Originally Posted by
Rivet Joint
Yes the facts currently point to it being a hard fix but at the end of the day an airport being closed for a full day because of some fog is pathetic. Fog is predicted tomorrow which means two days where time stands still and the airport just doesn't function. Yes SOU is not LHR but it is also not some dirt strip out in Timbuktu. The airport is hugely important to the local economy and if some trees need to be cut down to increase the environment in which it can operate safely then the local authority should be facilitating that. If the shed near the railway works is too tall then it shouldn't have been given permission. All buildings of any relevant height are assessed prior to permission being granted. Someone messed up there or maybe the airport didn't have the foresight to think that down the line that would be an obstacle for its growth. I suspect the latter. We are talking about people who built a car park so close to their runway that it affects their operations. I mean you seriously couldn't make it up! What's key to our business? The runway and stands where the aircraft which are the defining feature of our business depend on. No, the car park which makes us a few quid in the short term is more important. That's what grates the most for me personally, the sheer lack of ambition and short sightedness that is constantly undermining the growth of their business. I am sorry but it cannot be a coincidence that the grinning goon has been in charge throughout. Some change is much needed but the nature of a pension fund is that they want a safe investment. It doesn't matter the the returns are small as long as they are dependable. It's a shame someone did not step in when it was up for sale who would have speculated to accumulate. If someone is willing to spend 50mil at BOH then we should expect the same for SOU. Can you imagine what could be achieved at SOU with that sort of money.
Rivet Joint - again, your comments amaze me - complete lack of understanding about how an airport works in general, let alone Southampton. I am intrigued by your back story and you still haven't told us where you got your information from relating to the ILS being unsupported?
In reference to your comments regarding buildings, there are currently no buildings in close vicinity to the airport that affect it's operations or could be seen as performance limiting. The railway sheds do not affect the operation as they are not tall enough; the only affect being wake turbulence on particularly windy days but nothing that could be deemed as a hazard. The sheds have never been on airport land so you cannot criticize the airport for their location. The safeguarding process is well documented and audited by the CAA so no buildings have slipped through the net and nobody has messed up.
Secondly, the car park does not limit the operation of the runway? I'm particularly intrigued by this comment as I cannot understand how it does affect the runway?! Perhaps you could expand?
Lastly, you mention trees. You seem to think that you can get the local authority involved to cut them down? Nope, again, a very short sighted view. Most of the trees that could be deemed as performance limiting are on private land. The local authority has no jurisdiction about those ones so engagement is required with the landowner, and in the case of Marhill copse just to the South, who owns that?! Southampton City Council don't! Then there is the costs associated with the tree reduction, not only the cost of lopping but the compensation required - you are talking thousands... per tree. Having been involved in tree reduction at 2 airports, you can take that as fact. It has just taken 4 months to remove 3 trees at my current airport....
It's about time that you laid your grudge to rest... failing that, put all of your comments and suggestions in writing and address them to "The grinning goon, Southampton Airport, SO18 2NL" Do something positive with your negativity rather than sitting behind a keyboard moaning.