Horse Breeder sues MOD over Jets

['Chuffer' Dandridge]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotland/7440307.stm

Another drain of taxpayers money..... :ugh:

[spinnaker]

Why? :confused:

[Beatriz Fontana]

Who has been in the area the longest - the RAF or the horse breeder?

[HEDP]

Then maybe everyone will want one!

Maybe a court will give a ruling in favour of the families of those crews whom are killed whilst low flying due to the restrictions placed upon them that curtail their ability to train in that environment?

[Melchett01]

Stupid bitch. you buy a house in a low flying area and then wonder why there are jets flying low near to your house. Didn't you do a bit of research into the area when you were buying the place - or did you and your horses just turn up one day and think this would be a nice place to stick a stables. Dry your eyes and man up, no sympathy from this callsign, I'm fed up of people buying property next to airfields / trg areas and then complaining when they hear a jet.

Why do the Tornados need to train at 250ft when all of their recent campaigns have included dropping precision guided bombs from many thousands of feet?

I'm assumign that's a rhetorical question. But in case it isn't then the answer is for the same reason that airline pilots still need to learn how to land a heavy even though they have a computer that can do it for them .... one day they might just have to do it themselves. Plus, a show of force over Basrah doens't quite have the same effect a FL250

[spinnaker]

Asking for an avoidance around her land seems like a perfectly sensible request.
Absolutely.

Maybe a court will give a ruling in favour of the families of those crews whom are killed whilst low flying due to the restrictions placed upon them that curtail their ability to train in that environment?

I don't agree with what you say, but I would die in the defence of your right to say it.

[spinnaker]

Stupid bitch. you buy a house in a low flying area and then wonder why there are jets flying low near to your house. Dry your eyes and man up, no sympathy from this callsign.

The stupid bitch is a taxpayer. Your comment would not be out of place in Moscow.

[monkey2]

So then, how would you go about an 'Avoidance'?

[knowitall]

"Asking for an avoidance around her land seems like a perfectly sensible request."

indeed perefectly reasnoble to request, doesn't mean its practicle or indeed possible to avoid her land mind

[Melchett01]

Maybe a little blunter than normal, but it's been a long week. And quite frankly, whilst I could change the wording, the sentiment would be exactly the same so I won't. And I can guarantee that in being somewhat more blunt than usual, I am merely saying what many are thinking but are just too polite to articulate. And quite frankly, given the current op tempo and focus on providing kit and support to the various theatres which has already paired back the availability of training, I as a tax payer would prefer to see the forces of which I am also one, being able to train properly for the task required of them, without having to justify essential operational training activities to the NIMBY brigade.

She lives in the middle of the low flying system. She has to expect some aircraft activity. She states herself that the horses bolt at the slightest noise, so given the aircraft noise in the area, maybe bringing 11 highly strung thoroughbreds into the area isn't such a good idea. Just a thought :ugh:

And how much is the MOD going to spend defending this case and/or paying her off that could go to making the lives of servicemen on a base/barracks that little bit more tolerable by doing delapidated buildings up, ensuring necessary kit is provisioned for?

[spheroid]

She lives in the middle of the low flying system
We all live in the middle of the LFS.

This lady has a good point and she should be listened to. There is no reason why FJ need to fly low over this ladies property. She lives in a very rural area and an avoidance would be easy and may save the MOD a lot of money.

[waterhorse]

in reply to melchett
I hope the way in which you express yourself doesn't reflect the way you handle yourself in your professional life. A bit of tact would go a long way.
Forgive me if u think I'm being insensitive
Yes the RAF and armed services do a valuable job and I'm sure the woman in question appreciates that, if not she should. The guys on the ground and in the air deserve the best kit. and no lets not waste tax payers money with court action.
but I'm sure the woman in question felt she had no option and a bit of appreciation by the ministry of the deaf (sorry defence) would no doubt have avoided the situation.
Being a horse breeder isn't like training to be a dog walker
it takes a life long experience and skill that you possibly don't appreciate
and it is her job and no doubt provides her income - not everyone wants to join the armed services.
low flying and horses will always be an emotive area - but you can't expect people to stop riding or check when a jet might be passing over.
yes riders have to put up with occasional blasts by in the air or on the ground from motorists.
But they don't have to sit up and shut up all the time. As far as I remember we live in a democracy and unless Mugabe has taken over we can pursue our hobbies and have the right to expect a wee bit of consideration occasionally.
the sky is a big place and as planes can cover more ground than horses perhaps they could move over a bit. From memory I seem to recall that pilots can navigate their way in the dark - so it can't be that hard to be a bit neighbour friendly.
No doubt youll slag me - but sometimes things really can be resolved that :Oeasily.

[Sven Sixtoo]

You cannot say, without seeing a map with her house and the surrounding avoids, that there is no reason to fly over her property. It is perfectly reasonable of her to ask. It may not be perfectly reasonable to grant it. The UK LFS contains an incredibly complex mass of regulated avoidances of various sorts. In some places, one more can have effects out of all proportion to its simple dimensions.

When I was young, I used to go horse riding near Dyce airfield. The horses were completely unfazed by aircraft (the occasional Dakota or Chipmunk) or the large noisy steam engines on the railway that backed on to the stable. They did, however, freak out at the arrival of one of these new-fangled devices - a deisel locomotive.

I suspect that horses living in a well-used part of the LFA get used to jet noise in time. Certainly the horses around my airfield don't seem in the least bothered by a large helicopter cavorting at 50-75 ft, as we have been doing every other day or so for at least 30 years.

Sven

[LBGR]

This country is rapidly expanding in all directions. More and more people are living in rural areas. When do we stopping moving low-flying areas to suit the local populous? I think it has already been established that low-flying is essential, and large areas of land are needed for this purpose.

If every time someone moves into a low flying area, it has to be restricted or moved, we will end up with no where but the north sea to fly!!!

[spinnaker]

Here is a link to the locality I believe this lady is LINK (http://www.multimap.com/maps/?hloc=GB|Carsphairn#map=55.2122,-4.26009|12|4&loc=GB:55.2122:-4.26009:14|Carsphairn|Carsphairn,%20Castle%20Douglas,%20Kirk cudbrightshire,%20Scotland,%20DG7%203)

waterhorse, thanks, my thoughts exactly.

[Sven Sixtoo]

LBGR

The trouble is that there are a very great many people who don't understand why we can't do all our low flying training over the sea.

Sven

[LBGR]

Sven,

And that is the small underlying problem, that is the cause of so many of our larger ones, the lack of public knowledge. But that is a different thread which, I'm sure, has been started on here many times.

[spinnaker]

Sven Sixtoo

Lets face it, the MOD are not the best communicators. Last time I spoke to them about a breach, they told me to shove off. I took the problem to a few land owners who did not know that the MOD was illegally using their land, ie trespass. The MOD got evicted. There is an element of bullying when it comes to rural areas, and some guys have had enough.

[Sven Sixtoo]

Spinnaker

Given the trouble that my unit has to get permission to use any land in Scotland, and the very stringent observation of all conceivable laws and regulations by the military authorities responsible for liaison with landowners, I actually have a little difficulty with your view. Care to provide some more detail?

Sven

[spinnaker]

A number of inflatable targets were set up accross agricultural land without prior permission, close to a village during exercise neptune. Couple of years ago.

[Sven Sixtoo]

OOOPS!

Naughty.

I have worked in that world before, and must admit that when given a target grid to set up always assumed that I was OK to carry on in the field. But mistakes do happen. Did they just turn up, or was it a cock-up with grids / wrong fields / misidentifying who owned the land / some such?

Sven

[Melchett01]

Waterhorse -

Having taken off the old boots and had an end of week restorative beverage I have calmed down a little now, and in answer to your comment, you will no doubt be pleased to hear that in a professional capacity I try not to let the side down ranting at work and am generally far more diplomatic and tactful than I would like to be on a daily basis. Probably to the point that I tend to use this forum as a bit of a safety valve on occasions having spent most of the day biting my tongue at serial incompetence of the highest order. (Ed - however, that safety valve has more to do with a genuine passion for the RAF as an entity and its people, and an associated horror at what is being done to it, rather than the chance to spew out a few ill chosen remarks and rants).

However, I stand by my original sentiment, and agree wholeheartedly with Antelope - we must stand firm and fight our corner. This wil cost the MOD thousands we can ill afford and that could be spent on kit and making the lives of serving personnel that little bit better.

The forces as a whole are under attack from too many sides these days, whether it be the accountants salami slicing, the politicians lying, industry failing to deliver and once we've got past that lot, the enemy trying to give us lead poisoning! If we repeatedly cave in every time somebody doesn't like what we do or how we do it, then we may as well pack up and go.

And NIMBYism - and there is no other way to describe this - is just another attack on the forces and how we have to operate in order to do the basics of our job. Her life would be perfect without the jets (or something along those lines according to the report) - how long has she been there? If she chooses to make her living from a horse factory in the middle of a tactical training area, that is her choice. She can do it anywhere in the UK; we cannot conduct operationally vital tactical training anywhere in the UK. Having come from a tactical background, I know that it is more than most crews lives are worth to deliberately fly over areas like this - the resulting investigations, paperwork and general hassle are enough to ensure deliberately annoying someone doesn't happen.

People are quick to jump to her defence saying it is her livelihood etc etc etc and are missing the point that it is also the livelihood of those crews who are being asked to go and do the job and then being stopped from preparing for it in the required manner. What about our livelihoods? Quite frankly, the lives of crews and those they are there to support are far more important than a few horses, especially when their presence in a TTA is optional.

And of course, she will have also given a perfect assessment of the aircrafts' attitude and altitude and track over the ground to come up with her view that the aircraft must be operation in violation of various orders or acting in an unsafe and inproper manner that was putting her horses in danger. It would also be interesting to see how high she thinks the trees are and then actually measure them before assessing whether or not the RAF is to blame. However, I suspect that she would not be able to provide fully accurate statements to any of those points.

If my original post offended, well, quite frankly the sentiment behind it stands - even if I was a little blunt. Given her choice of location, I view her complaint selfish and without due regard to the reasons behind OLF and motivated purely by a desire for gain on her part.

[spinnaker]

Sven Sixtoo

It was a cluster of f*ck ups. The weather for the primary areas were not good. Permissions were not in place for the secondary or fall back areas. Not only did the light brigade charge in with re-heat, ground movements buggered up bio-security on a number of farms. I lost five grand in one week due to lost work and running around trying to patch things up with Environmental Health Officers and SEERAD animal health. Not a happy bunny.

[LBGR]

I think the real issue here, is not do we need low flying? (We do)

Or does this lady have the right to live peacefully in the countryside? (She does)

The real issue is how has it got to this stage without a compromise being reached. If the lady in question contacted the MoD and she was told to 'blow it out her ass', and no attempt to explain the need for low-flying or thought of an avoid was made, then quite right her next step would be to take it to the next level.

If however, an avoid was not possible and everything was done to explain to her the operational requirements of the crew, or worse, she did not contact the MoD and then decided to take it to the courts, then I have zero sympathy.

Without knowing the facts of the individual case it would be difficult to come to a conclusion either way.

[NP20]

I remember being surprised when reading John Terraine's excellent 'The Right of The Line' about the low flying complaints being received when the Pathfinder Force were in training. If people couldn't see the reason for Low Flying then, they are probably hard pushed to do so now. I also agree with Melchett, and the NIMBYism line - but then again I'm a townie.

I also remember receiving a letter at Brize from an estate agent asking if we could avoid flying over a certain grid reference at a specific time and date as he was going to show a rather large house to prospective buyers!

[Dan Winterland]

Quote: "I also remember receiving a letter at Brize from an estate agent asking if we could avoid flying over a certain grid reference at a specific time and date as he was going to show a rather large house to prospective buyers! "

And a pliot at Brize got ATC to declare visual circuits to the south in force while he showed prospective buyers round his house which was to the north of the airfield!


I come from an agricultural community. The practice of getting the MOD to stump up compensation is a well known moneymaker in the farming comunity as they rarely contest in court and nearly always cough up. I had a claim against me once. It had to be me as I was the only aircraft of that type in that area all day. The claim was for a horse which had allegedly bolted and injured itself when I flew over the farm. I got a visit from the plods and a grilling with all sorts of accusations being thrown around. However, the ATC video showed I was at 8000' above the farm in question. But the MOD still paid up.

10/10 for the farmer's aircraft recognition though! :D

[El Mirador]

Haven't read it all but raised eyebrows slightly especially at the alleged 'white spots' on the horses! Pretty common and possibly ...'bird catcher' spots..
That aside. I have been a yard manager to approx. 16 horses ranging from Arabs to Thoroughbreds and they all get used very rapidly to Jets and although not FJ's but with the occassional visitor, they were stabled on an active RAF station! Marham, Cottesmore, Coningsby all have riding schools or training yards within 2 miles of the runway....No problems. The yard near Marham has a flying programme passed (or used to) daily to it on request, no problems. I am married to RAF (my husband competes and rides) and I have a fair bit to do with horses. Husband has been in for 18 years riding for 13 of them and we have never ever experienced any problems with low flying jets....I do not deny she is having problems and would have to see all scenarios but really am inclined to (based on my own experience) say there is some compromise that could easily be reached without the need to set the precendent of sueing.

[ShyTorque]

Surely, if horses get used to low flying jets, in this case they just need more exposure and training? :oh:

[El Mirador]

Well Like I said...I would need to see the whole picture for myself and unless the jets are coming from nowhere, with full bottoms on fire, I think that yes....most horses will get used to it!
But I take the slightly mischievious tone of your question!;)

[EdSett100]

Melchett, and others:
I'm interested to know how any ordinary person can be criticised for not doing research into whether or not the property they want to buy is in an RAF low flying area.

Clearly, prospective buyers should take into account a local airfield and other obvious clues, but when you visit an apparently idyllic property in the middle of nowhere during a weekend, the RAF is not flying low level and our training routes will never come to mind. The seller is not required to volunteer information, but they must not lie, if asked. The subject will probably not come up in discussion.

I have some sympathy for the horse breeder's situation. I think LBGR's message is on the button.

Ed Sett

[Whenurhappy]

Didn't know it was an LFA?

Isn't that why one employs solicitors to carry out the necessary searches and the requirement for the vendor to exercise due dilligence in declaring matters that affect the property and its environs?

Get a better solicitor - one with local knowledge...

BTW - I live in the Lake District and revel at seeing all manner of aircraft transiting at snot feet. The locals don't even notice them - it's the 'Beatrix Potter' or the 'knobbly-kneed' cagoul-wearers tourists that complain.

[Beatriz Fontana]

Compensation culture gone mad! I learned to ride in Lincolnshire and there were some pretty large aircraft flying about from Waddington at the time (Nimrod AEWs and visiting fast jets). The horses were fine. Would horse owners sue car and wagon owners for spooking their horses whilst on the roads?

I've heard some pretty miserable low flying stories over the years (and that's what most are - stories). Flying causing subsidence, chimney pots being knocked off houses, many of them unsubstantiated by thorough investigation. Instead of running to court and suing, how about a little investigation as to frequency of flying and the effect on the animals?

After the Bell case in Lincolnshire (a rider was killed after her horse was startled by a Chinook in 2003) the MoD had safety trials and, working with the British Horse Society, began issuing high vis jackets to horse riders so that pilots could pick them out and take evasive action. I believe the scheme started in Scotland first a couple of years ago. Has the horse owner contacted the Society for a jacket?

[spinnaker]

Hmmm. Reading this thread so far, makes you wonder.

I once did my bit for the country, why oh why did I waste my time?

[Beatriz Fontana]

Antelope,

Yep, agree entirely. I really don't know how many people took up the offer.

[El Mirador]

I think that in this case it is a stud so the horses are not probably being ridden. The complaint seems to be of animals spooking in the field/stable and probably charging around doing themselves a mischief so the high visiblity jacket scenario is not relevant,
Saying that, the absolute stupidity of some riders on country roads still astounds me. Many have taken up the banner of high vis. but many sadly, haven't and usually cars are the main problem!
I was once walking our 14 stone dog near Cottesmore. The dog never barked at horses and was sitting at my side on a lead/harness whilst I waited for a rider to pass. The horse took one look at my silent, obedient dog and threw it's rider. The rider proceeded to give me abuse. The horse once caught repeated this twice. All the time Harrier's were flying with no effect. The horse threw the rider as it was scared of my silent dog. There will be people who would love to blame the MOD as it's easier to do that than admit their animals are the problem. Maybe not this case but possibly others.
If the lady in question is a stud owner, she will have youngstock and probably a fair few of the horses will not have time to acclimatise as they maybe visiting horses coming in for covering... Silly place to have a stud. A compromise could be reached.

[Chairborne 09.00hrs]

On my last visit to Valley a year or so back, I was astonished to see that what looked very like a stables had been built along the back road to Fraggle Rock and the "spotters" area.

Tell me it only looks like a stables, please? Anyone??

[M609]

Do you have avoid markings around fox/mink (fur) farms on VFR charts in the UK?

If so, are they impeding on day to day low level ops in any way?

[TurbineTooHot]

M609, no fur farms I think unlike Canada(where I've seen them before), but there are plenty of industrial avoids plus medical institutions and other sensitive areas.

That area is littered with Tactial Training Avoids, those little red triangle thingys. Surely a compromise could be struck such that she doesn't get dusted off by OLF traffic, but normal LFA traffic remains unaffected by popping one of these over her gaff.

As I understand it the noise footprint is increased significantly when one flies a wee bit lower. Can't remember the exact figures, but it did surprise me.

Hope this gets cleared up soon.:ugh:

[spheroid]

There are mink farms in North Devon but no avoids around them......Unlike the Mink farms in Norway where if you inadvertantly penetrate a mink farm avoid you are in the poo big time and fined lots of wonga..... avoid the mink farms as much as you would avoid the wires.....

[Double Zero]

Quote: "The practice of getting the MOD to stump up compensation is a well known moneymaker in the farming comunity"...

When carrying out aerial photography for BAe at Dunsfold, ( light aircraft )I was often asked by pilots to confirm that the cattle etc. below were undisturbed, as the local farmers tried it on regularly.

So did the gypsies, but their claims were so absurd that no-one took them remotely seriously.

We kept most of the farmers placated by holding a reasonably lavish cricket match & party between the farmers and airfield management / Test Pilots.

When BAe left the airfield in the hands of property developers ( see ' Save Dunsfold Campaign ' ) the developers held an open meeting, mostly attended by people who had moved into the area during the 'fields' brief period of inactivity - there are occasional aircraft movements now, including the Brooklands Vimy replica and a large annual airshow.

A roving microphone was provided for people to air their views, the majority of which were NIMBY'S asking " there aren't going to be any nasty aeroplanes are there ?! "

I managed to get a go on the mic', and asked these people if they'd noticed the airfield, which has been there since 1942 !

My comment that without such places UK Ltd would be a lot worse off re. exports, and they'd be doing their complaining in German, seemed unpopular but I think I hit them below the waterline...

This woman and her precious horses deserves a special flypast - the comment posted above that one employs solicitors to 'search' before buying a property is spot on.

Maybe a helo' could stop and spray a roundel on her roof as a gesture of appreciation of her views, and an aiming point ? I'm sure she'd like a Harrier to hover & bow too.

I wouldn't mind betting she'd be suddenly very keen if offered an aerial photo' of her place by some berk like me in a Cessna...

[bazzacat]

As far as i know no property searches in the UK have ever considered low flying routes- as the information is not available to the local councils whom the solicitors turn to for the information. Legally, information is required on the likes of rights of way, former industrial use, contamination, proximity to land fill etc- but no such requirement is made for aircraft transit routes (as opposed to being on an airport flightpath etc).

Council tax payers would moan at the cost of constantly updated digital aviation charts being purchased by their council for what they would consider a non essential service.

[Fox_4]

If the horses are getting white spots, wont that make them more rare and valuable so actually low flying is helping her business!

She should stay in and watch more Jeremy Kyle for the real world issues!!

[El Mirador]

If the lady was a horse owner and just a horse owner, I can imagine that not checking aircraft activity etc. could be acceptable. To set up a stud farm takes time. Surely in all this time she noticed some FJ activity.

[XV277]

Other reports detail she moved in in 2000, and first noticed the jets in the next spring.

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/latestnews/Horse-breeder-sues-MoD-over.4162256.jp

She also has previous with the courts and animals

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotland/6201361.stm

[heights good]

If a horse has a field in which to run and do its thing when its spooked then what is the issue.

In all the time I have flown over horses low level I have never seen any of them choosing to hit a fence rather than run into the open space of a field. Sounds like a massive mountain out of molehills as usual, I could be wrong but I thought horses enjoyed running :\

As an aside, wearing fluorescent jacket does not suddenly make horse riders jump out from the surrounding countryside. If riders happen to be behind a ridge, bush, treeline, in dead ground or any other manner of cover then crews are unlikely to see them until its too late.

Crews do have an almost pathological fear of horses and riders that is not helped by irresponsible riders not doing their bit to help things. Crews do indeed try everything in their powers to avoid any kind of conflict with horses (and chicken farms, LFA avoids and several other sensitive areas) as the implications of doing so are huge and are potential career enders.

Please dont start another witch hunt and blame the guys who are doing the flying as they do everything in their power to avoid flying over LFA avoids or sensitive areas.

The best way to try and educate complainers I believe is to get them into the sqn and speak to the guys, get them involved in the planning process including the Vol 3, NOTAMs, LFA avoids, planning docs, LFA bookings, PINS, Royal flights, Wx etc. After they have done this take them flying and let them see first hand how difficult the whole process is.

I would be willing to bet that if you give them one task of identifying an IP, TP or landmark they would not manage that never mind having any chance of seeing a lone horse and rider.

I think the big problem is education and understanding not trying to win an argument about who is right and wrong. The viewpoint of "who will they be shouting on when the hun come over the horizon" doesnt really cut it. The public at large just dont understand the problems we as military aviators face. The only way we will make headway is by opening dialogue and trying to help them to understand.

Anyway thats my 2 pennies worth :)

HG

[El Mirador]

All that time to notice a FJ???? I rest my case.

[Double Zero]

Heights Good,

Everything you say makes good 'pro-active' sense, can only think of two snags / improvements; you'd need a plentifull supply of sick bags, and ideally a simulated SAM / AAA attack - that should get her mind concentrated !

DZ

[Sven Sixtoo]

Suzysparkle

I fly Sea Kings.

The decision on avoiding horse and rider is usually near to last-minute. Our view is that the increased noise (blade slap) from a harsh late avoid manoeuvre is likely to do more harm than simply continuing on track. It's not as if we can either creep up quietly or arrive unannounced at Mach 0.lots in a Sea King.

If we are wrong, it would be nice to know. Your thoughts?

Sven

[MG]

Completely agree with Sven and a couple of others. It may not look like we're taking avoiding action but to fly over at 250ft is, probably, a better compromise than putting down a whole load of bladeslap at 100ft in an attempt to go round the rider. A gentle (ie, no extra power) climb just takes the noise higher and disperses it. It would be interesting to hear a horse rider's view on this.
On hi visibility, there is no doubt, it stands out a mile provided that:
a. The rider is not hidden (although it still helps through some 'thinner' trees)
b. The rider and horse wear the stuff. A thin vest doesn't really work and the rider needs to wear a full jacket. In addition, the horse should wear a hi-viz cover. Anything less compromises the positive results of the trial. I know that isn't popular with a lot of riders as they want to look part of the country in their browns and greens but it's a fact of life, if only so that they don't get run down by a car.
One final point: The trial was only for helicopters and as a direct result of the Bell case. I'm not sure how much the FJ fraternity can take from the results of the trial but there must be some postitives. The RW have had to change an awful lot of their procedures and this has increased their workload when planning a low-level sortie. Isn't it only fair that the horse-riding society meets us halfway?

[airborne_artist]

I've (briefly) flown RW (and done some LL in the mighty 'Dog), live 5 miles form Benson and have ridden for over 40 years.

Sven is right about blade slap - the sudden increase in volume and pitch will spook a horse.

Hi viz needs to be on the horse, and on the rider. The rider's hi-viz is aligned vertically, while the horse's is more horizontal - the two need to be combined.

However, in summer even a hedge of 10' will obscure a horse from a LL aircraft until quite late, and many lanes and tracks have foliage much higher than 10', and right now it is very thick. Riders on moors/heaths will stand out, but in leafy Oxfordshire it's easy to hide a horse.

This picture is taken from ground level:

http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcms/mediafiles/94F4D0CE_B8E0_5817_F50899F94AC4C2CB.jpg

and so it's quite un-representative of what the pilot will see. Note that the best bit is the hi-viz hat cover. It's the highest point, and it's visible from 360 degrees. If all horse riders used one it would be a good start.

[waterhorse]

melchett
obviously you have spent too much time or not enough in the bar if u thnk u are making rational comment
As a horse rider and mother of a rider who lives within shouting distance of two airbases, and with miltary connections I appreciate the job, but I repeat what I say - that not everyone has to put up with low flying if there can be some sort of compromise.
Most pilots stick to the circuit and yes if u buy a house near military aircraft u have to expect noise. To be fair, most horses get used to it, but a bit like a car that overtakes with no thought at high speed, a horse is going to react to it and that could be dangerous with a human rider on board. Does that not count as an important life to you??????????
Yes horses in a field do have room to spook - but can also injure themselves in the process. Unfortunately like it or not the pilots of visiting jets are the main offenders of low flying in our area. either they cannot read the station rules or don't bother. There is a problem that needs adressed here.
as for your remarks about a few horses not mattering, they do when there is a rider on board. I don't know the specifics of the woman and the court case but suspect she has exhausted other avenues.
PLus having already lost a member of my family to the MOD I don't intend to stand by and watch another have an accident because of an inconsiderate low passing jet that doesn't have to low fly right over our heads - especially when it is breaking into the circuit.
if your children were on the horse you would think twice cos animals are unpredictable.
pop by sometime - we'll let u have a go - nearly as hard to handle as an aircraft and a better adrenaline rush - but unlike some of these visiting easily excitable pilots most responsible horse riders learn to be quiet, patient and have nerves of steel. This is not straightforward as people like to horse ride, pilots like to fly and unfortunately never the twain shall meet.
:ooh:

[waterhorse]

riders should wear flourescents - its good practice
and doesn't cost much
8.99 for brushing boots from tescos - tenner for a jacket
but doesn't mean that all aircraft would avoid them

[GIATT]

It seems a really really odd place to have a stables breeding pure Arabs.

It's not in a horsey area and although there are race courses at Ayr and Hamilton the route to market is long and very winding. There is the usual point to point thing, but they are still a long way from the centres of activity in either Ayrshire or Dumfries and Galloway. In fact the regional boundary is not so far from where they are. It's also a long way from a specialist horse vet.

Sounds like another wanna-be good lifer has been given the five minute warning by the bank manager and has hit upon a potential source of cash.

[bayete]

A while back and after a momentary lapse in concentration we went to view a house somewhere in Oxon. It was only when navigating to the village and using an OS map to check for nearby pubs that I realised our mistake and I said to my wife that we can't live here...
It was a Sunday and I directly asked the estate agent if the village suffered from aircraft noise, the reply "no its a very quiete village".
Really I thought 3.5 miles SW of Brize and no noise from the extreamly quiet VC10s/Tristars departing on the predominent runway! :ugh: riiight..

We once got a letter to the Stn Cdr from a lady thanking us for avoiding her on her horse.

[K.Whyjelly]

I directly asked the estate agent if the village suffered from aircraft noise, the reply "no its a very quiet village".


Had exactly the same thing myself with these people many moons ago. Playing devil's advocate (much to the annoyance of the memsahib) I asked an Aldershot estate agent about a lovely property in a place called Middle Wallop..............."lovely quiet place" says he!!!! :hmm:

[Dan Winterland]

They should write 'Piss Off Biggles' in large white letters on their stable roof. that should work :ok:

[Silent Witness]

What a shame Cluster Bombs have been withdrawn from service, she would have made a wonderful target . . . . These people do bore you. Keep silent my dear, its the sound of freedom.:ugh:

[Double Zero]

Hear Hear, S.W,

even flour bags / pots of paint should get the message across. I still think a hovering helo' painting a roundel on her roof would be a good starter...

[nunquamparatus]

Can you see the French putting up with this sort of cobblers? Mais non, a quick visit from the owner of La Boucherie and the Glue factory would quickly put paid to her winging. Did someone say Cheval et Frites?:E

[nunquamparatus]

That was supposed to be 'wingeing'.............

[Strangelove PhD]

... or even whinging

[clicker]

Taking the two examples from XV277 it seems strange that in June 2005 the farm was a “sanctuary” and in June 2008 she’s a horse breeder with “pedigree black Arabian stallions”.

She viewed the farm back in 2000, brought it in spring 2001. So what was the place between 2001 and 2005? Surely she should have seen the risk in trying to set up the farm as a stud in those 4 years when she noticed the aircraft a few months after moving in.

In the later newspaper article she is quoted as saying “The only thing I have on my side is the truth.” So where are the repair bills for the premises because “Windows vibrated and masonry fell” and the hospital and vets bills for “she had been injured by a bolting or rearing horse, and the horses had also hurt themselves”.

To me this does not add up to anything but a grab for the taxpayers money.

[El Mirador]

I too have been injured by a frisky horse....I also have had a horse LIVING ON AN ACTIVE MILITARY STATION injured horrifically.... was nothing to do with planes though.....newsflash....that's horses! They are unpredictable flight animals and how on earth she could prove that 'a particular injury' was sustained solely due to FJ activity is questionable. Take all the jets away and cars and lorries and plastic bags ( loads of horses hate plastic bags!) and bird scarers and...and.... horses will still find something to spook at!

[Tightflester]

It’s easy money.
Better odds than the national lottery.
If she loses the case, what has she lost? She’s representing herself, so not much.
If on the other hand she wins…. Kerching.

I'm just surprised, given there is nothing to lose:
a) Why it took her so long and
b) Why everyone else is having a go

As a dolphin breeder, based in Cornwall, I have had my fair share of troubles with the MoD. In fact Ms. Alyson King has inspired me…. I think I’ll have a go at the compensation lottery myself…. Fingers crossed for a sympathetic judge.

[knowitall]

"If she loses the case, what has she lost? She’s representing herself, so not much."

apart from having to pay the MOD's costs