PPR Turweston

[max roll rate]

Due to recent events Turweston is now strictly PPR and will be working within its planning constraints. Movement limits are very tight so please help us to help you as we hate having to turn people away once they are in the air , could you also help by passing this information around our general aviation community .
Thanks
Max roll rate

[Taildragger]

What.?????? What is going on here.?? Turweston is the new HQ of the PFA and we have to get permission to fly in.??
We used to enjoy flying into the VAC do's but that was cancelled due local protestors. It used to be trite to say it was an elderly Colonel and a Yuppy wannabe who spoiled it for others but in this case it was TRUE. A very small (Very very very very very very very small, like two) bunch of protesters are allowed to kill off a facility like Turweston.?? DISGUSTING.
What is going to happen if Silverstone happens next year after the government (ie; You and Me) have paid for the new roads around the traps, but the fixed wing folks are having difficulty flying in for the British Grand Prix.??
The whole busines gets my goat. Signed Disgusted of Twyford.

PS.... Can we request PPR via the wireless 10 miles out.??

[DubTrub]

max roll rate
Are you acting for or on behalf of the Turweston Aerodrome Authority? Perhaps if so, you would be generous enough to let us know in what official capacity you act.

And perhaps promulgate the info by either NOTAM or the correct entry in the AIP.

[LowNSlow]

I can only echo Taildragger's comments. Good choice of location PFA.

[max roll rate]

Hi all
dub trub i am the airfield manager , it is in the AIP it always has been its just people sometimes dont ppr and this has now become a problem so its just a reminder to folks .
it is hard for me to comment on events but just to say we are backs to the wall and under a lot of presure , i am unable to write my own feelings as it may not do our cause any good .
here is a link to the flyer forum where the problem has been talked about slightly more .
regards to all our friends
Max

http://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=9943

[Genghis the Engineer]

Surely nobody would fly in to see PFA without an appointment anyway, that would be most inconsiderate.

G

[DubTrub]

Thanks for your reply, max, me now slightly wiser.

Was Turweston a wartime field? Would they have questioned it then? Is this "prior use"?

Shotgun, anyone? I like a nice horse steak.



[Edit: as an aside, the aerodrome I fly from has Lapwings...OK, I know they are birds...they sit in flocks in excess of 200 in number adjacent to aircraft landing and departing(within say 20 feet), and appear to be totally unconcerned, and do not interfere or pose a birdstrike threat. Perhaps it is because they have been naturally reared amongst aeroplanes]

[Gyr]

If this idiot (polo pony breeder / city head hunter called xxxxxx) keeps this up, does he realise if he acheives total closure of turdy, he and the local villages will lose the protection of an ATZ (for the nimby thats in turdy's case 2000 feet up and two miles radius and an extended 3 mile curcuit noise abatement rule in the planning permission), and we the Aerobatics world will gain 6000 feet of open FIR and aeros down to five hundred feet for practice. Fantastic! Oh and then there is a small problem of a high speed low level direct practice route opening up for the RAF which presently passes to the north and east. I know they fly straight over my house at about 250 feet.

How did he do so well in the city?

Some people are just a little short sited :hmm:

[Flyin'Dutch']

Although I can sympathise with the feeling expressed here, reality dictates that shouting won't help.

Grabbing your pen may!

Someone on the Flyer Forums posted the following: This morning I got a letter from Aylesbury Vale DC to say that it has now gone to appeal. Anyone who has written previously about this will have their comments forwarded automatically, but any additional or new comments can be addressed direct to the inspectors at:
Planning Inspectorate
Room 304A
Kite Wing
Temple Quay House
2 The Square
Temple Quay
Bristol BS1 6PN

Reference number to quote: APP/J0405/A/04/1163756.
Three copies of all correspondance to be sent within 6 weeks of start date, which was 4 October.

If anyone hasn't written in support of Turweston, there are a couple of weeks to do so.



So get your quill out and start writing!

FD

[Gyr]

Dear Flying Dutch

three copies in the post box that went like this:

Re Turweston Airfield Planning

Being a local resident who sees most of the arriving air traffic pass over his house at which I breed rare species of Birds of Prey with great success.

I find the objections to;
A, The Vintage Air Rally (that has gone without complaints for years providing education and entertainment to thousands, not to mention the employment) and
B, The obviously sensible requests by the airfield owner to increase his operations by a sensible amount to continue his business growth and maintain this superb facility,
placed by a minority few, fuelled by an individual who thought he could purchase a cheap manor house and systematically go about closing down an airfield that has been here since the end of the First World War, quite frankly obscene.

Should this appeal on behalf of Turweston Aerodrome not be successful it will be yet another tragedy in the history of the British planning procedures.

I have attended the local steering committee meetings as a local onlooker, and found it to be a small group of individuals who no longer represent the local community, yet they clearly feel they have our support. If they were in fact to knock on our doors they would find an indifferent group of parishioners. Who the hell are they anyway; I cannot recall a vote in the past seven years to elect any of them. Yet they seem to have the devoted ear of the local council, even when the planning office has no objections.

Please write to this concerned local resident as we appear to be losing a local treasure by war of attrition, a war over which we have no control.

Will that do do you think?

[Flyin'Dutch']

Gyr,

You clearly take no prisoners!

:O

I have drafted something along the same lines but maybe less succinct.

Hope many more folks take our lead!

Best regards

FD

[Orange Arm Waver]

Gyr
Good but Turweston opened originally in November 1942... and closed as an RAF base in September 45 I think.
:8

Guys the original hearing there were three letters of complaint - two ariving late by all accounts. There wer 70+ letters of support...!:suspect:

As a member of the VAC (and as supporter of the airfield as I take my monsters when I have them) I have expressed my support to the airfield and I am wondering what I can add further under this appeal.

Our meeting held at TW on the 30th was subdued and yet the air of frustration (and air of mild anger) was incredible. We know we were being watched (as the airfield is regularly by people including the council) and this did not help matters.

The VAC will stand by Turweston.

We only use the airfield 5 days a year. My personal feelings go out to the flying school, maintenance shop and paint shop there - they have to endure this lunacy every working day. This WILL I believe affect jobs in the area both directly and indirectly.

Our country is turning into a land of intollerants - As long as I'm all right Jack!:mad: :mad: :mad:

OAW

[BEagle]

Who is this git?

Move next to a zoo - don't complain about the noise the lions make.

Move next to an aerodrome - don't complain about the noise the aeroplanes make.

Of course, if he continues to complain about the noise and subsequently decides to sell his stately pile, he must disclose the fact to the prosepective purchasers. If he doesn't, he will have withheld a material fact (aeroplane noise about which he felt the need to complain) that might have affected the value of his property - which I understand would give the purchaser an opportunity to sue.

Were Turweston to lose its licence - or even worse to close - guess where I'll be practising all my PFLs down to 501'.......

[Dusty_B]

Gyr,

I'd not considered the effect of the closing of an ATZ before. What a wonderful arguement! If the airfield does close, then it is still a viable landing ground under the 28 day rule (without the need for noise abatement proceedures), so private flights to the VAC would still be possible. And on non-VAC days, PFL and "bad weather navigation practice" at 501' in the local area sound like a dreamy idea!!

And barns next to disused airfields make SUCH good turning points too...

I've always said that if a nimby near me kicks off, I shall be demanding that the A34, M40 and railway lines are all closed between the hours of 11pm and 7am. Yes, I know they've been around for years, but the traffic is soooo much worse now... I can't get any sleep...

[Gyr]

Ah yes the 28 day rule - not much use for the poor sods based ther I would guess.

However the local idiot could not affect an application to the CAA for a permanent exemption to the 500' rule.

I will not give it its proper name as we know the idiot is reading all we scribe.

But we could ask for a training box for aeros (a 1km cube fits perfectly I've measured it out), allowing all DA holders to practice down to Da authorised levels(some are as low as 20' or less).

For a small fee the Ad owner could make a tidy sum from fuel sales, some of us burn off 40ltr's in about ten minutes(three sorties a day is about the limit - it all gets rather sloppy after that), not to mention gallons upon gallons of deisel for smoke. Bugger heading him off at the pass - smoke him out.

We could invite every team in the UK (no Europe) for daily practice sessions, with resident critics (top names of course).

I believe the National Aerobatic Championships may even be looking for a new venue? Three whole days of pure cloud abuse!!

And then there is motor racing :D

[PhilD]

I can sense the frustration in these posts, but I can't help feeling that it would be in the best interests of GA overall if we were to talk more about constructive engagement, dialogue, and understanding than dive-bombing the houses of people whose opinions we don't like. We are a small minority, and we need to encourage tolerance, not create opposition for ourselves by our behaviour.

A good first step would be for as many people as possible to write to the council in an objective and calm way to express their opinions.

[Gyr]

I have just been looking at the Flyer postings and it seems possible that a meeting may be taking place in the next week or so.

Anyone got any info as to date and time?

A small pilot invasion should be the least we can do, having already written several letters and had no replies.

Could be a good excuse for a few beers in a local pub, bringing yet more trade from the aviation community, who I would like to add are not the minority in this case, but by far the majority. Sadly it appears however, that the local council are not listening and are prepared to ignore their own planning office, not to mention us locals.

[max roll rate]

Hi all thanks for all the positive replies I do think we need to stay calm we do not want to end up at there level we are all grown up sensible people we need to do things through the proper channels even if they are slow and not always fare , and if we loose the battle then I guess nimbys are fare game lol ! .ref the meeting that has been mentioned it is for the based operators and businesses on the airfield and it is to discus the best way to utilize the movements at the weekends it is no more than that , if any more meetings are planes in the future I will try to keep you advised
Regards max

[Dusty_B]

Gry comes up with another sound point for nimbys to consider:

Motorsports.

(Should have thought of that one for myself coming from Enstone...)

The disadvantages of having an active licensed aerodrome in your back garden FAR outweigh the potential disaster that a disused aerodrome might become. Go-kart track, rally driving school, skid pan training, motorcycle school, motocross competitions...

Oh for the sound of a lycoming bimbling overhead!


Aerobatic Zone
This is a BAD idea.
Low level aerobatics down to 50' REDUCES the footprint of your sound polution.... thats no good at all.....:E

[Gyr]

Living in a small village not far from EGBT with a minor road going through it, that allows lorries up to 40tons on a daily basis. The nimby in question should be aware of the councils attitude towards access by road.

They quite simply state that we live in an area with many small rivers and access for industrial vehicles is limited, therefore they will not impose weight restrictions on any roads. Where a route already exists they are happy to provide planning permission for further industrial use.

EGBT has already a large grain silo and access. EGBT already has another large drying facility as a neighbour using the same access.

Not difficult to work out what the owner of EGBT may be forced to do. Lets face it after 60yrs of concrete and tarmac he is hardly likely to dig it up for farming. Finmere was going to be used as a giant car park. Not to mention the huge investment in buildings for the PFA and hangars etc.

Perhaps the people of Whitfield should ask themselves what it is like to have an average of 100+ lorries a day coming through the village? That what they get at the Heyfords (which is shortly to close). We have only twenty or so and the damage is unbelievable. All the council say is "we'll give you 18" kirb stones and reinforce the roads". We have a single track bridge through our village and a sign stateing "unsuitable for heavy vehicles", that does not discourage them and the council will not apply a weight limit.

Food for thought for this idiots supporters.