once the agreements have been completed.

One of the requirements of MC-60, a NATO Council approved document, is that airfield facilities will be dispersed permanently to a site at least seven kilometers away from the airfield. This requirement does not include hangars and buildings associated with aircraft maintenance.

The visit during April and May, of the AFHQ Nuclear Defence Team, headed by W/C WJF Young, produced information which indicates the necessity of re-studying the vicinity dispersal concept. Originally, the vicinity dispersal concept was developed to counter blast effects of atomic attacks on airfields. It now appears that the major threat is fallout rather than blast and that the present concept of vicinity dispersal, under tentage, from main and deployment airfields is unsatisfactory if 1 Air Division forces are to survive and operate.

Belgium – One meeting was held with representatives of the Canadian Embassy, Brussels, and one with representatives from the Canadian Embassy and MOD Belgium in respect to the use of two airfields in Belgium by the RCAF.

Subsequent to these meetings, the Belgium – Canada Agreement for the use of St Hubert and Bertrix airfields was signed on 29 Aug 58.

Luxembourg – Meetings have been held with representatives of the Canadian Embassy, Brussels and MOD Luxembourg in respect to the use of Sandweiler by the RCAF.

To date, agreement has not been reached on the text of the Canada – Luxembourg Agreement for the use of Sandweiller by the RCAF.

1 Jun 57 to 30 Nov 57

To reduce the possibility of being crippled by a sudden mass aerial attack, SACEUR developed a plan for the dispersal of his forces, to improve their ability to withstand the initial blow and to still retain a retaliatory capability. This plan, known as MC 60, was adopted by the NATO Military Committee in Apr 56.

The SHAPE message AG6160 PANDP, 11 Feb 57 gave approval for the allocation of the following four deployment airfields to 1 Air Division: