This "well educated man" has produced an incredibly weak consultation document, that is far less than it needs to be. To pick just two obvious weaknesses: (1) he hasn't used aeronautical charts, and (2) there are numerous local flying organisations not being consulted.
Indeed, when I first looked at it I was irritated by the lack of aeronautical charts. However the essence of the proposal has still been conveyed and I will send him a comment on the basis of what he has proposed.
To say that there is no see and avoid is rediculous. On every aircraft is a jump master that observes the DZ prior to drop to ensure there are no aircraft in the area. In addition to that there is a DZ controller that is on the ground in constant communication with the aircraft that also will not approve the drop until the area is clear.
Yep indeed, I did a parachute jump at Weston-on-the Green a few years ago and know how a professional outfit is run. My fear though is that considering the traffic situation at this point it may be difficult for the jump master to ensure that the drop zone is clear of aircraft, and remains so for the duration of the jump. There was a horrific accident at Thruxton about 20 years ago when a parachutist fell through the blades of a helicopter, now obviously the circumstances of that accident were somewhat different but it just underlines the point that having multiple traffic types in a tightly confined place can be dangerous.
The issue of monitoring the drop zone frequency is also complicated by the fact that it appears to be partially inside the Middle Wallop MATZ stub and also very close to Solent's airspace.
My essential view as that on the face of it, as much as I'd encourage the guy in general, that this place is not really suitable. I'll send him my views though and I guess we'll see what happens when his consultation period (which I agree is a bit short) is over. I'll also be inquiring as to the views of Thruxton as well since I've been a member there for a while now.