When do TUI'S 735's Arrive At Coventry?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Coventry
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scouting around?
Dada - the airline ops from the airport South side where there is plenty of branding to be seen. I guess you were elsewhere onsite - poss amongst the Atlantiqe aircraft on the North side where it would not be appropriate for Thomsonfly stuff to be posted. Whilst Thomsonfly and the airport share common ownership they do not have carte blanche to brand the whole airport with their stuff. Their flags fly on the south side and the departure lounge is bedecked with their ads. The passenger info screens in departures and arrivals are also heavily branded. I guess when another airline comes aboard that will change. As for the basic nature of facilities - yes on the North and West side there's a lot of older hangarage - housing many classic aircraft because that's Atlantique's thing - maybe you missed that subtle point. On the South side it's temporary buildings whilst Warwick District Council play silly ******s, after which a posh new terminal goes up.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Coventry
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More airlines at Coventry
Arbottle - not to my knowledge but the businesses (airport and airline) are totally separate entities - and as the airport has many other tenants not associated with Tui the branding remains airport first, client second. If more airlines come here in the future I'd guess some of the Thomsonfly stuff in the departures area would have to be changed for generic airport branding. Airport colours are green and black - Orange will look horrid here 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Coventry
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The antis are using the following “professor” Timar as evidence to back their pollution claims.
http://www.angelfire.com/pe/environmentaleng/
Have a read of:
http://www.areco.org/gtaaimpact.pdf
If you want some entertainment. Especially the household survey at the end - “how many deaths have you had this year”
http://www.angelfire.com/pe/environmentaleng/
Have a read of:
http://www.areco.org/gtaaimpact.pdf
If you want some entertainment. Especially the household survey at the end - “how many deaths have you had this year”
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK Midlands
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Despite the BBC reference to 15 th May, its actually the 13th and 14th may, that Warwick District Council are having a preliminary hearing in the high court, as to whether Coventry Airport are within Permitted Development rights or not, to have erected and operated the 'interim' terminal - ie the portacabins. WDC are adamant that they are not; that Cov Airport should have submitted a planning application and environmental statement for the temp facilities. Equally the airport are adamant they are operating within the law. Someone will be wrong. There is more than a fair chance that the high court will order the airport to stop using the 'interim' facilities, but it may have to go to a full hearing of the high court, which will give thomsonfly a bit more time to set up a plan B.
The permanent passenger terminal planning application is another matter altogether. That application is still on hold. Despite it being submitted over a year ago, cov airport have requested Warwick district council delay any decision, as the airport want to resubmit the environmental Impact assessment and supporting mitigation package. They did say it was going to be reissued at the start of April, but here we are in May and it hasnt reappeared yet.
So no date currently is set for the permanent passenger terminal.
The permanent passenger terminal planning application is another matter altogether. That application is still on hold. Despite it being submitted over a year ago, cov airport have requested Warwick district council delay any decision, as the airport want to resubmit the environmental Impact assessment and supporting mitigation package. They did say it was going to be reissued at the start of April, but here we are in May and it hasnt reappeared yet.
So no date currently is set for the permanent passenger terminal.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: n/a
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Noww the mayor of whitnash is complaining in the local paper that aircraft low flying over the tachbrook road are a terrorist risk.
I'm not kiding that is eighteen thousand that he is complaing about.
....I was amazed to see a low flying plane. It was only 18,000 feet up.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: n/a
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well its an odd figure, if it was a typo then did he mean , 18 feet, 180 feet, 1800 feet or 180,000 feet and how the heck does he know.
As for the Letter on the next page calling for a total EU ban on night flights these people have no idea what we do at night
Leamington Courier 30 April 04. P37.
As for the Letter on the next page calling for a total EU ban on night flights these people have no idea what we do at night
Leamington Courier 30 April 04. P37.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Coventry
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Fundamentalists"
Very interesting article in CET stating that the new chair of the airport committe, Lord Snape, will not tolerate the "fundamentalists" who have been stirring up so much bad feeling about the airport:
Lord Snape, 62, who as Peter Snape was MP for West Bromwich, has been a friend of Coventry Airport managing director Bill Savage for several years. He has declared he will not support the views of "fundamentalists".
He said: "The fundamentalists take the view that the airport should not be here in the first place.
"That's not the view that I take and is not one I want to entertain; that is something for the High Court to decide.
"It's somewhat illogical to buy a home adjacent to an airport and then ask them to stop flying.
"What I will be doing is addressing the issue of noise, making sure airlines stick to landing and take-off guidelines and persuade the airport to benefit local purposes."
Full article:
http://iccoventry.icnetwork.co.uk/01...l&siteid=50003
Naturally, CAECA have already accused him of bias, because they are all so neutral aren't they?
Lord Snape, 62, who as Peter Snape was MP for West Bromwich, has been a friend of Coventry Airport managing director Bill Savage for several years. He has declared he will not support the views of "fundamentalists".
He said: "The fundamentalists take the view that the airport should not be here in the first place.
"That's not the view that I take and is not one I want to entertain; that is something for the High Court to decide.
"It's somewhat illogical to buy a home adjacent to an airport and then ask them to stop flying.
"What I will be doing is addressing the issue of noise, making sure airlines stick to landing and take-off guidelines and persuade the airport to benefit local purposes."
Full article:
http://iccoventry.icnetwork.co.uk/01...l&siteid=50003
Naturally, CAECA have already accused him of bias, because they are all so neutral aren't they?
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK Midlands
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DfT Guidlines for consultative committees:
guidelines
Note the bits about appointment of a chairman, paras 5.1 and 6.5
guidelines
Note the bits about appointment of a chairman, paras 5.1 and 6.5
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Coventry
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another nail in CAECA's coffin
Not really a good week for CAECA is it?
Firstly, they are exposed as thugs on the evening news after they are challenged at one of their protests.
Then the new chair of the airport committee calls them "fundamentalists"
Then they try and hijack the supporters' forum with repeated spam attacks.
Now one of the country's top experts in pollution criticises their "black arts" of propaganda, after one of the local papers actually bothers to check up the nonsense they send them.
No wonder they have gone so quiet lately....
6/5/2004 - Coventry Observer
Airport campaigners raise pollution fears
CAMPAIGNERS fighting the expansion of Coventry Airport claim infant mortality rates around the airport will double if passenger flights continue.
The Campaign Against Expansion at Coventry Airport (CAECA) claim to have evidence of catastrophic health implications for residents living near the airport.
The campaigners point to statistics taken from a study by Canadian professor Gabriel Timar on pollution at Toronto International Airport, which carries over 20 million passengers per year.
Professor Timar states aircraft emissions have strong links to cancer, heart disease, respiratory disease and infant mortality.
But checking the professor's credentials on the internet, The Observer discovered his work has not been published in reputable scientific journals and, according to the professor himself, he does not have figures to back up his claims.
Professor Ronan Lyons from the University of Wales, one of the country's top authorities on atmospheric pollution, told The Observer this week campaigners must back statements with credible evidence.
"The first question one has to ask when presented with statistics like this is 'where they have come from?' - has it been reviewed by other experts, are there any vested interests?," Professor Lyons said.
"The NIMBY brigade like to scare the living daylights out of people without any real evidence because they know it makes for good headlines.
"It's the old black art of propaganda."
When The Observer questioned CAECA's evidence and revealed Professor Lyons opinion, a spokesman said precise figures of the impact of passenger flights at Coventry Airport were "hard to measure at the moment."
But the spokesman added the campaigners were keen to see air monitors installed at the airport.
"We need to know what the pollution threat is," the spokesman said.
"We are aware that, because of the conflict of airspace with Birmingham, aircraft have to fly lower and for longer in and out of Coventry.
"This causes more pollution. The airport has refused to calculate the environmental impact and have started flights without doing any kind of assessment."
Firstly, they are exposed as thugs on the evening news after they are challenged at one of their protests.
Then the new chair of the airport committee calls them "fundamentalists"
Then they try and hijack the supporters' forum with repeated spam attacks.
Now one of the country's top experts in pollution criticises their "black arts" of propaganda, after one of the local papers actually bothers to check up the nonsense they send them.
No wonder they have gone so quiet lately....
6/5/2004 - Coventry Observer
Airport campaigners raise pollution fears
CAMPAIGNERS fighting the expansion of Coventry Airport claim infant mortality rates around the airport will double if passenger flights continue.
The Campaign Against Expansion at Coventry Airport (CAECA) claim to have evidence of catastrophic health implications for residents living near the airport.
The campaigners point to statistics taken from a study by Canadian professor Gabriel Timar on pollution at Toronto International Airport, which carries over 20 million passengers per year.
Professor Timar states aircraft emissions have strong links to cancer, heart disease, respiratory disease and infant mortality.
But checking the professor's credentials on the internet, The Observer discovered his work has not been published in reputable scientific journals and, according to the professor himself, he does not have figures to back up his claims.
Professor Ronan Lyons from the University of Wales, one of the country's top authorities on atmospheric pollution, told The Observer this week campaigners must back statements with credible evidence.
"The first question one has to ask when presented with statistics like this is 'where they have come from?' - has it been reviewed by other experts, are there any vested interests?," Professor Lyons said.
"The NIMBY brigade like to scare the living daylights out of people without any real evidence because they know it makes for good headlines.
"It's the old black art of propaganda."
When The Observer questioned CAECA's evidence and revealed Professor Lyons opinion, a spokesman said precise figures of the impact of passenger flights at Coventry Airport were "hard to measure at the moment."
But the spokesman added the campaigners were keen to see air monitors installed at the airport.
"We need to know what the pollution threat is," the spokesman said.
"We are aware that, because of the conflict of airspace with Birmingham, aircraft have to fly lower and for longer in and out of Coventry.
"This causes more pollution. The airport has refused to calculate the environmental impact and have started flights without doing any kind of assessment."
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK Midlands
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Methinks you are desparately trying to distract attention away from the real point.
Coventry Airport are being taken to the High Court next week for flagrant breaches of planning regulations. Cov Airport/Tui/Thomson may not care about planning regs or environmental assessments but plenty do. It is the law of the land, not something that can be ignored by bully boy big business.
If the proper procedures had been adhered to , cov airport probably would now not be up the creek without paddles. They only have themselves to blame for the mess they are in
Coventry Airport are being taken to the High Court next week for flagrant breaches of planning regulations. Cov Airport/Tui/Thomson may not care about planning regs or environmental assessments but plenty do. It is the law of the land, not something that can be ignored by bully boy big business.
If the proper procedures had been adhered to , cov airport probably would now not be up the creek without paddles. They only have themselves to blame for the mess they are in
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South Warwickshire
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Twostroke:-
{quote} Coventry Airport are being taken to the High Court next week for flagrant breaches of planning regulations. {quote}
ALLEGED breach. The airport will contend that they carried out development WITHIN the permitted development. I also have to say Warwick DC have not alleged "Flagrent" that is your opinion only.
{quote} Cov Airport/Tui/Thomson may not care about planning regs or environmental assessments but plenty do. It is the law of the land, not something that can be ignored by bully boy big business. {quote}
Again, that is YOUR interpretation, not fact, Twostroke.
{Quote} If the proper procedures had been adhered to , cov airport probably would now not be up the creek without paddles. They only have themselves to blame for the mess they are in {Quote}
Again I would contend that proper proceedures WERE carried out by the airport, and that the Planning Committee, by ignoring the evidence are now up the creek and will have only themselves to blame for the debace (and costs) to come.
Shall we leave our comments untill the High Court makes the decision?
{quote} Coventry Airport are being taken to the High Court next week for flagrant breaches of planning regulations. {quote}
ALLEGED breach. The airport will contend that they carried out development WITHIN the permitted development. I also have to say Warwick DC have not alleged "Flagrent" that is your opinion only.
{quote} Cov Airport/Tui/Thomson may not care about planning regs or environmental assessments but plenty do. It is the law of the land, not something that can be ignored by bully boy big business. {quote}
Again, that is YOUR interpretation, not fact, Twostroke.
{Quote} If the proper procedures had been adhered to , cov airport probably would now not be up the creek without paddles. They only have themselves to blame for the mess they are in {Quote}
Again I would contend that proper proceedures WERE carried out by the airport, and that the Planning Committee, by ignoring the evidence are now up the creek and will have only themselves to blame for the debace (and costs) to come.
Shall we leave our comments untill the High Court makes the decision?
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Coventry
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Precedent?
I'm still wondering if there is any precedent for this case. Has anyone had such a big argument over a temporary structure?
I don't see any victors next week, except the lawyers.
If TUI win, the antis will cry foul. If WDC win, TUI will appeal. If TUI lose on appeal, will they reduce the size of the terminal - afaik, they still have development rights to operate the flights?
Even if they have to get rid of the terminal, couldn't they 'borrow' one of those mobile loungers, as used at places like Dallas? I'd love to see WDC try to slap an enforcement notice on one of those - every time they tried, they could just move it across the apron!
Seriously though, as I understand it, TUI HAVE tried to arrange mediation, but WDC have refused. They have NOT done a very good job at explaining this though, and really should have tried the PR offensive months ago.
I don't see any victors next week, except the lawyers.
If TUI win, the antis will cry foul. If WDC win, TUI will appeal. If TUI lose on appeal, will they reduce the size of the terminal - afaik, they still have development rights to operate the flights?
Even if they have to get rid of the terminal, couldn't they 'borrow' one of those mobile loungers, as used at places like Dallas? I'd love to see WDC try to slap an enforcement notice on one of those - every time they tried, they could just move it across the apron!
Seriously though, as I understand it, TUI HAVE tried to arrange mediation, but WDC have refused. They have NOT done a very good job at explaining this though, and really should have tried the PR offensive months ago.