HEATHROW
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He's technically correct however like a lot of laws on the statute books, it would be very unlikely to pass the public interest test for prosecution which is why Police don't blink at the thousands of scanners they see at airshows and why planefinder and flightradar apps are not illegal.
In fact given that you can listen in on ATC on some airlines own flight entertainment, AND our on society is much more open than the post war one which passed the act, it's passing into irrelevance over time.
In fact given that you can listen in on ATC on some airlines own flight entertainment, AND our on society is much more open than the post war one which passed the act, it's passing into irrelevance over time.
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 7th May 2013 at 07:32.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When this question arises there are always those who will argue that black is white. It's pointless arguing - it's LAW. Whether one chooses to ignore it - like the clowns who drive at 60 in 30 limits - it's up to the individual.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, read what I said. It's nuanced. The particular law is now archaic and irrelevant due to it's having fallen out of use and never having been used. In the same way that monitering aircraft movements can be seen as spying. In the world of planefinder, liveatc and the internet, there is no reasonable chance of a peacetime prosecution taking place.
Rules is rules is best left to parking attendants. What circumstances would ever realistically warrant a prosecution? Worth remembering that although you have signed the Offical Secrets Act I bet there's one or two of your enjoyable anecdotes that you technically ought not to have shared on pprune?
Rules is rules is best left to parking attendants. What circumstances would ever realistically warrant a prosecution? Worth remembering that although you have signed the Offical Secrets Act I bet there's one or two of your enjoyable anecdotes that you technically ought not to have shared on pprune?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My God Skippy here is a first...we agree on something !
The law re listening is totally out of touch !
When the media at Royal International Air Tattoo, Waddington, Luechars etc are prosecuted for providing a list of "todays airshow freqs" AND stop traders from selling airband radios I'll stop listening , but not before !
The law re listening is totally out of touch !
When the media at Royal International Air Tattoo, Waddington, Luechars etc are prosecuted for providing a list of "todays airshow freqs" AND stop traders from selling airband radios I'll stop listening , but not before !
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OFCOM considers that when organisers publish a display frequency at an airshow to be implicit consent to allow the public to listen to that frequency.
I'm not saying that the law is not broken, but I do think there are valid reasons for it to exist.
I'm not saying that the law is not broken, but I do think there are valid reasons for it to exist.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
" The particular law is now archaic and irrelevant due to it's having fallen out of use"
That doesn't change things one iota - there are lots of laws on the statute book that are old and rarely used but are very useful when Mr Plod is looking to fit you up
The Treason Act dates back to about 1710 I think..................
That doesn't change things one iota - there are lots of laws on the statute book that are old and rarely used but are very useful when Mr Plod is looking to fit you up
The Treason Act dates back to about 1710 I think..................
Can we please take this stuff about Scanners off to a separate thread, maybe in the Spotters section. It's nothing specifically relating to Heathrow and the same participants just cut-and-paste the same comments about it repeatedly whenever anyone even mentions the S****** word.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA are planning to work up their 380's on domestic routes and short haul - presumably they'll only be able to load the lower deck if they are going domestic?
Aberdeen doesn't have a flight of steps that big.......
Aberdeen doesn't have a flight of steps that big.......
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA re planning to work upp their A380's on domestic and shorthaul
presumably they'll only load the lower decK?
Or has someone told Aberdeen they're going to need a lot bigger set of steps??
presumably they'll only load the lower decK?
Or has someone told Aberdeen they're going to need a lot bigger set of steps??
Paxing All Over The World
Last edited by PAXboy; 10th May 2013 at 02:26.
Link to full public report:
http://londonfirst.co.uk/wp-content/...IC-VERSION.pdf
And an example of their researchers' attention to detail:
http://londonfirst.co.uk/wp-content/...IC-VERSION.pdf
And an example of their researchers' attention to detail:
Heathrow has around 650 flights each day between 7am-11pm
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Durham
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thames airport 'should be rejected' - MPs report
Thames airport 'should be rejected' - MPs report
BBC News - Thames airport 'should be rejected' - MPs report
BBC News - Thames airport 'should be rejected' - MPs report
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Houseville UK
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How long are 27R and 27L intended to be? (see map).
Is there sufficient lateral separation between the runways for full IFR ops?
Oh to be a Government London Airport Ctte paper shuffler, job for life. Good pension too.
JJet
Is there sufficient lateral separation between the runways for full IFR ops?
Oh to be a Government London Airport Ctte paper shuffler, job for life. Good pension too.
JJet
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite interesting to see the amount of people in London adversely affected by noise from road traffic is actually far more than from LHR, and a similar story from pollution. Not something I had thought about before, and the first time I've seen it compared and displayed in direct comparison.
Increasing the glide path angle to 3.2 might help
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Policy Exchange proposal (the one with 4 runways 2 miles directly to the west of the current ones) proposes increasing the angle of descent, as currently happens at LCY. It does acknowledge, though, that this could only be achieved for narrow bodies, being currently too much of a safety risk for wide bodies