BAE Woodford sold
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Between a Rock & A Hard Place
Age: 53
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If true then this is good news indeed. Firstly it gives us flyers a choice in this area, if they open up to flying clubs of course!! Secondly most of the premiership footballers are already interested in GA flying, mostly rotary though as really is a rich mans sport!!!! Although granted there are those in that line of work for whom the ground exams might be a trifle challenging shall we say!!!
As for the local residents, it is not a case of middle England prejudice, for those that have never been around that area, it is full of some very nice, very large, very very expensive houses of the hald a mil for a garden shed style!!! If you had bought a house in the most elegant neighbourhood the area has to offer and then saw the value of your investment destroyed overnight by social housing (as already mentioned, occupied by the anti social) I think you would resist such a move as well. This is not a snobby attitude, but it is law if a company builds a new housing development, a certain percentage of the build has to be social housing. Given that for the last 40 years councils all over the country have tried to mix the classes moving the anti social in with the nice people in the hopes that the scum would pull thier socks up. In reality the opposite occurs, the value of a pile in Woodford would drop through the floor overnight. In addition when runway 2 was being built at MAN, there were restrictions on the tipper wagons that they couldnt go through Woodford, can you imagine the outcry from the locals if they had all the ghastly lorries going past the door every day??
If offered the choice of the two, I imagine the locals will tolerate the airfield all day long, and if that is the case then good look to Woodford, and I look forward to seeing your runway soon
As for the local residents, it is not a case of middle England prejudice, for those that have never been around that area, it is full of some very nice, very large, very very expensive houses of the hald a mil for a garden shed style!!! If you had bought a house in the most elegant neighbourhood the area has to offer and then saw the value of your investment destroyed overnight by social housing (as already mentioned, occupied by the anti social) I think you would resist such a move as well. This is not a snobby attitude, but it is law if a company builds a new housing development, a certain percentage of the build has to be social housing. Given that for the last 40 years councils all over the country have tried to mix the classes moving the anti social in with the nice people in the hopes that the scum would pull thier socks up. In reality the opposite occurs, the value of a pile in Woodford would drop through the floor overnight. In addition when runway 2 was being built at MAN, there were restrictions on the tipper wagons that they couldnt go through Woodford, can you imagine the outcry from the locals if they had all the ghastly lorries going past the door every day??
If offered the choice of the two, I imagine the locals will tolerate the airfield all day long, and if that is the case then good look to Woodford, and I look forward to seeing your runway soon
woodford
Thought police antagonist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 1,371
Received 110 Likes
on
77 Posts
Well this should placate the horse set in Chesh sheer ( as those eloquent Beeb persons from Islington insist on calling the county 
) if nothing else...
BAE Woodford site purchaser revealed as JCB heir | Wilmslow Express - menmedia.co.uk
) if nothing else...BAE Woodford site purchaser revealed as JCB heir | Wilmslow Express - menmedia.co.uk
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At this stage everyone's guess is as good as mine. I would caution about getting too excited about a resumption of any meaningful aviation activity. The fact that the Flight Sheds area is the prime focus of attention for the film studios, does suggest that aviation is not top of the list of priorities.
Some of the proposals I have seen have the runway laid out as a main road into the site, linking up with the new by-pass link. Likewise rumours of the likes of DHL etc suggest to me road freight depots.
As it was on the last day of BAE airfield operations, see here.
As it was over many decades, wallow in nostalgia here.
Hopefully there will be a favourable outcome for the resumption of some form of flying activities, but given the limited one sided press stories we have been reading, I will not be expecting much at this stage.
Some of the proposals I have seen have the runway laid out as a main road into the site, linking up with the new by-pass link. Likewise rumours of the likes of DHL etc suggest to me road freight depots.
As it was on the last day of BAE airfield operations, see here.
As it was over many decades, wallow in nostalgia here.
Hopefully there will be a favourable outcome for the resumption of some form of flying activities, but given the limited one sided press stories we have been reading, I will not be expecting much at this stage.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whatever happens at WFD it is unlikely to take away much bizjet traffic from MAN. One of the major advantages of private jets is that you fly when YOU want to, often at short notice. MAN is H24, all-weather, has comprehensive facilities, and night noise restrictions don't gnerally prohibit today's bizjets. I can't see WFD ever being able to ofer all those advantages. Sheik al Makhtour, the Glazers, Roman Abramovic etc are not going to be impressed when they are told that they can't stay for that extra cocktail after the match because of the curfew at WFD, or they have to stay because the weather has closed the field.
Operationally, despite the 2000+ metres of runway, WFD will be somewhat limited for commercial flights by the large lump of Cumulus Peat-Bogostratus (aka Kinder Scout) which rises to over 2000 feet on the extended centreline.
Operationally, despite the 2000+ metres of runway, WFD will be somewhat limited for commercial flights by the large lump of Cumulus Peat-Bogostratus (aka Kinder Scout) which rises to over 2000 feet on the extended centreline.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Cheshire, UK
Age: 60
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What you say is probably true about business traffic but I disagree with your point about the terrain. Commercial traffic operates at airfields with considerably higher terrain than Kinder Scout in the surrounding area. It may be 2000ft but it is over 7 miles away. I've flown out of Woodford many hundreds of time and haven't hit the hill yet!
The bigger hindrance might be a lack of parallel taxiway. I believe planning permission was sought many years ago but it was never built. It was a pain at times when the airfield was busy.
I don't actually think a commercial operation is on the cards anyway, mores the pity.
The bigger hindrance might be a lack of parallel taxiway. I believe planning permission was sought many years ago but it was never built. It was a pain at times when the airfield was busy.
I don't actually think a commercial operation is on the cards anyway, mores the pity.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roverman. Apart from possibly disturbing the Manchester Rambler's Sunday, I also don't see the problem with Kinder. http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadba...2006-01-19.pdf The NDB/DME Approach Plate for 07 shows bags of terrain seperation. Also, Kinder is not exactly strewn with bent AVRO/HSA maker's plates.
Instrument Approaches and Minima
Never operated into Woodford. (Drove there around 1986/7 to evaluate two types of EFIS fitted to an ATP simulator, and in a hangar saw the Kinloss Nimrod whose belly had been burned by flares in flight.) Any topographical shows the aerodrome is worse affected by the proximity of cumulo-granite Peninis than MAN. Thought it might be worth looking at the let-down plates in the UK AIP.
Unsurprisingly, the ILS for Rwy25 is 3.6deg (20% steeper than standard), and availability of the paired DME is mandatory as there is no L (locator) beacon nowadays for Rwy25. The OCH for Cat A aircraft (would that include bizjets?) is 400ft, roughly double the normal for a Cat1 ILS procedure. This may be partly due to the steeper slope, but is likely also to be something to do with a large number of close-in obstacles. The Cat B OCH is 100ft higher.
http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadba...2006-01-19.pdf
The lowest-available minima for Rwy07 are for the offset NDB(L)/DME procedure mentioned above by GBZ, and they match the ILS Rwy25 figures – presumably due to the comparative lack of obstacles.
http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadba...2006-01-19.pdf
Even for Cat A aircraft, a decision height of over 400ft is likely to be restrictive on many mornings, unless Woodford weather is an exception to the general rule. But MAN is close to hand...
PS (EDIT): For some reason the links posted by me and GBZ don't seem to work, but the charts come to hand easily enough via the UK AIP website.
Unsurprisingly, the ILS for Rwy25 is 3.6deg (20% steeper than standard), and availability of the paired DME is mandatory as there is no L (locator) beacon nowadays for Rwy25. The OCH for Cat A aircraft (would that include bizjets?) is 400ft, roughly double the normal for a Cat1 ILS procedure. This may be partly due to the steeper slope, but is likely also to be something to do with a large number of close-in obstacles. The Cat B OCH is 100ft higher.
http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadba...2006-01-19.pdf
The lowest-available minima for Rwy07 are for the offset NDB(L)/DME procedure mentioned above by GBZ, and they match the ILS Rwy25 figures – presumably due to the comparative lack of obstacles.
http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadba...2006-01-19.pdf
Even for Cat A aircraft, a decision height of over 400ft is likely to be restrictive on many mornings, unless Woodford weather is an exception to the general rule. But MAN is close to hand...
PS (EDIT): For some reason the links posted by me and GBZ don't seem to work, but the charts come to hand easily enough via the UK AIP website.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Despite being licensed, Woodford has never been used for commercial (revenue) flying, only for flight testing and for BAE and its predecessors business.
The Aerodrome Licence has now been revoked and the ATZ given up. Whereas previously WFD had a licence with a number of legacy non-compliances such as terrain and trees through the obstacle limitation surfaces. A new licence application with a new owner is likely to be treated from scratch - i.e. comply with the requirements or have operating limitations as an alternative means of compliance. These could take the form of reducing the runway declared distances, higher than usual minimum descent heights, higher than usual RVR limit. Trees can be removed, hills can't, unless you're in Hong Kong. Probably not a big issue for JCB's own fleet but likely to be limiting for commercial operations.
The Aerodrome Licence has now been revoked and the ATZ given up. Whereas previously WFD had a licence with a number of legacy non-compliances such as terrain and trees through the obstacle limitation surfaces. A new licence application with a new owner is likely to be treated from scratch - i.e. comply with the requirements or have operating limitations as an alternative means of compliance. These could take the form of reducing the runway declared distances, higher than usual minimum descent heights, higher than usual RVR limit. Trees can be removed, hills can't, unless you're in Hong Kong. Probably not a big issue for JCB's own fleet but likely to be limiting for commercial operations.
BAe
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: MCT
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sale now completed to JCB
Article still mentions retention of the runway but no further clues as to whether it will ever be used for flying again.
Good to see the future of the Heritage Centre is assured too.
JCB heir acquires BAE Woodford for £100m | Manchester Evening News - menmedia.co.uk
Suzeman
Article still mentions retention of the runway but no further clues as to whether it will ever be used for flying again.
Good to see the future of the Heritage Centre is assured too.
JCB heir acquires BAE Woodford for £100m | Manchester Evening News - menmedia.co.uk
Suzeman
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: England.
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its being turned into a bizjet park and also a aircraft scrapping and reclamation centre.
Isn't £100m a tad too high?
