What the ####s happening at Oban? [Archive]

PPRuNe Radar

14th Dec 2005, 15:39

A little birdie told me that the council's expert aviation consultants have a pipe dream of someone like Ryanair eventually operating a hub there .... bwahahahahahahaha

I think they have spent too much time playing 'Microsoft Airport Manager Simulator 2005'.

Oban is at best a small GA/commuter field. It's what the airfield could support, and it's what the surrounding countryside and terrain will allow.

The dreams of large scale commerical operations, and a desire for flights to/from the islands daily for schoolkids, etc, have taken no account of reality. Guaranteed ops in Scottish winter conditions (or some summer days for that matter) where it will be difficult if not impossible to devise a regularly useable instrument approach which gives even a half chance of landing simply highlight the basic physical problems that this development faces.

Oban under Paul was brilliant at what it is suited for. A real touch of class when it came to customer service and provision. It could be developed a little more (and I'm sure Paul and Brian were more than up to the job), for example, scenic flights during the summer, perhaps a floatplane facility by the shore, and a small scale inter island operation (probably seasonal again). Hard to see the market or operational possibilities of anything else.

I wonder how much the poor local council tax payers and UK/European tax payers in general have been fleeced for the provision of an unworkable dream ???

Mon, 07 Nov 2005 16:22:56

The announcement by the Scottish Executive of a £6m investment package to fund the creation of a regional air hub at Oban, and two new licensed airfields on Coll and Colonsay has been welcomed by Argyll and Bute Council.

Argyll and Bute Council Leader Allan Macaskill said. "This really is excellent news for Argyll, Oban and for our island communities. During the winter Coll, Colonsay and Tiree are serviced by three ferry journeys a week. The Argyll Air Services project will create a "hub" providing a daily connection to Oban, dramatically improving access to services and providing vital business and tourist links. This is a key factor in supporting the sustainable growth of some of Scotland's most fragile island communities.

"In the long term, I hope that the "hub" will link into the wider Highlands and Islands Air Services Network, contributing to the area's strategic transport network. The Scottish Executive funding will directly support the running costs of the improved airport at Oban. The funding received from Argyll and the Islands Enterprise and the European Development Fund has evidenced a real partnership approach to improving services to some of our most remote communities."

The project is HITRANS' top priority and involves the upgrading of Oban Airport and forming new airstrips on Coll and Colonsay to create licensed airfields which can support scheduled air services. This will allow the commencement of an Argyll islands air network feeding into the Oban hub.

and from the Highlands & Islands Airports Ltd Board Meeting in April 2005, it seems Pauls card was already marked.

4.6 Oban Airport: Update

Mr Macleod had met with James McLellan, Chief Executive of Argyll and Bute Council on Friday 22 May. The Council had seen the pitfalls of their earlier proposals to transfer ownership given the ongoing contracts with the incumbent operator. The Council are content with the current direction which is that they will continue to own the airport and appoint a manager to oversee the project initially. In time they intend to put the operation of the airport out to tender. The Board agreed that in principle HIAL would be prepared to tender but wanted to be able to give detailed consideration to this at the appropriate time.

possibly started by this paragraph in the 'consultants' report

The airfield management (TLC) has attracted general and business aviation to the airport. The market, in which they operate, is for individuals who have the means and ability to use general aviation and therefore are likely to have a high propensity to spend which makes a positive contribution to the local economy. However, such services do not meet the objective of greater social inclusion and accessibility for the general public. It is the intention of TLC to grow the airport within this market, building on the growth they have achieved since they were franchised to run the airfield.

Full report is here (www.hie.co.uk/ oban-lifeline-hub-final-report---june-2003.pdf )

'India-Mike

14th Dec 2005, 16:12

PH-UKU

Timely post. Oban is now to all intents and purposes unusable. Imagine - phone council, can't get through, no-fly, no fuel uplift - fuel facility then becomes untenable. Mmmmm. Method in the madness methinks. Or, phone council, get ppr, don't go. Will they then invoice on the basis that you've gone? We must try it soon, see what happens. Access to fuel is perhaps the most important operational issue here. We need easy, flexible, on-demand fuel on the West Coast between Pik and Inv.

The good news (and I'm not being facetious) is that we'll be getting two smashing island airstrips built for us. Coll and Colonsay have to be 2 of the nicest West Coast islands.

PPrune Radar - spot-on, concise post. Says it all. This is political remember - our lords and masters know best. And remember, whether local or 'national' level, we're not just dealing with any old politician. We're dealing with Scottish politicians - third-rate doesn't even begin to describe them.

Droopystop

14th Dec 2005, 18:36

Now that I would like to see - a 737 short finals to 20. No scratch that, I would like to see the look on the pilot's faces as they turn finals!!

Say again s l o w l y

14th Dec 2005, 18:48

It's a scandal and a disgrace. I'm all for organising an entire bunch of a/c to trek up to Oban for the day and give Paul some support, but there is no way I'll be calling the council for "permission."

If we turn up en-mass, what are they likely to do. It would highlight what a farce is going on and allow us to show what a loss Oban is to the GA community in Scotland.

As for getting a 73 in on 20!!!.... I'll let someone else try it first! I'll watch with a roadsweeper, ready to brush up all the pieces.

Long live the Jammy Dodger! Perhaps we could get the Flying and feasting community together for a barbecue?

PM me if anyone is interested, I'll do a quick run around most of the clubs hereabouts. (Perth, Cumbernauld, Fife, Strathallan, Glasgow.)

Johnm

14th Dec 2005, 19:42

Seems to me that a commercial service base don Trislanders or small turboprop might fly, but even with ILS there'll be a lot of no flying days.

Moreover I'm pretty sure they could leave it to Paul to organise all that and save a truckload of money. I wish.......:(

Say again s l o w l y

15th Dec 2005, 07:58

I have already recieved a bit of interest about a fly in to Oban from various people on this board and directly through the club, so I'll have a bit more of a think and see if we can't organise something.

I think I'll give the flying mags a look too and see if they can run story about it.

Whirlybird

15th Dec 2005, 08:14

SAS,

Let the flying mags know. I don't think this is reported in any of them; it's the first I've heard about it. Oban is a favourite with many, many people (me included); I think you might well get a lot of support for a fly-in...and maybe anything else, if it's not too late to change things.

And I wanted to fly to Oban again next summer. :{ :{ :{

Mariner9

15th Dec 2005, 08:17

As well as the flying mags, would be well worth getting the local (Oban) press involved too. Articles in Flyer/Pilot whatever wouldn't put much pressure on local councils IMHO. Have PM'd SAS over the flyin.

Say again s l o w l y

15th Dec 2005, 10:56

16 a/c so far! one e-mail sent to Argyll and Bute council to ask what on earth is going on, but guess what? They are out of the office and don't give you any other contact details........... Back in on Monday however.

I think if we go after Christmas, it would be best, giving time to organise as many people as possible. A weekend obviously and some good weather would be nice!

Whirly, can you let me have some contact details for some of the Mags you've written for? I'd like to get in touch with them ASAP really. Thanks.

We could turn this into a Pprune fly in aswell at this rate!

'India-Mike

15th Dec 2005, 12:16

SAS

QED! If you couldn't get through, presumably no-one else has been able to. So anyone who wants to fly to Oban this weekend, but was waiting until now to see how the wx might go, can't. No movements there this weekend then?

mad_jock

15th Dec 2005, 12:40

As i said on previous posts on the subject of Oban.

The local politics of rural highlands are famous for this.

Someone has decided that Paul is gone and or the field. The airport currently doesn't actually help any of the local councillers.

Currently they are putting together schemes which they hope won't work. Paul was putting a spanner in the works by making the airfield work.

I wouldn't mind betting that in 10 years time there will be a small village of holiday homes on the land. Which is what the councillers want because it will put more money in the coffers of the businesses they run. And also they will sell the site for a mint.
And stop that moaning face bastard at the caravan site complaining all the time. He complains about everything and tried to get violent with me when we were diving the Breda and brought the rib into shore to drop someone off. Silly bugger tried to get me nicked for carry an offensive weapon. Thanks to Strathclyde police dive team for explaining to the local plod that a 6" serated knife is part of the safety equipment for a diver.

HIAL I think are about as interested in OBan as they are in Dundee but have to play thier cards close to thier chest because they are owed by the scottish exec.

MJ

Say again s l o w l y

15th Dec 2005, 13:05

I have just spoken to the council at Oban to see what on earth is going on, I have been told that the council offices are closed at weekends, but if you want to fly up there, then you can give them a phone and get retrospective permission during the next week!!! To me this says we all have permission whenever we wish. Tel no: 01631 562 125.

How that works I have no idea, but I'll see who's up for trying it this weekend!

Oh and Paul's "given up." But may be around the airfield......
Sounded rather defensive as well.

helicopter-redeye

15th Dec 2005, 15:12

The 'strategic importance' of Oban to GA (and the military) is the fuel.

There is nowhere else in the region within reasonable range of the Western Isles.

Say again s l o w l y

15th Dec 2005, 17:43

Here's a copy of an e-mail I've just received despite originally being told that the recipient would be away until Monday.

"Dear Mr Say again slowly,

You have to get PPR from the Council because Mr Keegan decided, after having previously agreed to continue on a short term basis until the new regime is in place, that he would not do so. We decided that with lower numbers of users in December we could operate without radio. We hope to get air/ground radio re established in January prior to work starting on upgrading the infrastructure.
I suggest you phone for PPR prior to the weekend.
We greatly hope Mr Keegan and TLC will continue to provide a service at Oban Airport.
Yours Sincerely,"

I think a phonecall to Paul tomorrow would be in order and I'll see what response I get from my latest e-mail.

Whirlybird

16th Dec 2005, 07:38

SAS, check your pms.

wbryce

19th Dec 2005, 17:44

SAS,

Count me in on the airtourer if no ones already commited the aircraft....but not on Christmas day! may be a w&b issue! :D

with regards to the 737 turning finals for rwy 20...the caravan park owner will no doubt have something useless to say...and in these nanny state times, noise abaitment procedures will no doubt result in an engines off landing! :E

Say again s l o w l y

19th Dec 2005, 21:31

Thanks to all who've replied and want to come, particular thanks to Whirly for the contact details.

At the moment it looks as if we'll need a 73 for everyone to come! I'm planning on going during January, 14th or 15th maybe? Earlier would be fine, so if anyone has any preferences, let me know. 7th/8th?14th/15th? Weekends would obviously be best.

I'll be away over Christmas, but I'll keep everyone upto date. I'm still awaiting a response from Argyll and Bute council on numerous points which I'll post here when I get a reply from them.

S205-18F

21st Dec 2005, 11:45

Great I thought I had missed the Oban flyin and even better news is the dates as I am on holiday for the 7/8th so count me in and I will contact my buddies at the Glasgow Helibase to see if I can get Helimed 5 to come out to play too.
I know that Tam and the rest love to stop at Oban for Jammy Dodgers.
Paul needs all the support he can get and I cant believe the council cant see what a brilliant job he was doing in attracting new custom to the airfield.
Maybe they can and dont like his success! The Green Eyed Monster has raised its ugly head:}
John.

LDG_GEAR _MONITOR

21st Dec 2005, 16:28

I could join you if you do the 14th - but i woud def need fuel to get home ! be about 4hrs each way - in a PA38

Say again s l o w l y

21st Dec 2005, 16:38

14th it is then, with the option of the 15th if weather looks dodgy.

If anyone wants to go but hasn't got an a/c, then we can take about 6/7 people in the Islander from Cumbernauld.

sjm

23rd Dec 2005, 18:01

Bloody Outrageous!!!! :mad: :ugh: :mad: :mad:

Paul is a great guy always made me and my crews feel very welcome, many a night stop in oban, this will be a great loss to the west coast of Scotland.

Typical bloody politics and people running things they neither care or understand into the ground for a few coffers.

CDH

29th Dec 2005, 10:15

Sounds like a good idea, but will Paul & Brian still be there in Jan?
See other Oban threads (sorry no link)

I would have liked to join in but going on Hols 8th to 15th.
I'll check this thread on return incase the fly-in date moves back though.

Ringway Flyer

3rd Jan 2006, 19:40

Only been a couple of times to Oban, the first to explore the locality, i.e., the Scottish Islands. Paul & Brian are the best ambassadors for that part of the world, bar NONE!! The hospitality and helpful attitude is an education for most other airfields in the UK. If this all goes ahead, it will be worst case of nose cutting off this century. Can't the council see what they're going to lose??
We'll do our best to be there on the 14th/15th.... Suffering jammy doger withdrawall symptoms already!

saq246

7th Jan 2006, 07:26

The happenings at Oban made me so incensed that I finally got around to registering on this site!

Count me in for the fly-in! I will be coming from Suffolk and will try to arrange some other aircraft aswell. Hope the weather will be ok!

SAS, I have pm'd you.

'India-Mike

7th Jan 2006, 14:56

So, are we going for the 14th, with 15th as weather option? Need to know to let the chaps know here. Should be able to get 1-4 aeroplanes from this end - that includes you, PH-UKU. You can leave the tin-pushing to others that weekend!

The Westmorland Flye

7th Jan 2006, 17:26

The goings on at Oban and, especially, this thread have propelled me at long last into registering on PPRuNe.

I know Paul Keegan quite well and I had a long telephone conversation with him this afternoon. I'd like to share with you the upshot of this conversation, at least as far as it relates to a possible flyin. I make no recommendations, I merely provide material for discussion.

Paul is far from happy that a flyin, especially at this time, would aid his cause, or that of a GA friendly Oban.

1. PPR is a concern. You have to contact the council and pay in advance. Otherwise you don't have PPR. Large numbers of GA pilots turning up without proper PPR could be very viewed in a very negative light by the council.

2. There is no radio at Oban. This clearly has safety implications, especially if the WX is less than friendly, as it often is at this time of the year. Yes, we can use the Oban frequency as a sort of SafetyCom but that has its own legality issues. An example of Paul's concern is if the wind is calm and people try landing on 01 and 19 simultaneously! Yes, I know we wouldn't do that... would we?

3. Negotiations are at a delicate stage and there is much ground to cover, both for Paul and for the council. A flyin at such a time could be perceived as being provocative by certain factions.

Paul would love to sell us all some AvGas and, of course, there's no problem with small numbers of aircraft, correctly PPR'd, etc. A mass rally at Oban might not be quite such a good idea.

I have my aircraft booked for next Saturday and am as game as anyone else to fly up to Oban. We ought to carefully think what it is that we are trying to achieve and consider whether a mass flyin will further our cause.

John.
G-JLIN - Carlisle

helicopter-redeye

7th Jan 2006, 17:55

You have to contact the council and pay in advance. Otherwise you don't have PPR.

I'm struggling to think of anywhere else in the UK (world??) where you have to 'pay in advance' ???

Contracturally, if you then do not use the facility that has been paid for, how can a UK public body accept payments for services that are not supplied?

AND if you were to crash en route in poor or declining met conditions due pressonitis because you had paid for a service that you could not reclaim if you did not use it, would Oban Council be liable ??

Confirms for me all of the worst rumours about politicians the world over.

:ugh:

'India-Mike

7th Jan 2006, 20:41

Sounds like a fly-in is off.

Now where can I take the Chippy next weekend, then....Need a grass refamil.....Mull is the best in the locale. Aircraft might be a 22A but it'll still need fuel to get back home. Hmmm.

Say again s l o w l y

7th Jan 2006, 21:44

I think a thorough rethink is necessary, the sheer volume of people wishing to attend has turned this into something that needs to be done properly, rather than any ad-hoc fly-in, especially with upto 50 a/c at an uncontrolled and non radio field.

I know Paul has reservations and at the moment so do I. If there were any incidents or problems it would play directly into the hands of those who seemingly want to wreck Oban as it is.

I've had a few ideas and I'll check on the feasibility of them over the next couple of days, but this is something that while it may be a morale booster, could actually be a hindrance in the long term.

Stay tuned though, something WILL be sorted out to show Paul our support, but it needs to be appropriate.

Sorry for the change at a late stage, but this needs to be done correctly. I'll keep you all updated over the next couple of days.

ChrisVJ

7th Jan 2006, 22:08

We have a strikingly similar situation here in Pemberton.

Twenty odd years ago the government spent millions building an airport as part of a regional development plan. A few years later they spent a bucket load more upgrading and building a smart terminal so we could have a local airline. Result: One very nice, very expensive, and very empty terminal.

Then they spent another bucket load installing the answer to all our problems, a microwave landing system. Did not work that well and no one used it so they took it away.

For many years the local council have not allowed anyone to start anything on the airport because they were "waiting to see what important development" would happen. Of course none did.

As nearby Whistler desperately needs some decent air access Pemberton has been touted as the answer. The problem is there is a bloody great mountain 400 yds off the end of the runway and the approach would be 400 ft over the village with a turn at late finals that coincides with wind shear from the inflow from two valleys. You can't come in the other way because that leaves you without an overshoot. The valley is steep and clouded down to the ground 50% of the days in Winter, I don't even bother counting the times I have literally driven into a wall of cloud just as I turn the bend into the valley on my way to the airport. A regular 737 service, which is what the local council wants, is just not going to happen.

Last year they commissioned a consultant. Consultant said the runway could be lengthened to 737 useable length (towards the hill!) and drew pretty plans showing little housing lots abutting the taxiway. He commented that he did not know if the approach clearances to the golf club etc would be acceptable and he did not even mention minima as a problem (what were they paying him $40,000 for?) and everyone on council said "What a wonderful report, this could be 'the big one,' now we must have some more discussion."

Oh yes, did I mention that they have just built a big new sewage works just next to and on part of where the housing lots are projected because they needed it in a hurry and the council already owned the airport. Crown land was available just a little further away but they did not want to wait for the application and granting process.

In the meantime they have skipped so many small simple opportunities that would make the airport more attractive that it makes you cry. (No public toilets because they are in the airport building which is locked up, no access to the municipal golf club (which does a decent breakfast) even though it is just a few yards away. No new small business on the airport as mentioned above, no snow clearing.

I suspect they will still be looking for "the big one" in another twenty years time. Funnily enough (well it's not funny really) Squamish, which is about the same distancee the other way (South) is in almost exactly the same position, (except that I don't think they have commissioned the $40,000 consultant's report yet.) Same approach (different hill!), same lack of facilities, same attitude, same answers to locals who want to do something there.

It is almost surreal.

Bluebeard777

19th Jan 2006, 21:58

Just looking at these posts, and thinking forward to summer flights in the glens, the least I should do for that A1 aviation gentleman Paul Keegan is to write to Argyll Council & complain about how matters are going downhill:uhoh: . Can someone tell me who the relevant person is, the chairman or whatever of the council?

Stafford

20th Jan 2006, 12:08

Flew into Oban a couple of years ago and arrived at the same time as a gaggle of Shadows. Two particularly beautiful examples of the Shadow, one Sky Blue and the other Yellow just took off after we landed and the sight of them sprinting off towards Glenforsa was spectacular. Presumably to unload the gallons of hot coffee forced on them by the lads at Oban.

Great time had by all and Paul was just so friendly and helpful. There seemed to be a lot of Paul's friendly helpers around for advice on just about anything, especially the safest routes around the West of Scotland for the novices among us. Spectacular scenery.

T'would be a shame if Oban falls to the great capitalist venture !

Johnm

20th Jan 2006, 16:18

I think it may be wise to stop letting heart rule head as Westmoreland Flyer suggests.

There are a number of very experienced GA operators on this forum I wonder if any of them feel willing to approach the council with words of free advice in everyone's best interests?

Notwithstanding the long term aims, they have created a short term problem but if PK feels willing to enter into a short term commercial arrangement to manage the interregnum it would have beneficial impact on his fuel sales, beneficial impact on the utilisation of the airfield and consequent revenue and we might even create a forum where the Council's plans can be assisted without bu66ering up GA in the Highlands.

The big question is there a senior officer in the Council who might listen and then advise the members?

PENNINE BOY

24th Jan 2006, 20:06

Up for a Fly in!!!
Need to keep Oban & Paul in business!!!!!

The BLACKPOOL BOYS!!!!!!!!

flybymike

31st Jan 2006, 22:49

I notice that in today's Flight International, Argyll and Bute council are advertising for an airfield development manager for Oban Coll and Colonsay , (£41000 if anyone is interested) Does anyone have any idea whether Paul Keegan has applied for the post?

Say again s l o w l y

1st Feb 2006, 07:12

The chap who was originally given the job turned it down at the last minute. He was supposed to have started this week.

I spoke to Paul on Monday and there are a few developments, for a start it seems the council forgot about a small piece of legislation called TUPE, which of course they have been reminded of now.

We really need to have a letter writing campaign otherwise I can see the end of GA at Oban for the forseeable future and that isn't acceptable.

flybymike

1st Feb 2006, 11:10

I have already emailed various parties about this fiasco when it was first publicised in the mags, but would be very happy to keep writing to anyone and everyone if anything can be done to save this little scottish jewel from further dilapidation. Does anyone know who specifically to write to about this ridiculous malarky?

MoateAir

19th Feb 2006, 18:30

http://www.argyll-bute.gov.uk/content/news/general/0038?s=906&a=0

Gives an update on what is happening. Paul is still supplying fuel, but thats about it....

Council contact details at base of page.

jayemm

19th Feb 2006, 21:08

Forgive me for being stupid, but having read the council article it seems like good news. It looks as though they or someone are investing in the airfield. Surely this is improvement? Earlier I feared that the airfield would be sold for the developers to have their way, but this does not seem to be the case. Maybe ppruners can enlighten me.

helicopter-redeye

20th Feb 2006, 09:43

Like politicians, "..we will have to wait and see"

Say again s l o w l y

20th Feb 2006, 10:41

The problem isn't the improvements, but what happens when they are completed. Will we see an HIAL type approach, where GA is not welcome and the airports are only open monday-Friday 9-5?

AOSL are the genius' who masterminded Sheffield. I think we all remember what happened there.... AOSL used to be called Humberside Aviation Services Limited.

The upgrades are a good thing, but not at the expense of losing Oban to the people who use it most.

GK430

22nd Feb 2006, 11:40

Assuming someone is appointed to the post, how much of a free rein will they be given or will they purely be the aviation mouthpiece of the Council.
I know someone who has applied and has a fair understanding of the needs of the GA community.
Having seen the advertisement, it would appear that obtaining an Aerodrome License is not a bad move and they have seemingly good intentions, i.e. having the ability to operate some limited services to some of the outer islands.
Most posters seem to have this vision of a hidden agenda, or have I misunderstood their concerns?

NorthSouth

22nd Feb 2006, 21:35

Two things:

1. The Council has only approved funding the running costs of the airport for the first year. When it gave that approval it did so on the specific condition that HIAL would take over the running of the airport (and therefore the financial risk) from the second year.

2. There are massive problems with getting the airfield licensed - particularly for any sort of commercial operations - because of the surrounding terrain. It's just possible the CAA might approve it as a VFR-only Code 1 (suitable for Islanders). But the consultants advising the council are still telling them that they can have Jetstreams etc operating schedules to Edinburgh, Glasgow and beyond. It's cloud-cuckoo land, funded by the taxpayer. There's a real danger that when the council realises what a hole it's dug for itself it'll take the easy financial option and sell the site off for housing development.

NS

2Donkeys

22nd Feb 2006, 22:06

Housing development is probably one of the least likely options, given that the area has a glut of housing and a decreasing population.

Gravel extraction would be a more probable alternative.

Southerly IFR approaches are highly unlikely at Oban thanks to the terrain to the North, but cloud-break manoeuvres don't seem impractical to me, albeit with reasonably high minima.

We don't know what the licensed LDA will be so far, but I see no reason why a Jetstream operation into Oban would be impractical. Citations regularly used the place in its unlicensed state.

2D

helicopter-redeye

23rd Feb 2006, 06:43

The Citations were probably private. The J41 Jetstreams would be revenue earning (I recall the J41 is the most expensive commercial aircraft to operate per load/hour or similiar. Whats wrong with an Islander for the run to Coll/ Collansay?)

NB is it relevent that the previous poster is at 999 posts??

Say again s l o w l y

23rd Feb 2006, 07:07

Any sort of scheduled service into Oban would need to be IFR, but there is no way on earth you could get a procedure in place given the local topography. Put it this way, would you want to fly it........

The only sensible solution to the desire of having a service between Oban, Coll, Colonsay and Tiree would be to use an Islander, the even dafter thing is that one of the local Islander operators has a dispensation to operate from unlicenced fields, so why the council don't just let them try the route first before spending the vast sums of money that will be required to licence all the strips?

It's a complete farce and a total waste of tax payers money, but councils never seem to bothered about that do they..... :mad:

NorthSouth

23rd Feb 2006, 07:44

Housing development is probably one of the least likely options, given that the area has a glut of housing and a decreasing population. Gravel extraction would be a more probable alternative.You may well be right but the point is, stones or homes, they'd both generate income for the council which an airport never will.
Southerly IFR approaches are highly unlikely at Oban thanks to the terrain to the North, but cloud-break manoeuvres don't seem impractical to meCan you tell me anywhere in the UK where such a procedure has been approved by the CAA? The high ground to the north precludes any approach pointing at the airfield due to the effects on the missed approach - unless you accept a ridiculously high MDA - so a cloudbreak procedure would have to be to somewhere in the middle of the firth, followed by a VFR transit. That would presumably require vis minima high enough to see the airfield from the missed approach point, which would be several km away. Then of course it would require a circling approach. The UK's main Jetstream operator doesn't allow circling approaches.
I see no reason why a Jetstream operation into Oban would be impractical. Citations regularly used the place in its unlicensed stateAll the Citations I've seen there were carrying one passenger, operating in wide open VMC, and in conditions where there was a significant headwind component on runway 19. The obstacle limitation surfaces for both 01 and 19 are breached on short final. This will mean displaced thresholds at both ends. A Jetstream would require >1100 metres. Highly unlikely that is achievable at Oban and the CAA have already told consultants that.
As SAS says, it's sad that a perfectly achievable and sustainable air service has been rejected by the council because it wants to be up with the big boys. Shetland Council manages to run daily scheduled services to four unlicensed strips, on a CAA exemption, at a fraction of the cost proposed for the Oban operation.
NS

boomerangben

23rd Feb 2006, 08:46

Stornoway has a cloud break procedure which approved and plated.

neutron

23rd Feb 2006, 11:21

I can't see even a cloud-break proceedure based on an the airfield NDB ever being approved at Oban. There is an unofficial let-down, used by inbounds in IMC - at BRUCE, followed by a VFR transit to Oban. Much less to hit at BRUCE with GOW & TIR VORs + radar from Scottish 127.275. Never seen anything like that approved in the UK though!

Neutron

NorthSouth

23rd Feb 2006, 12:29

Stornoway has a cloud break procedure which approved and plated.Indeed. But:
1. It's one of nine approved IAPs for that airfield, and all 8 others have lower minima for Cat B aircraft and above. Oban would only have that one procedure.
2. The Stornoway procedure is an aerodrome approach procedure, with a MAPt only half a mile short of the field. Because of the high ground N of Oban a cloudbreak procedure there would probably have to be to a new NDB on Lismore or somewhere away from the airfield, followed by a lengthy visual transit to the field
3. Stornoway procedure uses VOR which has a smaller obstacle assessment area so lower minima. Oban's would be NDB
4. The terrain round Oban's much less forgiving than Stornoway. 25nm MSA at EGPO is 2300 (cf Oban 4700); 10nm MSA is 3700 (cf Oban 5500).
NS

Say again s l o w l y

23rd Feb 2006, 12:58

So in reality a daily IFR service to/from Oban would be an accident waiting to happen without an enormous expenditure or leap forward in technology.

At one point they were hoping to get 737's in there.........:eek: :eek:

clearfinalsno1

23rd Feb 2006, 14:08

As a non IFR trained PPL, what is the real limiting factor here, the accuracy of ground based radio navigation aids close to undulating terrain, or aircraft performance?

This was just really picking up on the previous posters comment that a " leap forward in technology" would be required - did you mean the navaids or the aircraft? We can assume the later stays constant (unless a radical new discovery in physics/wing design allows aircraft to fly much slower). So, if GPS is used for primary navigation would this not allow for pin-point let downs over the Firth or Lorn or Loch Linnee? Would this then just require some sort of NDB approach to the airfield from this let down point over the water? Assuming this is all ok, is the problem (considering an approach from the south) that a missed approach cannot incorporate an immediate climbing left turn (to avoid the mountain at the end of the runway). Also I realise that the ground to the south of the airfield is quite hilly but can't the approach plate just emphasise the risks of deviating from the 3 , 4 or whatever is required degree of glideslope. Surely some of these airports in Nepal and similar have unusual Instrument procedures like this?

Before you shoot me down, I apologise if some of my points sound dumb - as I said at the start I have no formal IFR training or knowledge - just a can-do outlook. I have also flown into Oban a number of times, VFR in a PA28.

Finally, how long does a 737 need? It seemed a bit of a squeeze getting into Rome Ciampino in my Easyjet 737 flight the other day - a stamp on the brakes affair.

GK430

23rd Feb 2006, 14:54

Well, I thank you all for the responses generated since my post.
I appreciate the terrain issues etc. etc. however, there seems to be a lot of negativity generally ref: the Council's plans.

Many airport's in the U.K. have been/still are operated by Councils or have them still as shareholders; i.e. Manchester - Birmingham and on a smaller scale, Gloucester. Airports can be good investments. Additionally, aerodrome operators have to look at the wider picture; what good can an airport be in terms of its support for the the local populace and businesses.

I must confess to never having been to Oban and therefore do not pretend to understand the geographical features, the local infrastructure nor, above all, the politics.
One poster mentioned Nepal - how about Bhutan! There are areas in the world where high ground, obstacles, poor wx and safety criteria can mix.
GPS approaches will get accepted one day; EVS is already here - if you can afford it; steeper ILS apps can be licensed etc.

A real shame Cessna Caravan I's can't be used for commercial ops in this country. Islanders, unless you buy a shiny turbine one are getting a bit long in the tooth.

Maybe an acceptable operation that mixes in with everyone's aspirations can be devised.

GK

737's.....some aspirations need lowering

NorthSouth

23rd Feb 2006, 15:18

if GPS is used for primary navigation would this not allow for pin-point let downs over the FirthIn a word, yes. But we're still a long way from that in terms of CAA approval. As for Nepal and Bhutan, I suspect their accident stats might be rather eye-watering.
NS

Say again s l o w l y

23rd Feb 2006, 15:53

There are ways to make an approach feasible, but there are other issues such as what happens in the event of an emergency.

As NS mentions the accident rates in Nepal and other areas are frightening and totally unacceptable, one thing we must never do is compromise safe practices to satisy someone's whim. Something thankfully the CAA are highly unlikely to allow.

NorthSouth

23rd Feb 2006, 16:59

A real shame Cessna Caravan I's can't be used for commercial ops in this countryAnd even when they are (been talked about for years), they'll be restricted to routes which are not over water or mountains and are within gliding distance of a designated and approved emergency airfield. Scratch the whole of Scotland!
NS

NorthSouth

23rd Feb 2006, 17:05

There is an unofficial let-down, used by inbounds in IMC - at BRUCE, followed by a VFR transit to ObanBRUCE to Oban is 20nm and the MSA at BRUCE is 2000 feet so doesn't give you much advantage.
NS

boomerangben

23rd Feb 2006, 21:02

North South,

I take your points, but I was merely saying that cloud type procedures do exist. It is quite clear to me that getting any form of instrument approach would be a) very difficult due to the terrain and b) costly to the point where the landing fees would become prohibitive. I think the money would better spent on maintaining the existing real estate and maybe looking for someone to set up a charter business (scenic flights etc).

Clearfinalsno1,

Descending over the sea IFR only gets you to 1500' (MSA over the water) so a GPS approach would not be much use either. You need radar to descend further and at that point it becomes a multi crew operation.

NorthSouth

24th Feb 2006, 07:24

boomerangben:
Probably nitpicking but my point was that what many people think of as cloudbreak procedures are actually aerodrome approaches, i.e. conventional IAPs except that they are not aligned with the runway. There are a few of those around - Sumburgh, Islay for example as well as Stornoway. The point I was making is that I don't believe even that's possible at Oban because unless you put the NDB somewhere off-aerodrome to the south, the hill north of the airfield would make the MSA 1200 or 1300 feet which is pretty useless.

The sort of cloudbreak procedure I was thinking of was something along these lines:

http://www.slv.dk/Dokumenter/dscgi/ds.py/Get/File-624/AD_2_EKVG_NDB_MY.pdf

Not sure if the Danes have approved any commercial operators to use that procedure but I have a suspicion that the CAA here would have kittens at the prospect of a Jetstream hunting around in the murk at 1000ft or less with the Capt and FO debating which headland is the right one to fly round to reach the airfield.
NS

2Donkeys

24th Feb 2006, 09:03

NorthSouth

I'm guessing that you've not flown the Vagar procedure, but it is routinely used by BAe146 and Boeing 737 aircraft and far from "groping around at 1000 feet", the procedure is safe despite the terrain. The major issue is normally the turbulence. The cloudbreak procedure is not used when visibility below cloud would preclude a safe VFR approach.

Bad weather at Oban, somewhat similarly to Vagar tends to fall into two categories.

- Poor vis with precipitation.

- Low Cloud with good visibility undeath.

In the first case, no form of approach is likely to be possible and this will be an operational issue for the airport.

In the second case, a cloud-break procedure will make it possible to operate into the airport, subject to the cloud layer not being below (say) 1500 feet. Not ideal, but better than having to cancel flights simply because you can't get to VMC from the Advisory Route without busting MSA.

I think you are too quick to dismiss the value of such a cloud-break procedure, and too quick to assume the reaction that such a procedure is likely to receive from the CAA/DAP.

2D

Say again s l o w l y

24th Feb 2006, 09:27

The procedure may well be feasible, but there are other factors that mean this is just pie-in-the-sky.

Firstly, runway length.
Secondly, a wacking great big hill just to the north.

How could a missed approach procedure be designed safely? (One that actually has a realistic DA/MDA)

Oban is a wonderful place in good conditions, but when the weather is bad operating in these areas can be distinctly unfunny. Subjecting passengers to this, would be inadvisable IMHO.

This is forgetting one salient point, are there other methods other than air transport to getting people across from the islands? Even if there aren't, the locals are very used to being socked in due to weather and are likely to be the most forgiving if you were only to run it as a VFR service. After all the great cost of making this an IFR service has to be absorbed by someone.

2Donkeys

24th Feb 2006, 09:33

Runway length at Oban is not an issue for Jetstreams, although of course, we are yet to see what length the Council is looking to licence.

Missed approaches are irrelevant. Contrary to the implication behind NorthSouth's post, any procedure is likely to be an IFR cloud-break procedure, terminating in a VFR approach (note, VFR not VMC), in very much the manner described in the Vagar example. Unless the conditions are sufficient to permit VFR ops below cloud, the procedure would not be available.

Talk of Cost and Airline Operations in the Scotish Isles is always uncomfortable. I suppose we should not be surprised by the large number of lavish and unnecessary airfields in the region, supported by European Money. It would be a mistake to judge what may happen at Oban against any conventional Commercial yardstick.

2D

Say again s l o w l y

24th Feb 2006, 09:50

How can a missed approach be irrelevant? If for some reason we couldn't land at Oban and need to divert, what do we do then? Fly VFR back to the beginning of the procedure and then climb?

A missed approach preocedure has to be designed to take into account all sorts of issues, Single engine climb performance being one of them.

There are just too many issues here for me to feel comfortable with.

The scottish islands do have a very expensive set of airfields, b ut they aren't there to serve a commercial need, but a social one. There are other ways of dealing with Oban and the routes specified, than lobbing large sums of money at something that is technically very, very difficult. Not to mention potentially dodgy.

I have no doubt however that the CAA would never licence any approach that wasn't totally inline with safe practices, but it's not them I'm worried about. Oban could turn into a huge white elephant under these plans and the risk is that either the tax payer soaks up the cost. (They are for the "improvements.") or it will just be forgotten about when a change of government comes along and cost cutting becomes an issue.

2Donkeys

24th Feb 2006, 10:10

The missed approach is irrelevant because the approach will not be an instrument approach, it will be a VFR approach.

The Cloudbreak procedure will have its own MDA and MAP which in this instance will probably consist of a a DME from the NDB on an outbound or inbound track. Failure to break cloud by the MAP will result in a climb back into the associated holding pattern.

However, once cloud is broken, the pilot will continue under VFR and land in the normal way - there will be no additional missed approach. Operators will be expected to define in their own ops manuals what they will do in the event that they fail to maintain VMC once the cloudbreak is complete. Ordinarily, this will consist of an urgent climb to MSA.

The advantage of this approach is that the runway can be licensed as a visual runway - which is considerably cheaper than the alternatives, and gets around some of the issues being trotted out on this thread.

All of the small HIAL airports are White Elephants, if you judge them by any commercial standards. Fortunately, they are subsidised largely by EU Money. Oban is unlikely to be any different. It *will* be a white elephant, but it would be a bold person that claims that this particular elephant is any whiter or larger than any of the others in that neck of the woods.

2D

Say again s l o w l y

24th Feb 2006, 10:38

Personally I wouldn't be happy with any procedure that was as lax as to simply climb to MSA without any form of horizontal guidance. Especially in the Oban area!

I think what you are proposing 2D is probably the only possible way that you could have any form of semi-IFR procedure. It is still VMC necessary and cannot sustain a daily service, but it would at least be some form of help.

An NDB in that area would be subject to so many errors that it would be virtually useless. Maybe the CAA could trial a GPS approach for use! It would be the perfect proving ground as basically not much else would work, and if ti was successful, then it should work anywhere!

NorthSouth

27th Feb 2006, 08:46

I think you are too quick to dismiss the value of such a cloud-break procedure, and too quick to assume the reaction that such a procedure is likely to receive from the CAA/DAP
No I haven't flown the Vagar procedure and I'm interested to hear it's regularly used by commercial flights. Clearly the Oban situation is not a mirror image but it's interesting to note that the Vagar procedure involves aircraft flying VFR from the MAPt to final, with, by the looks of the terrain, the airfield invisible until you're on short base or final. I'm not aware of any precedent for UK CAA approval of that sort of procedure. Circling approaches yes, but not cloudbreak to VFR with the inbound track not even remotely aligned with the aerodrome never mind any runway.
I take your point re an Oban cloudbreak procedure pointed at the airfield (i.e. an aerodrome approach) with, say, an MDH of 1300ft being better than nothing. But a commercial operator will need some guarantee that a very high proportion of schedules will get in. I don't believe an MDH that high will do the job, particularly when it ends with a circling approach which by my reckoning could only be made to runway 01. We're not just dealing here with whether they can design a procedure to ICAO/DAP criteria. We're also dealing with CAA Flight Ops approval for an AOC holder.
NS

2Donkeys

27th Feb 2006, 08:53

NorthSouth. I think you need to consider two points.

1) A commercial operator contemplating Oban is not going to be able to guarantee reaching his destination with quite the same frequency as a CAT IIIb operator contemplating Heathrow. Flying in light commercial types around the Highlands and Islands is not a particularly dependable service now, and Oban will be no worse than many of the other established fields that either lack IAPs altogether, or rely on rather unusual IAPs. The standards that your replies envisage a commercial operator will apply to Oban are not those that are already applied by the existing operator base - who are after all the most likely user of Oban, post-modernisation.

2) Don't overlook the fact that in order to overcome the limitations of flying in that neck of the woods, the CAA has already approved a number of unusual ops practices that do not commonly see the light of day elsewhere. Amongst the more obvious is the dispensation for the commercial flights of a named operator to fly IAPs into places like Islay without Air Traffic Control.

2D

NorthSouth

27th Feb 2006, 10:14

Oban will be no worse than many of the other established fields that either lack IAPs altogether, or rely on rather unusual IAPsThere are no cloudbreak to visual procedures in use at any of the HIAL airfields. All the discrete Loganair procedures are, as far as I'm aware, conventional VOR/NDB procedures, or aerodrome approaches to a facility on the airfield. Barra is perhaps the closest parallel. I haven't seen the plates for the NDB procedure there but it looks like they have an MDA of around 1000ft. The general minima are 3km/1000ft anyway. But the big differences between Barra and Oban are (1) choice of runways - no need to land over or towards a 1000ft hill - and (2) option to do an en route letdown at Tiree or Benbecula and proceed VFR below cloud. The nearest parallel for a field with no IAPs is Tingwall. But Tingwall has no requirement to handle IFR traffic, the inter-island services are VFR only (as the island services from Oban would be but other services couldn't), and you can legally get in and out of Tingwall VFR from east or west with a cloudbase of 600ft. Plus if you get caught out and have to climb into IMC you have good radar cover and a whole rack of IAPs at Sumburgh and Scatsta to allow you to get back down again and either divert or transit back to Tingwall VFR along the coast.
Don't overlook the fact that in order to overcome the limitations of flying in that neck of the woods, the CAA has already approved a number of unusual ops practices that do not commonly see the light of day elsewhereIndeed. But none of them so far include cloudbreak to visual procedures. The irony is that if the council had pursued your line of argument here, which I completely agree with, they might well have got away with not having to licence Coll and Colonsay at all, and perhaps not even Oban either. Meanwhile, as the spending mounts, the prospects look good for the CAA agreeing to remove the requirement for a licensed airfield for light commercial ops.
NS

2Donkeys

27th Feb 2006, 10:21

I think the only point on which we are disagreeing is the possibility that a cloud-break procedure can be established for Oban's use.

I believe that it probably could be, you seem to think that such a thing would be impossible, largely because there have been few other examples in the UK in recent times.

My view is that even were such a procedure not to appear, it is unlikely to affect the primarily VFR traffic which will serve Oban and nearby strips.

To have such a procedure available for IFR flights will not fundamentally change Oban's desirability (or otherwise) as a destination for Commercial ops, but there are occasions when it will help.

2D

Say again s l o w l y

27th Feb 2006, 10:39

A sensible procedure would make Oban more attractive to GA not less, the only thing is, is that any procedure is liable to be Operator specific just like the Loganair operations.

I still don't think it's worth doing, or ever going to be particularily safe, but I'll wait and see.

2Donkeys

27th Feb 2006, 10:41

Unless ATC is established at Oban, any IAP will certainly not be available to GA.

However, a new runway and facilities at the cost of Paul K and his excellent hospitality and "open-all-hours" approach... that is a tough trade-off for the average GA punter - less so for a commercial operator.

2D

NorthSouth

27th Feb 2006, 11:25

I think the only point on which we are disagreeing is the possibility that a cloud-break procedure can be established for Oban's use...My view is that even were such a procedure not to appear, it is unlikely to affect the primarily VFR traffic which will serve Oban and nearby stripsMy view too and this is precisely the point. The council's plans are predicated on levels of traffic that can only be achieved if services to Glasgow/Edinburgh/Inverness/islands other than Coll/Colonsay/Tiree are established, and at least the Gla/Edi/Inv routes could not in my view be done with enough regularity unless they were IFR. The doubt about a usable IAP goes to the heart of the whole project's credibility.
NS

2Donkeys

27th Feb 2006, 11:27

Where are these Council Plans published? Your information is obviously better than mine.

I have seen only the vaguest of indications as to what the nature of the traffic is that the Council expects, beyond the simple VFR-only local hoppers.

NorthSouth

27th Feb 2006, 12:05

Best places to look are:
http://www.argyll-bute.gov.uk/
http://www.hie.co.uk/aie and
http://www.hitrans.org.uk/

but it's a bit of a slog searching through all of that. I can send you the key reports if you like - pm me.

Another indication of the council's view is in the letter to NATMAC re the creation of an ATZ at Oban. DAP says they were told by the Council that scheduled services at Oban would lead to "an immediate tripling of movements". This implies about 9500 ATMs a year which is way in excess of the single Islander operation required for VFR-only flights to Coll & Colonsay.
NS

2Donkeys

27th Feb 2006, 12:16

Thanks for the links. I am familiar with those websites.

I think the bottom line is that we are all inferring a certain amount about the plans for Oban, in the absence of anything particularly concrete written down. That is why I hesitate at this stage in being too critical.

In reality, as aviators, we know that "new Oban" will essentially be a FISO or A/G VFR field with a nice runway and the usual over-engineered HIAL brick terminal building and control tower. Lots of part-time jobs for locals as firemen, shopkeepers, sandwich makers.

It will be visited by Cessna 406 aircraft, Islanders, Military Helicopters and GA, as well as receiving the odd private charter from "down south".

To assist in marginal weather, a cloudbreak procedure may be available, if the cost-benefit of flight-checking it can be justified against the relatively high minima that will inevitably be associated with it.

The only real likely GA Gripes will be:

a) That Paul K, an all round nice guy with a unique flair for looking after the GA community, will have been partially removed

b) That HIAL tends to be associated with restrictive opening hours and excessive admin.

2D

NorthSouth

27th Feb 2006, 13:12

I think there's more reason to be concerned. The whole project is immensely expensive and has to be funded by someone. The council only approved its financial contribution on the proviso that HIAL takes over the operation of Oban after the first year. The viability of any of the planned routes out of Oban is also dependent on them getting PSO support. Both of those are highly dependent on the attitude of the Scottish Executive which so far has made no commitment to additional funding nor to the proposed extension of PSO status to every scheduled route in the Highlands and Islands. The Council has also done no serious prior consultation with the CAA on the vaibility of licensing any of the three airfields. The net result is that there is a serious risk of running out of money. A future council may well decide that the only way to recoup the wasted spending is to sell the airfield.

2Donkeys

27th Feb 2006, 13:33

You may be right to be concerned, but I doubt it.

It is worth reflecting that not a single HIAL Airport runs at a profit. The four worst-case airports all individually lost more last year than the entire Oban Airport development budget.

Passing another loss-making Scottish airport onto HIAL (and a small one at that), is not fundamentally going to change the equation. HIAL provides a simple cocoon into which such costs can be passed, to be balanced by subsidies received from all an sundry.

2D

neutron

27th Feb 2006, 13:59

Just had an interesting chat with a guy who flew into Oban this weekend. Terry Marsden of Airport Operational Services (AOS) was manning the radio, giving his FISO a break. What follows is indirectly from TM - who should know - as it is he that is developing airfield ops.
Instrument Approaches
The NDB is to be moved onto the field with a co-located DME, for which a channel has been already been assigned. AOS envisage 2 instrument approaches:
1.FAT straight in for runway 02 but with the MAP some distance south of the field. Missed approaches turning left!
2 Cloud-break procedure for runway 20
MDH for these procedures not mentioned.
Airfield Lighting
Runway lighting being installed and interestingly 2 sets of PAPIs for 20 to cope with the curved approach. A red airfield beacon will help identify the field for VRF operations
Work in Progress
Work starts this week at Oban and it is probable that the main runway will be closed from mid-week onwards. It is planned to keep 04/22 open with as much usable length as possible with at least 617 metres availble.
PPR
PPR and info on WIP available on the airfield number 01631 710384 which is working once again. GA welcome as usual, subject to WIP. Fuel available from Paul at TLC as always.
neutron

NorthSouth

27th Feb 2006, 15:14

Council press release covering the above and some other points is at
http://www.argyll-bute.gov.uk/content/news/general/0038?s=906&a=0
NS

NorthSouth

27th Feb 2006, 15:32

2D:
You may be right that the great Scottish Executive milch cow will provide for yet another white elephant airport project. But it doesn't have to be that way. Take two airports with similar numbers of air transport movements - HIAL-run Islay, and (ironically) council-run Tingwall:

Airport operating costs (excluding capex) 2004-5:
Islay £1,127,000
Tingwall £124,000

OK, so Islay has higher RFFS category for handling Saab 340 etc, so maybe not a fair comparison. Try this then:

Barra £704,000
All 6 council-run strips in Shetland £345,000

NS

2Donkeys

27th Feb 2006, 16:58

NorthSouth,

I was not suggesting that this is "THE WAY" to run an airport. Rather, I was countering your suggestion that Oban runs the risk of being sold to property developers if it "runs out of money". Clearly with HIAL involved that would not be the case. Oban would be unique if it actually ran at a profit.

As I wrote originally, in my view, the only real downside to GA is the tremendous loss of the institution that has been Oban Airport under Paul's stewardship these last few years, and the potential bureaucracy and inconvenience that tends to be associated with HIAL airports.

Trying to stretch the inconvenience to include the potential for the airport being sold and built on is simply scaremongering without basis so far as I can see.

2D

flybymike

27th Feb 2006, 18:11

[QUOTE= A future council may well decide that the only way to recoup the wasted spending is to sell the airfield.[/QUOTE]
In that case things are not so bad after all because Paul could simply buy the place for a song and then we would all end up back where we started.... :)

Flap40

28th Feb 2006, 09:06

A red airfield beacon will help identify the field

Is it becoming RAF North Connel then?:confused:

PENNINE BOY

28th Feb 2006, 20:06

I suppose they will rename the airport Glasgow West!!!
Hi Vis Jackets, X ray machines, inshore rescue boat for the firefighters.
I do hope they have some hygenic wypes handy so we can clean up after having our pants taken down for landing fees!!!!!!!!!!
Wot was wrong with Oban before F--- ALL.....................

Cloud break No worries descend 5nm before bruce if not good visual 1000 before MSA do a 180 and Fox trot oscar home .........

Last year on a flight from Donegal to Tiree, we were told by the tower that the airfield hours were get this,,,,,,, 0900 to 1400 mon to Fri Sat 0830 to 1000..
3 Fab runways Vor/ATC all payed by the good old EU and and open half the day. So we headed off to good old TLC biccys and a brew at Oban with Paul, aviation as aviation should be. The guy has won nearly as many awards as Rangers!!!!
So happy memories, well brew n biccys will have to be taken at Glenforsa with Brendon.......:E :E :E _

neutron

15th Mar 2006, 16:11

Anybody been into Oban in the last few weeks and landed on 04/22 who can update us on development progress?
neutron

Say again s l o w l y

21st Mar 2006, 22:04

Had a fax from Scottish info this afternoon say that fixed wing aircraft are no longer permitted to land at Oban.

No reason given, so I'll try and find why out tomorrow. I'm assuming it's because of the runway work.

Say again s l o w l y

23rd Mar 2006, 22:05

It seems a Loganair ambulance pilot complained about the work going on around the field and how poor the surface was. The field was pretty busy and it seemed as if there was no real control or guidance from the A/G operator (yes, I know...) So the decision was taken to simply ban all fixed wing a/c for the forseeable future. No timeline given.

Good 'eh!

flybymike

24th Mar 2006, 12:34

U:* Unbelievable cock up. Bring back Paul....

NorthSouth

24th Mar 2006, 14:18

I've just spoken to the council. They say the airport's closed due to runway works this weekend but the plan is to reopen it on Monday.
NS

Humberair

25th Mar 2006, 11:27

Anybody been into Oban in the last few weeks and landed on 04/22 who can update us on development progress?
neutron
:O Runway 01/19 is closed due the WIP to upgrade the Aerodrome, Runway 03/21 will be avialable on most days except this weekend due to work on the drainage around the intersections of the runways
The use of Oban is PPR 3hours notice due to the WIP on obtaining PPR by telephoning 01631 710384 pilots will be given an up date on the WIP
The A/G on 118.050 operates daily 0700z to 1700z and by arrangement
and the NDB "OBN" operates H24
Fuel is available from TLC (Paul Keegan) by telephoning 01631 710888
Humberair

quilmes

26th Mar 2006, 14:22

Are the gliders still active?

Humberair

26th Mar 2006, 20:13

:ugh: Are the gliders still active?

Only power gliders!

flying snapper

24th Apr 2006, 12:37

I was thinking of going up this Sunday coming - any latest reports? Is the main runway finished yet??:rolleyes:

Ridgerunner

24th Apr 2006, 12:47

I flew in yesterday and the main runway is still under maintenance. 21/03 was in use and there was full A/G Radio provided by a man named Sebastien who was perfectly helpful. Paul is still around, he fuelled up my 152, but he seemed to just be spending his time working on his aircraft in one of the hangers. His cabin with the old yellow "C" has a cross through it, suggesting he is no longer in charge. Shame, cause he is a really nice guy. Seemed to say they think it will be finished in August.

RR

NorthSouth

24th Apr 2006, 13:32

I was there last Tuesday. 690m of r/w 03/21 available (from just west of the intersection with 01/19). Take care to avoid the cones which may be planted across part of 03/21, along the intersection of the two runways, just short of the threshold markers. Not easy to spot on final.

Also, if you want fuel, do please phone Paul direct before you depart for Oban - don't rely on the A/G Op phoning Paul up.

NS

ProcATCO

29th Apr 2006, 12:54

Does anyone know whether the Airport Development Manager job was filled? And by who?

I was one (of Many?) that was interviewed for the position, but I did not get it, which was disappointing for me. :{

I would be grateful to know how things stand at Oban as I have liked the place for years!!

Thanks in anticipation!!

:rolleyes: :ok:

NorthSouth

29th Apr 2006, 20:56

Yes it has been filled, by a guy who is a retired aerodrome manager from a regional airport in England - Paul K did tell me which one but I've forgotten.

NS

Captain Mayday

29th Apr 2006, 22:34

I think it was Sheffield - and we all know how successful that was .....

Seems rather sad that something that worked so well has just been sacrificed on the Council sponsored altar of 'bigger and better'.... and that applies to Council egos too ...

"Carpetbaggers" from 'down south' come in, and 2 local well-respected and liked operators lose their jobs. Is that progress ?

On one hand money spent on airfield upgrades is always a good thing, but there is a very nasty taste in the mouth here ....

1- Paul was shafted by the Council because they were jealous of his success, and he dared to disagree with them when they first came up with their grandiose plans :uhoh:

2- What will happen in 2-3 years time when the airfield is running at an inevitable loss .... who will pay ?. The local tax payer ? GA ? Before Paul came along the Council charged £20 a landing and got no visitors.... not too long before we see that again I think ... or else it will be sold off for housing development as all the services are now being put in place ...

3- Paul single-handedly has added a huge amount to GA on the west coast, because he is passionate about it. I can't see the other operators having quite the dedication or understanding of GA ... I am bothered that they may just end up as HIAL clones more worried about playing at being air traffic controllers ...

I hope I am proved wrong here, but Oban will now have to work doubly hard to win back a lot of cheesed off/disillusioned pilots ....

boomerangben

30th Apr 2006, 17:32

Was in yesterday and got fuel and Jammy Ds - Cheers Paul. Seemed pretty busy with plenty of traffic in and out.

helicopter-redeye

30th Apr 2006, 17:59

I was in Oban yesterday also. There are now two parts to the service arrangement at the airport. You go to a new green shack to pay for the landing fees, and somebody fills in a coloured flight strip to control the flights. Helicopters outnumbers fixed wing for the first time in living memory. There were more aircraft movements at Glenforsa than Oban in the CAVOK conditions of Saturday.

Only 03/21 in use. The old 19 numbers current about 5 feet deep under diggers. The approach to 21 is over high-ish ground and over the light aircraft park.

Paul and Alan have been moved to the spot next to the green Oban Flying Club hanger and dispense fuel, tea, dodgers & etc as before. Brian has been laid off due to a significant fall in trade as have all the part time local staff.

On the phone the airfield manager mentioned that Sheffield was his old airfield but did not mention if it was as one of the succession of 'General Managers' of the old Sheffield City International or as a GA pilot who was resident there. Either way, local employment 0, incomers 1. Strange out-turn for a local authority inspired plot to develop the local ecomony.

If you want GA to survive in the region, for Gawd's sake get up there and buy some fuel .... (go in dry;) ).

NorthSouth

1st May 2006, 10:44

I don't think the new Aerodrome Development Manager is ex-Sheffield. You may be thinking of Terry Marsden, who is the council's long-term airport consultant and is currently running Oban pro tem until the newly appointed person comes in.
Paul and Alan have been moved to the spot next to the green Oban Flying Club hanger and dispense fuel, tea, dodgers & etc as beforeDo remember though that Paul no longer gets any income from landing fees, only from fuel, so don't go in there expecting him to be running a cafe as well as a bowser.

Meantime, anyone got some spare cash to buy an Islander off Loganair and lease it back to them? That now looks like the only way there'll ever be any passenger services out of the new Oban because the end of Loganair's air ambulance contract on 31 March means they can no longer cross-subsidise basing Islanders at Kirkwall and Tingwall and have no requirement for one at Glasgow.

NS