Two small things.
The St Helena Independent alleges that the Met Office has edited its website. I do know that I saw the first Met Office press release and requested a copy of the full report and how the studies were conducted. In reply I was told to contact the airport but no-one has acknowledged my requests. I may tell you if you don't already know that this is the norm for SHG – they do not reply if they can avoid it. St Helena has no freedom of information act.
My second point might help WHBM but a full exposition would mean going back to the High Point Rendel report of June 2001 and even then you have to read it in the context of what was going on in politics. Ms Clare Short had attempted to "incentivise" the whole she-bang of SHG and the Saints themselves. Time was of the essence. Two good runway locations were assessed but land use and strong winds made them improbable. Of the remaining sites the only good one involved a humiliating loss of face which SHG would not countenance.
It took three "goes" for SHG to get the answer they wanted. High Point Rendel, GIC, then Atkins. Think of cavaliers versus roundheads. The cavaliers were SHG/DFID/ASSI and the roundheads were SHELCO/Arup/Boeing [Boeing Airfield Construction that is]. Essentially in the Blue Corner were all the men from whichever ministry and in the Red Corner was commercial enterprise.
The upshot is that the least best option won, the most massive earthworks had to be paid for and the least amount of concrete was poured for the ridiculous amount of RESA
because kitty litter is cheap whereas runway is expensive. Folks when you only have so much yardage for an airport go for the hard stuff. Reasonable?
There I feel better now. I have made all my points before but the principal ones are:- no kitty litter, just hard concrete, full construction all the way; indicate 90 metres RESA, 30 metres strip at each end with paint; the bit in the middle is runway, get your tape measure out... it must be at least 1800 metres, more if you can get it.
Now if it is too windy then you should have gone for either of the two improbables but you [SHG] didn't.
PS for Paully [who is I guess from the handle is from St Paul's]
It is not for the Governor but for the Gov acting on the best advice of ASSI. To say the "Governor" is to lend wings to the belief that the Governor is the "Enforcer" and we know where that gets us - a governor with two hats, head of state and head of government who can do as little or as much as he/she likes. But I get your point. I have in mind an OEW of 33,660kg that qualifies in every way with the PQQ set out in the original document you'll find out on the sthelenaaccess website.