Lee on Solent

[Mike Cross]

On Tuesday, with my AOPA UK hat on I was at a meeting of Hampshire Police Authority. The Press Report linked below gives a very fair summary of the proceedings.

It's natural for the Police Authority to initially defend the Police from criticism. I'm very grateful to the Police Authority Members and the Chair, who took the time to investigate what the Police were up to and when they realised what was going on took decisive action.

The Chief Constable's Report which was being discussed can be seen by using the links under agenda Item 8 on this page. (http://www.hampshirepoliceauthority.org/hpa/hpapanels/hpameet.htm?newsid=235735)

The Newspaper report on what happened when the Report was discussed is here. (http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/travel-latest/Anger-over-skyhigh-airfield-charges.4170761.jp)

This saga illustrates perfectly the role AOPA UK plays in helping all pilots.

Mike

[FBS]

Well done Mike

There are a lot of us out here fully supporting everything that is being done to resolve this rather bizarre situation.

I have my own thoughts on what is happening and my own about the Chief Constable who I have had to deal with on other matters and was not impressed.

To those few people that said some time back that "Lee on Solent was unfriendly" and that it "did not matter of it closed and good riddance" please turn the gas up and boil your heads properly.

All airfields are important.

Coffee and buns on me next time Mike

[jayemm]

Hugely appreciative of your efforts Mike. :D

What does this mean the situation is now? Presumably Lee is still not accessible to general GA, but what happens next?

[Fuji Abound]

Mike

You know I support your efforts.

However, I think we would all be interested in more specific news.

I have read the report to which you gave a link. The contents of the report appear to have been reasonably well rehearsed in the past on this forum and else where. Crucial is the cost analysis of operating the airfield. It seems an argument will be constructed for the cost not being that far removed from the £80K pa originally intimated?

I have also read the press cutting to which you gave a link. It would appear there were various criticims levelled but primarily these were concerned with the lack of consultation that had taken place.

The police will presumably now seek to justify that there original cost analysis was correct and presumably will consult with the residents. Presumably they will point out that no rent has been charged for the last 18 months (is this really the case?).

Presumably what you are seeking to achieve is to keep the airport open to the residents. I am not clear whether you are propsoing that the airport should be open to visitors, and if so how they will pay for use of the airfeild? I am also not clear what you are proposing should be a reasonable charge and why?

As much as I support your efforts in my heart, in my mind I would also like to see a properly constructed case for GA which might I suspect resulting in your gaining even greated support for this case.

[Mike Cross]

FA

Thanks for the reponse. More details for you.

I was at the meeting and the Chair of the HPA absolutely tore the Deputy CC to shreds. The critiscism of charges by Bob Purkiss was very important. He's the liaison person between HPA and Special Ops, who are responsible for the Air Support unit who manage the a/d. Bob complained that the figures were not honest, Deputy CC objected to that term, saying that it implied that they were dishonest. The word "credible" was then substituted.

You know, I know, and now HPA have confirmed that they know that the figures in the report are rubbish. We now have detailed consultation with the Finance Committee at which we will be able to argue the case. I anticipate that the outcome will be charges that are in line with what would be available in the commercial market for runway acess at an unlicensed a/d and will take into account the level of facilities provided. You'll I'm sure appreciate (as did HPA) that a comparison with international airports such as Bournemouth, Southampton or Lydd with ILS, Customs & Immigration, Fuel, Parking, Hangarage, Rescue & Fire Fighting, Full ATC etc etc is totally out of order.

There are 3 police Islanders in the country, Cheshire have one and I believe Newcastle has the other. Using the Freedom of Information Act I obtained costs for Cheshire earlier this year showing that they pay ca 8.5k for runway access and 46 k p.a. for accommodation, rates, light heat & power. These figures were presented at the meeting by Sean Woodward, who is a member of HPA and bring into question whether HC should be operating the a/d if they claim it costs them ca 230k a year.

Other things going on. MCA, part of DfT, who own the a/d have called in the CAA. Two Senior Aerodrome Inspectors were there on Monday and Tuesday and I was invited over to talk with them. It would be wrong of me to anticipate the conclusions of their report but the fact that MCA initiated it indicates that they are concerned about what the Police are up to and are taking action.

I have someone who wants to base an a/c at Lee for a few months for hours building and I'll be personally dealing with that. It'll make a good test of whether HPA's teeth have worked.

Last week I met with SEEDA and I'll be participating in an aviation workshop with them on site later this month.

Mike

[Fuji Abound]

MC

Thank you, an excellent and well informed brief that I think many will find makes interesting reading.

Are you hoping that the airport will be opened up to visitors?

Do you have a view on what you believe is the real motivation behind wanting to deny access to the airfield?

[Mike Cross]

The field is currently open to visitors with PPR from the a/d manager. However as there are no facilities (not even a toilet) I'd suggest you hang fire for the time being unless you have a need to come in. It wouldn't be helpful at this stage to try coming in just to get another entry in one's logbook.

By mid-July we should have an a/g service operating, at least while the gliding club are operating (Wednesdays and weekends). Anyone wanting to come in will probably for the time being need to arrange parking separately with a tenant of the SEEDA land. Our hope is that it will operate as any other airfield in the fulness of time.

Yes I do have a view on motivations but I'm not going to articulate it here.

[cwd]

This is great news not just for aviation but for the local community as well who continue to fully support the efforts to retain Lee as an airfield. Unlike some GA airfields, there was no nimbyism here, quite the opposite in fact. The local residents association was one of the biggest supporters of the campaign.

As a local myself, I hope that Lee will soon be able to welcome flying visitors to the area. It has much to offer. Situated literally yards from the Solent, it has a beautiful coastline, great sailing and the friendly borough of Lee-on-Solent just outside the airfields gates. Visitors will find a warm welcome from the locals.

Thank you AOPA and the Lee Flying Association for fighting the cause of commonsense against such idiotic taxpayer funded bureaucracy.

[beerdrinker]

Well done Mike. Make sure that Mr Plod does not have your car reg otherwise watch out for uncalled for stops!!!!!

Senior Plods do not like being shown to be clueless