Threat to the Shuttleworth Collection

[Fergy1]

I am sorry to report that the Shuttleworth Collection has received two anonymous letters demanding that model flying is stopped and threatening harm to the Collection aircraft.

Aviation Trustee Tony Haig-Thomas has taken the decision to publicise this threat and to ask everybody to be vigilant. A letter has been sent to all SVAS members and the text is reproduced below.

If anybody sees or hears anything unusual then please report it to the Collection management.

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b221/Active1930/Misc/Collection_Letter_Aug09.jpg

Kevin Panter
SVAS Secretary

[Agaricus bisporus]

If not an inside job than it is clearly from someone who lives within earshot - ie a very close distance from Old Warden Airfield. There can scarcely be more than a couple of dozen candidates.

Surely they must have expressed their opinions via more conventional means in the past, probably several times. This is hardly likely to be their first contact with Shuttleworth.

Even by adding "insiders" it would seem a fairly small range of potential suspects, surely not too taxing even for Bedfordshire's "finest" (fnaar, fnaar) to deal with?

[goudie]

Wasn't me!

[BEagle]

I was appalled to receive THT's letter today - what sick idiot could have made such threats?

Interestingly, the idiot uses phrases such as 'the flying of model aeroplanes', 'the aerodrome' and 'model fliers'. This indicates a level of 'expertise' one would not normally expect from someone averse to aeromodellers' activities; I would have expected the use of denigrating words such as 'toy plane' from someone who dislikes aeromodellers in the way this idiot appears to. Also, the standard of English is surprisingly good.

To me this indicates that the writer of these letters is a calculating, dangerously unbalanced individual. He needs to be tracked down and prosecuted with the utmost urgency.

The SVAS website indicates that there's a 'Festival of Flight Aermodel Weekend' coming up in a couple of weeks time (12/13 September), so let's all go and show our full support for the aeromodellers and our utter contempt for the activities of this twisted idiot.

[octavian]

I too read Tony Haigh-Thomas's letter with disbelief, after I opened it this afternoon. How anyone with even the most basic interest in aviation history could even contemplate damaging any of the priceless aeroplanes at Old Warden is beyond belief, and to cite the use of the airfield by model fliers as a justification is just crass. Undoubtedly the writer of these letters is in need of help and perhaps rather more than a severe slapping, but just how to make contact given the apparently anonymous nature of the letters. Let us hope that it proves to be the work of a crackpot and his threats remain just that.

[Hot Charlie]

Interestingly, the idiot uses phrases such as 'the flying of model aeroplanes', 'the aerodrome' and 'model fliers'. This indicates a level of 'expertise' one would not normally expect from someone averse to aeromodellers' activities; I would have expected the use of denigrating words such as 'toy plane' from someone who dislikes aeromodellers in the way this idiot appears to. Also, the standard of English is surprisingly good.

To me this indicates that the writer of these letters is a calculating, dangerously unbalanced individual. He needs to be tracked down and prosecuted with the utmost urgency.

Not the ideal surprise to find coming through the letterbox in the morning. Worrying also in that any threatened damage may be applied in quite a subtle fashion.

Fingers crossed it gets no further than the two letters received by THT.

[treadigraph]

Well, fingers crossed that it's merely some pathetic individual who delights in causing panic by writing nasty letters.

Can't be there for the aero modellers event, but hope to be two weeks later for the evening display. Will keep my eyes open if the matter hasn't been resolved by then.

[nacluv]

What a worrying incident.

Clearly SVAS take this seriously. Does it count as a clear t*rr*rist threat? So can it/should it be escalated to higher specialist authorities? Or is that overdoing it a bit?

Yes, I know it isn't Terry himself, but the weight of the anti-t*rr*r squad bearing down on whoever it is should quieten things down a bit surely?

[doppleganger]

This story has troubled me ever since I read it in the Bedford newspaper a couple of weeks ago.

I have been a regular visitor to the Shuttleworth Collection, on non-flying days, flying proms, flying days and evenings, and every model flying day myself and my son can get to, as the hobby of model flying is one we share and enjoy very much. I have gone to the model flying days since I was just a lad myself and travelled from Yorkshire where I lived at the time.

My son and I were there just today, and as always, had a fantastic day, and returned home with every model either broken or lost - always the mark of a good day's model flying!

I really cannot see that it is a local resident making these threats in response to the noise. The nearest dwelling is in Old Warden village, some distance away and well out of earshot of the relatively quiet models. The impact with respect to noise and motor traffic through the village is minimal compared to the real aircraft flying days/evenings, not to mention the flying proms. There were tractors in the fields next to the airfield making more noise than we were. This makes me agree with the thought that it is somebody closer associated with SVAS with a particular grievance. He (or she) needs to be found, for their own good if nothing else, as they clearly need some attention from a psychiatrist.

But one thing I did find quite disturbing today, was a chap going around asking people to show their BMFA insurance. For those who could not, he was stopping them flying. Some were going home rather upset. I've never been asked for this before, was not asked at the gate when I paid my entrance fee and have not seen this as a requirement in any flying day literature. Is this really a requirement? If it is shouldn't the organisers advise all those who turn up with a car load of models before they pay their entrance fee?

[oxenos]

As a retired professional pilot and long time model flyer, I greatly enjoy Shuttleworth's model days. Long may they continue.
However, any modeller knows that in the wrong hands, a model aircraft can do a lot of damage, particularly at a crowded site such as Old Warden. I have no doubt that the attendants that Dopellganger complains of would have been checking not only British Model Flying Association membership (which brings with it £10,000,000 of third party insurance), but also possession of a "B" Certificate, which is the BMFA's requirement for flying at a public venue.
It would be utterly irresponsible of the Shuttleworth if they did not ensure that all flyers were competent and insured. No one wants to see the Trust sued for negligence after an accident because they had failed to vet those taking part.
Doppelganger seems to think that a good days model flying involves losing or crashing all his models, and that being asked to show proof of Insurance is unreasonable.
It is a small minority of flyers like him who get model flying a bad name. If model flying gets banned at Old Warden it will down to such stupidity.
Either grow up or give up, doppelganger - neither modelling nor Old Warden need people like you.

[Jig Peter]

Using expressions like "the flying of model aeroplanes" or "aerodrome" seem to indicate someone rather elderly with a somewhat archaic mental reference bank concerning aviation, model or full-scale. Perhaps the local Miss Marple could bring some light to bear ... and, posting letters at Gatwick perhaps provides another clue ???
All set for an instalment of Midsomer Murders (NOT !!!).
I just hope that these threats are the result of someone's dyspepsia before flying off to warmer climes for the winter ..
And my fingers are crossed for the future safety of The Collection and model flyers too.

[Captain Airclues]

Planning a short visit to the collection tomorrow. I hope there's still something there to see.

Dave

[Agaricus bisporus]

Using expressions like "the flying of model aeroplanes" or "aerodrome" seem to indicate someone rather elderly with a somewhat archaic mental reference bank

What a bizarre assumption!

- Or merely someone who speaks gramatically good English and knows the correct terminology...
(young/old, archaic/modern, there is no possible way to tell)

:ugh:

[Jig Peter]

Put my "odd" lucubrations down to an excess of Miss Marple (Margaret Rutherford in glorious black & white, a sheer delight even when (excellently) dubbed) and other transmuted Agatha Christie and Midsomer evenings on our local telly down here in sight of the mountains. :8
Choice of vocabulary is, though, a potential indicator of this odd person's identity - "aerodrome" for example does have a whiff of the '20s about it, while "airfield" would, I'd have thought, be more usual, but then, those are just part of my personal preferences. And Prune participants also know that (s)he writes gramatically, which would exclude not a few possibles ...
I just hope, like most "raight-mainded" people, that nothing else happens and that Shuttleworth will continue undisturbed.

[bluesilk]

Just read this thread and I am appalled at the thought of some idiot wanting to harm what is arguably the finest airworthy selection of vintage aircraft.
I grew up just down the road from Old Warden and like Oxenos I have now retired from a full lifetime of Military/civil flying as well as flying models since 1950s.
Why would anyone be offended if asked to produce their insurance when flying models and what sort of person deems it to have been a good day when all their models are either in bin bags or lost.
Sorry Doppleganger but Oxenos is absolutely right. You should either change your attitude or improve your building/flying skills or stay away.
Lets hope whoever is responsible for these anonymous notes is bought to book and Shuttleworth remains as it is now.

[John Farley]

Just a comment on Doppleganger's post. If he is a power modeller (Free-Flight or R/C) then I agree with his critics but if he is one of very many rubber/glider/electric free flight modellers on a typical OW day then I take his side. Such models are pretty harmless and tend to come off worse when they hit my leg or the back of my neck.

[2 sheds]

"aerodrome" for example does have a whiff of the '20s about it, while "airfield" would, I'd have thought, be more usual
Hardly! See ANO, Art 155:
"'Aerodrome' means any area of land or water designed, equipped, set apart or commonly used for affording facilities for the landing and departure of aircraft and includes any area or space, whether on the ground, on the roof of a building or elsewhere, which is designed, equipped or set apart for affording facilities for the landing and departure of aircraft capable of descending or climbing vertically, but shall not include any area the use of which for affording facilities for the landing and departure of aircraft has been abandoned and has not been resumed".

Thus, "aerodrome" is the correct term and is enshrined in law and many associated procedures, requirements etc - e.g. licensing of aerodromes, a controller's aerodrome control rating, aerodrome operating minima, aerodrome traffic zone etc.

2 s

[BEagle]

'Aerodrome' is certainly the correct term. Which would indicate someone with some aeronautical knowledge - the genpub would probably use words such as 'airfield' or 'airport'. Also 'the Collection' (with a capital 'C') indicates to me that someone 'in the know' wrote the letters.

This whole thing has a very unusual ring to it. Why did T H-T send letters to every SVAS member including police advice as to the likely source? Has there been some 'falling out' at Old Warden - and have we been told everything?

Whatever, I hope that this idiot is caught soon.

[Jig Peter]

Without wishing to prolong any "pick-nittery", and while ANOs do, as quoted, call a place from which flying is committed an "aerodrome" - did you, BEagle (or any of us who have done so) actually talk about "the aerodrome" or prefer "the airfield" to refer to the not-built-up area of an RAF station when we were operating Her Majesty's magnificent Flying Machines.
Not just "genpub" (or so I thought I was in my light blue days* ...).





* Not now either, at heart, even though I've been a spectator for a few decades now.:E

[Flying Lawyer]

BEagle This whole thing has a very unusual ring to it. Why did T H-T send letters to every SVAS member including police advice as to the likely source? Has there been some 'falling out' at Old Warden - and have we been told everything?

I too thought the letter was very odd, particularly including the (alleged) police hunch/theory.
There was a 'falling out' fairly recently.
I hope the intention wasn't to generate suspicion about anyone in particular.

FL

[BEagle]

Jig Peter:

In my book, airfields are military aerodromes, airports are aerodromes from whence people tubes ply their commercial air transport business.

And 'twas only when I started learning aviation law for my ATPL that I learned the difference between an aeroplane and an aircraft!

Back to Shuttleworth; I would hate to think that any suspicion would be raised against anyone in particular without clear evidence and assume that any recent 'falling out' is simply a mere coincidence.

[Jig Peter]

Thanks, as always, for clearing up my pit-nicker's query ...
Anent the "Aircraft/Aeroplane" difference, I must have lmissed that bit when I "did" AvLaw for my (unused) ATPL.
Looking forward to reading more of your constant contributions to Pruners' forums
Regards and respect ...
JP



(Edited for undotted "i" ... JP)
:cool:

[bluesilk]

Just to nit pic a bit more. In the days of the old cat board for the light blue ATC the words "Airfield" and " Aerodrome" seemed to change with each new C.O. I well remember that one year it was definately airfield and next year it could well be aerodrome. Sorry to be be it off topic.
Still thinking fondly of Shuttleworth. Hoping all comes out well

[JW411]

Well, I hope the police are taking this very seriously. I had my hangar burned down in 1970 by a nutter who just had to have a fire on the anniversary of the day when his wife had bogged off and left him.

He actually had absolutely nothing to do with the club or any of the members or even aviation in general.

We lost all of our aircraft and eight years of hard graft that night. Luckily we were properly insured but it hurt like hell and no amount of money was ever able to put back what we lost.

[kevmusic]

Any developments on this? :confused:

[doppleganger]

To oxenos,
Very sorry to have upset you, but I think you misunderstand. I have no objection to having insurance, or being asked to prove it. I would be more than happy to get it if that is the official policy of Shuttleworth. However, the chap who was stopping people flying on that day was NOT a Shuttleworth official, and could not show any ID whatsoever, which is why I say it was disturbing.

I have not been able to get an answer from Shuttleworth on whether it is their policy that all flyers at their model flying days must be BMFA insured (I have asked them), and would still like to get an authoritive answer on this, if only to find out who this guy was.

My boy, who is 7 years old, loves to build simple balsa rubber powered kits no bigger than 16 inches span, most are smaller, and it is a series of these that he was flying on that day. He enjoys building them, flying them, and fixing them when they are broken.

However, as you have requested oxenos, and as a result of that most hostile character on that day, we will not return to Old Warden to fly model aeroplanes at any time in the future.

[ATSA1]

If I was at a model meet at Old Warden, or anywhere else, and a "jobsworth" started asking to see people's BMFA insurance, while refusing to identify himself, I would tell him in no uncertain terms, to go forth and multiply!
How did this man stop people flying?

Its also occured to me that this person could well be the same one who Shuttleworth are looking for......Unless the man concerned is prepared to step forward and identify himself, and his connection with Old Warden!(or the BMFA!)

[Mechta]

For the record, it is, or certainly was, possible to be covered with third party insurance for model aircraft without being a BMFA member.

The Model Aviators Association offered cover, as do/did many insurers as part of house insurance policies. I even phoned one insurance company, when insured with them, to clarify what limitaions there might be on weight/size etc. as the policy documentsdescribed the cover given but didn't specify limits. Their response was 'anything which you don't fly in yourself'':eek:, which gave a fair bit of latitude, like "where can I get a Global Hawk?':E

I should add, this is not to knock the BMFA insurance, and for the record, 'A' & 'B' certificates only apply to radio controlled models. They're totally irrelevant for the free-flight models that doppleganger flies.

However, the chap who was stopping people flying on that day was NOT a Shuttleworth official, and could not show any ID whatsoever, which is why I say it was disturbing.

Why let some jumped up t*ss*r with no authority put you off flying at Old Warden?

Anyone who has flown free-flight models will know that tree landings and landing damage are par for the course, I presume Oxenos did not twig that it was free-flight models that doppelganger and his son were flying.

BTW Did anyone else fly an Ebenezer on Christmas Day? It's bit of a tradition down here!:ok:

[doppleganger]

It appears that I have stumbled into a political arena that I have not experienced before, nor had anticipated - that is for some model flyers, the assumption that power flying/RC is the only real form of model flying.

It is true that I did not explain that my son flies small free-flights. The first flight of his first ever electric model (a tiny model of a powered-glider, just 8-inch span powered by a 30-second condenser) was lost on that day when it was picked up by a thermal. To a 7-year-old this is pure magic (but the material loss was more on the mind of his dad). Other rubber powered models suffered damaged landing gear etc. as is inevitable given the amount of flying we did, and that free-flights have to go through a precarious "trimming" stage.

But for this Oxenus has told us to "grow-up" and that "Old Warden does not need people like us". And bluesilk has told us to "improve building/flying skills or stay away".

All the other free-flighters that we met were extremely friendly and patient to explain to my son how their wonderful machines worked, and were captured by his enthusiasm for the sport (the timed tailplane-pop-up devices were his particular intrigue).

But as in any walk of life, it takes only one bully to shatter an experience.

At no time have I said that I have an opposition to purchasing insurance, but only that if it is Shuttleworth policy, that this should be made clear in their literature.
Neither was I aware that the Old Warden model flying days were really only for the seasoned and experienced modellers. Regardless of the one guy telling people they could not fly on the day, as relative newcomers to the sport, Oxenos and bluesilk have each made it quite clear we are not welcome at Old Warden.

For you two, and the author of the letters which are the subject of this thread, we will indeed stay away from future Old Warden's model flying days. However, I doubt you will be as successful in erasing my lads enthusiasm for small free-flights, even for your belief that it is kid's-stuff.

[oxenos]

Doppleganger,
A misunderstanding. It was not apparent that you were attending a free-flight day, and I had visions of some idiot driving a 1/4 scale Lancaster into the crowd and thinking it was great fun.
Unfortunately the hobby has a lunatic fringe who have no regard for safety, insurance or anything ( or anyone ) else. They can hardly be rated as modellers - they just buy big boy-toys, and buy another when they wreck the first. Clearly you are not one of them and I apologize for lumping you in with them
I cannot think that the person checking BMFA membership could be the threatening letter writer. He would hardly have approved of the BMFA. I am surprised that you have not heard from the Trust - be interesting to know if they do check up on insurance or if it was an over officious BMFA member.
Good model flying,
O Xenos

[Double Zero]

This threat is indeed disturbing; a thought has just struck me; while we aviation enthusiasts are rightly concerned about the unique & fragile nature of the full-size collection, this idiot's beef seems restricted to model flying.

I know modern R/C transmitters are a lot more handy, frequency wise, than earlier types, but I wonder if this berk might try, with a bit of experimentation with his own controller to interfere with a model in flight ?

Should be possible to spot such a character, probably not standing around but in a car tailgate / van etc...

In the wrong circumstances this might lead to a lot worse than a pranged model, which the idiot would presumably count as a 'result'.

[Capetonian]

Friends of mine live close to a model aircraft field - about 300 yards from the runway. The noise which punctuates our Sunday lunch is nothing more than a background buzz and can hardly be described as an incredible racket and far less irritating than the local kids on their 50cc mopeds with sawn off silencers.

We rather enjoy seeing the little aircraft and often walk over to the field to chat to the flyers, who are a friendly lot, if somewhat 'geeky' in some ways, and we are invariably asked to share a drink with them, or we take over a thermos of tea for them on a cold day, which is always appreciated.

I do feel that they should be insured against third party damage though, one of those craft coming down and hitting a car, or worse, a child, could cause damage and injury. Not to mention the risk of a collision between two models - ouch!

Good luck to the Shuttleworth flyers, I hope the person who is behind this is outed and ..... I know someone who is quite handy with a cricket bat ...!

[PPRuNe Pop]

Insurance is a must. It costs little and should be compulsory. The ONLY way it can be confirmed or vetted is for the BMFA to issue an ID card that MUST be worn as a badge (NOT around the neck for obvious reasons) when, in effect, all members vet each other. All model flying sites are usually run under the auspices of a local club and they would, I am sure, be happy to monitor it.

A life or an injury to person or property can be VERY expensive and way outside one's normal bank balance, so it is essential. Particularly in this case.

Whether THT would arrange for it I rather have my doubts - quite a few in fact. Still, it is up to him to state OW position.

[BEagle]

I agree with you PP!

Both on the need for insurance - any out of control model can cause a problem - and on the likelihood of OW's position being clearly stated.

As for Haig-Thomas, after reading his distasteful remarks in the last edition of the magazine, my opinion of him has certainly changed.......

[aw ditor]

If you find the Modelair 2009 statement (they appear to organise the model flying days at OW) they state that all model "operators" must have BMFA
insurance.

[Double Zero]

I agree wholeheartedly with insurance - I for one don't fancy my film-star ( Marty Feldman ) type looks being re-arranged by a hit from a churning prop', and model helicopters have awful throat-slitting potential...

BTW the term ' aerodrome ' is by no means as archaic as one might first think ( though the fact the Shuttleworth Collection is by nature old may have led the local nut to think in those terms; another clue as to his knowledge )?

I grew up and later worked at Dunsfold Aerodrome West Sussex, built ( by the Canadians ) in 1942.

Though among ourselves it may have been casually referred to as ' the 'field ' etc, it was to 2000 and to my mind still is most definitely Dunsfold Aerodrome.

I suspect RAF stations gradually became ' airfields ' as it sounds more trendy and each staish or above has to be seen to make a change...

If and when there is an outcome to this, I am sure I speak for others when I say I'd love to read about it here !

May be a tad embarassing in the short term I suspect.

Meanwhile, just in case, I trust suitable precautions are being taken around the real aeroplanes - if it was nearer I'd volunteer for the odd night watch; 'nuff said.

[Mechta]

An 'aerodrome' is of course a flying machine. As stated here by F.W. Lanchester in Flight, Volume 1 issue 1.:E

biplane | 1909 | 0011 | Flight Archive (http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1909/1909%20-%200011.html)

WHAT IS AN AERODROME?
SIR,—I regret to see that the misuse of the word "aerodrome"
is receiving your support in your columns.
This word was invented by Langley and applied by him as
meaning a flying machine of the " aeroplane " type ; it is in this
signification quite regular in its definition, and at the present time
constitutes a part of the English language (see recent editions of
Webster's and other dictionaries).
I suppose because a hippodrome is a big open space (or horses,
you think that an aerodrome should be a big open space for flying
machines (or rather, I should say for air), but as this is not the
signification, the idea is not well founded......
.....Excuse my bluntness, but do not let us have a dozen meanings to
one word, one meaning is enough if that is the right one.
Yours faithfully,
F. W". LANCHESTER

Although I'm prepared to go along with the viewpoint that an 'airfield' is the open part of an aerodrome, but will probably only ever use the term 'airfield'. On the other hand, an 'airport', to me, must have regular scheduled flights to other locations to qualify as such.:8

[Synthetic]

If you find the Modelair 2009 statement (they appear to organise the model flying days at OW) they state that all model "operators" must have BMFA insurance.

Indeed so. They will also probably be required to have some certification of their flying skills.

Back to the initial topic, is there any news on the threat to OW?