Wind Turbines & Mil Ac Issues

[jamesman]

All,

I am wondering if anybody has been involved in opposing the construction of wind turbines in their part of the country. I am specifically looking to see if there is a generic issue with mil ac.

There is currently an application pending for a wind turbine to be constructed about 1 mile from Salisbury plain and approximately 500 m from Cley Hill. Those of you in the Herc & Rotor world wil know this location as you fly around it on a daily basis!

Apart from advising on NOTAMs, is there anybody who has come across this issue and what arguments have been put up to stop them being built.

I know this is often a thorny issue, but whilst I agree with renewable, these ugly edifices are surely not the way forward across our countryside.

Any guidance you may have would be welcome.

Jamesman

[Exascot]

I am a consultant in environmental issues and very opposed to wind turbines. I was instrumental in halting a massive proposed project here on our island. I do not think the danger to low flying a/c will work as a lever. It is no different to radio masts etc. It would just get marked up on charts and put into nav systems.

Good luck. :ok:

[Martin the Martian]

So what's the issue with them? They can't be any worse than a long line of pylons surely?

I see plenty of them on my daily commute; don't even notice them these days.


Stands by for incoming.

[Dave Sharpe]

There was a proposal a few years ago to build a large windfarm site some 8 miles to the west of RAF Marham---from experience I know that MOD planners had to be consulted due to the possible interference to the radar head--we have had some of the smaller tubines put up in the same local(ish) area where there were no MOD objections---There was a similiar plan for a large scale develpment in the Snettisham area which is roughly to the North of Marham and the MOD were part of the planning process for the same consideration--neither proposal went ahead but it was a long battle by the inhabitants of both areas--

[ShotOne]

I'm very sceptical about the argument for wind turbines on both financial and aesthetic grounds. But is there an air safety case? Are they really more hazardous than the tens of thousands of aerials, chimneys, masts and pylons that dot/blight the landscape.?

[Yamagata ken]

Are they really more hazardous than the tens of thousands of aerials, chimneys, masts and pylons that dot/blight the landscape.? These are all stationary. Blades on windmills move. Is there a difference in (e.g.) radar returns?

[minigundiplomat]

There is currently an application pending for a wind turbine to be constructed about 1 mile from Salisbury plain and approximately 500 m from Cley Hill. Those of you in the Herc & Rotor world wil know this location as you fly around it on a daily basis!

Apart from advising on NOTAMs, is there anybody who has come across this issue and what arguments have been put up to stop them being built.

I know this is often a thorny issue, but whilst I agree with renewable, these ugly edifices are surely not the way forward across our countryside.

is the potential impact on parachuting the way forward?

[fabs]

There is a department within the MOD that deals exclusively with responding to planning applications for wind turbines and wind farms. Depending on if any of the ‘trigger factors’ are realised in a planning application the local authority is legally obliged to consult the MOD and ascertain whether they intend to object or otherwise. That is not to say that they automatically object to every proposal, quite the opposite, each case is rigorously researched and considered before responding to the local authority. I’m pretty sure they never object on ‘aesthetic’ grounds.
In your case I imagine that given the location of the proposal the MOD will be consulted (depending on the size of the proposed turbine).

[strake]

We had an issue near where I lived in Suffolk when I was based in the UK. A farmer leased land to one of the energy speculators involved in windfarms and they intended to put up half a dozen or so within 200m of some houses. The Flying hazard argument was discounted early on. In the end it was noise and intrusion that won the day. To those who ask what the problem is, I quite like seeing the windmills here in France but that's because they are located on hills far away from people or next to Motorways. Up close, they are big b*****s and they make quite a lot of noise. If they are so efficient, I'd say use oil taxation to build more giant farms off the coast where no one is going to be worried about it...apart from the environmental effect on the lesser spotted sprat of course.

[ericferret]

JAMESMAN please send me a PM.

Immediate action is to ensure that the application is called in by your local councillor once a formal planning application has been made. Failing to do so means that the application can be dealt with by delegated powers and you will not be able to present a personal objection. The application will be dealt with by planning officers using written evidence only. We have suffered from this locally.

As has been said the MOD has a safeguarding unit at Harrogate which is consulted on all wind turbine issues. I have contacted them more than once pointing out that the proliferation of wind turbines in our area which is a low flying area is potentially dangerous. They have never objected yet, even though the current planned turbines are 400 feet in an area where aircraft are cleared down to 250 (200?).

The only objections from the MOD that I have seen are on radar interference grounds and more recently where one turbine was to be sited on a low flying route choke point. This latter objection was upheld and planning permission refused.

We successfully opposed a wind turbine at our local airfield by citing the fact that it was on the turn between downwind and base leg at a height that would be dangerous particularly in bad weather. We are currently awaiting the plannning inspectorate report on another site where a developer has applied to put a turbine less than a 100m from the end of an established runway. We are hopeful that this application will also be rejected.

If you can demonstrate that the turbine will be dangerous to aircraft approaching an airfield particularly in bad weather remembering that the 500 foot rule does not apply during the takeoff and landing phase ( Also remembering that altimeter error within limits can bring an aircraft even lower) you may have a good case.

There has been one case in Europe of an aircraft hiting a turbine in bad weather (lucky to survive) and more than one in the USA. Aviation safety can be a strong card if played correctly.

[fabs]

The fact that a proposed wind turbine sits in a low flying area isn’t necessarily a threat to flight safety on it’s own. The aircraft captain may be authorised down to 250ft MSD (or lower). If said turbine is marked clearly on charts/maps and there are no other factors (like the aforementioned low flying choke point or airfield safeguarding criteria) then the aircraft captain is to avoid that obstacle by 250ft. If there is an identified danger to MOD aircraft by this proposal then the MOD will certainly object.
I wish you well in your campaign but I wouldn’t necessarily rely on the flight safety argument alone.

[Fortissimo]

Wind turbines can and do interfere with primary surveillance radars. That is why there is a Transponder Mandatory Zone around Thanet and the London Array - the TMZ allows ATC to use its SSR instead of primary radar. There is also a consultation running (check the CAA website) on a TMZ over a chunk of the Irish Sea near Liverpool to mitigate the effects of the turbines (290m blade height!) on Warton's PSR.

This is an issue that affects civ and mil airspace users.

[Sandy Parts]

Scottish judiciary have just upheld a ruling that allowed the MoD to veto some wind turbines on hills near the radar heads on the Hebrides. If you google Hebrides and MoD/windfarm you should find the recent story.

[Tankertrashnav]

Chap up the road from me had a medium sized one installed about 4 years back. I approached the company who installed it with a view to having the same. Plans were quite advanced, agreements drawn up etc, when the company backed out. Apparently Culdrose (in whose MATZ our properties both lie) were intending to object to all turbines above a certain size in the area, on the radar interference grounds already referred to, so my plan for a nice little £5k pa addition to my pension came to nought. When we enquired about how my neighbour's one got through, Culdrose had apparently objected too late, and weren't going to get caught on the hop again.

Funny thing is there is a much bigger wind farm with half a dozen large turbines just a few miles South of Culdrose - that seems to got through ok without interfering with the radar, but what do I know? Mrs TTN was pleased, though, she never really wanted it anyway.

[Basil]

I'd doubt that the rotation speed of a wind turbine would cause a radar problem.
When using the Argosy (RR Dart engines) for flight calibration, I recollect we had a prop RPM range to avoid due harmonic re-radiation of part of the ILS signal interfering with the accuracy of our technicians' instruments.
The restriction did not apply when flying a normal ILS.

[Valiantone]

Afternoon all

I assume you are all aware the a Swedish Company (Vattenfaal??) is proposing a massive wind farm at Nocton Fen running out towards Bardney.

I wonder if they realise that it falls with in the Coningsby (possibly) and Waddington (more likely) MATZs.

Not to mention the low flying route which runs down the Lincolnshire wolds past Bardney, and out over the edge of Metheringham.

And add to that on days when the visibility is bad Coningsby's finest often fly around/over the village of Branston next to Waddington

I never got a reply when pointing this out:=

V1

[Lordflasheart]

Jamesman -

1. Can you please post the name of the Planning Authority (the Council) or a ref number so interested parties can look it up in detail.

2. I refer you to the Bullington Cross windfarm application that Winchester, Test Valley and Basingstoke Councils jointly refused last week. Allegedly MoD objected. EDF are expected to appeal.

BBC News - Bullington Cross wind turbine plan rejected at joint meeting (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-27878764)

Hampshire wind farm refused over MoD concerns | Planning Resource (http://www.planningresource.co.uk/article/1299177/hampshire-wind-farm-refused-mod-concerns)

Planning Committee on 16 June 2014 10:00 AM ? Winchester City Council (http://www.winchester.gov.uk/meetings/details/1354)

This last link leads to detailed "Committee Reports."

I tried to find the definitive council website pages for more specific details of the application, but they all use user unfriendly software processes which makes it difficult for nosy gits – and I don't think they've updated anyway.

3. I was astounded to see that the Reading Green Park (single) wind turbine is claimed to have an historic operating efficiency record of just 17% of its full capacity and generates less electricity value than the subsidies paid to it in addition. A triumph of optimism over reality perhaps ?

4. I am told the Rule of Thumb says 5 - 15 - 25 metres per second windspeeds give you "start generating" – "reach rated power" and "stop generating" windspeeds for current wind turbines.



LFH

[Pontius Navigator]

Valiantone, living near Coningsby and miles from Nocton Fen and Bardney, I would be staggered if the farm got anywhere near the Coningsby MATZ. The north-south corridor I give would be close but probably no issue.

Rather than protesting against a wind farm near my unit, our help was sought by the Bicker Fen people who assumed that as a source of low flying complaints in their area we would protest against the wind farm. Of course, as pointed out, they are easy enough to avoid.

[Easy Street]

I'd doubt that the rotation speed of a wind turbine would cause a radar
problem.



Wrong. Fortissimo is absolutely correct. Stationary obstructions (masts, towers, etc) can be masked from a primary radar picture through digital processing. But wind speed and direction both affect the radar return from wind turbine blades, and this means that they cannot be mapped out of a radar picture. Allied to that, modern primary radars typically include some doppler signal processing logic with which the blades play merry havoc. Take it from me, they are a significant issue near airfields; I've been denied a deconfliction service on several occasions because the number of returns from windfarms meant that the controller couldn't provide the level of service required (there being no way to guarantee that the mass of ever-shifting returns don't include a non-squawking light aircraft).

[glad rag]

I am a consultant in environmental issues and very opposed to wind turbines. I was instrumental in halting a massive proposed project here on our island. I do not think the danger to low flying a/c will work as a lever. It is no different to radio masts etc. It would just get marked up on charts and put into nav systems.

Good luck. :ok:

Russia in secret plot against fracking, Nato chief says - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/fracking/10911942/Russia-in-secret-plot-against-fracking-Nato-chief-says.html#disqus_thread)

"Speaking at the Chatham House foreign affairs think-tank in London, Anders Fogh Rasmussen said Russia was mounting a sophisticated disinformation campaign aimed at undermining attempts to exploit alternative energy sources.....

:hmm: commiebastids

[salad-dodger]

I'd doubt that the rotation speed of a wind turbine would cause a radar problem.

Then you would doubt wrong. Wind turbines can and do cause significant problems for primary radars. The interference appears as clutter on the radar screens. The CAA is well aware of the issues, see CAP764 for details. Without effective mitigation, it may be necessary for controllers to apply both vertical and horizontal separation, particularly in areas where there is a mix of cooperating and non-cooperating traffic.

There are several windfarm mitigation solutions coming to market, each of which offers to resolve the problem.

S-D

[ericferret]

In respect or North East Lincolnshire the problem is that there are currently 12 potential wind farm projects with three built, over 80 turbines in total. If they were all to go ahead in the small area from Yarburgh to Humberston and the Wolds to the sea, with some up to 4OO feet high the low flying area would be compromised. In addition the wind farms would channel low flying aircraft directly over the villages. Let us not also forget the massive arrays going in offshore the Lincs coast and the Humber.

As a matter of interest I have attempted to raise this issue with the flight safety officer at Cranwell and the Commandant. Neither could be bothered to reply to my correspondence. I I have also spoken to MOD safeguarding at length with little response.

I have come to believe that this is a political issue and flight safety may not be top of the agenda.

[Willard Whyte]

I'd rather see a whole bunch of thorium-fuelled nuclear power stations.

[capewrath]

Two turbines beside a runway:-

Hawk T2 air to airs | Talk Photography (http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/hawk-t2-air-to-airs.547635/)

Not sure of the locus.

[Sandy Parts]

Departure/arrival from Kinloss using Lossie approach used to get the standard response "limited deconfliction service due to turbines " (or words to that effect) when near the very large collection of turbines south of Elgin and Forres. Always used to make me think "well why didn't you (MoD) object before they built them!" :}

[Basil]

Easy Street and salad-dodger, thank you for pointing that out.
I did a short ground tour as an RAF ATCO using, IIRC, AR-1.
I remember MTI (and losing contact for a sweep or two).
As you say, I can now understand that would be a problem.

[staplefordheli]

EMA have a documented issue with interference from a new turbine some miles North at Spondon Derby bit about it here East Midlands Airport confident of dealing with radar problems caused by Spondon wind turbines | Derby Telegraph (http://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/East-Midlands-Airport-said-aware-Spondon-wind/story-21089713-detail/story.html) Also for many years while Cottesmore was active, all turbines around the locality in Rutland were objected to by the MOD and none were constructed I personally hate the things unless they are in a windy location offshore. I think they destabilise the energy market and greatly increase the risk of blackouts unless they are to supply autonomous communities off grid and then they are a great backup to fossil fuelled gen sets.

[500N]

"they are to supply autonomous communities off grid and then they are a great backup to fossil fuelled gen sets."

Wouldn't you have the fossil fuelled gen sets as a back up for Wind Power in autonomous off grid communities ?

On a cost basis alone to start with.

Genuine question.

[NutLoose]

East Midlands have a pair on the airfield, they have the facility to shut them down at certain headings as the effect the radar, oddly enough they have objected to others in the vicinity of the airport as closer to the radar is less detrimental than one that is further away.

Will this help your cause?

Proposed Wind Farm ar Bullington Cross (http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?130690-Proposed-Wind-Farm-ar-Bullington-Cross)

[Aynayda Pizaqvick]

As a rotary guy I have no issues at all (ignoring aesthetics and the fact there are better ways to generate "efficient" energy) in fact, build them all over the UK; we wont hit civvy "clutter" produced by turbines at our height and we get loads of stuff to distract enemy radar in the next world war. Winner!

[salad-dodger]

Nutloose. If you know EMA, and you clearly do, then you will also know that the two wind turbines on the airport are tiny (relatively speaking). You will also know where they are, and that they are not sited in a critical area for the controllers.

S-D

[HEDP]

In my experience with an air to air radar every wind turbine generates a return therefore you either live with clutter and distraction or turn off the air to air radar and accept greater risk of collision. It surprises me in this safety conscious age that this is permitted to detract from safety.

[staplefordheli]

"they are to supply autonomous communities off grid and then they are a great backup to fossil fuelled gen sets."

Wouldn't you have the fossil fuelled gen sets as a back up for Wind Power in autonomous off grid communities ?

On a cost basis alone to start with.

Genuine question.


Yeh sorry got that round the wrong way


What I meant is that its is your own choice if you chose to be on a wind turbine ort solar PV off Grid and live with the consequence. Either maintain some sort of fossil fuelled or wood burning backup for heating and power when the renewable power sources are out of their generation window or live the with consequence of no power


The rest of us on grid want to know for certain that even in the coldest stillest winter night, we will still have 100% electrical supply
That means of course that in a privatised world, someone has to pay to keep assets online not generating to be used when the turbines and PV arrays stop generating and of course with the gas supply used for domestic heating increasingly wasted as fast buck for power generation, and now looking a decidedly unstable supply, we could be heading for the rocks in the next bad winter. Domestic produced coal fired and a number of modern nuclear stations are the only way to guarantee a stable grid even if through politics, they just sit there on standby. anyhow we drifted off radar somehow

[500N]

No worries.

Gas fired power stations are I believe good for overload powering up.
We have one in Melbourne.

Until Wind can stand on it's own two feet without subsidies and stop bending the rules
to get them installed - trampling over any green issues, then I reserve my opinion.
It costs more (green power) over here anyway.

[glad rag]

"they are to supply autonomous communities off grid and then they are a great backup to fossil fuelled gen sets."

Wouldn't you have the fossil fuelled gen sets as a back up for Wind Power in autonomous off grid communities ?

On a cost basis alone to start with.

Genuine question.


Yeh sorry got that round the wrong way


What I meant is that its is your own choice if you chose to be on a wind turbine ort solar PV off Grid and live with the consequence. Either maintain some sort of fossil fuelled or wood burning backup for heating and power when the renewable power sources are out of their generation window or live the with consequence of no power


The rest of us on grid want to know for certain that even in the coldest stillest winter night, we will still have 100% electrical supply
That means of course that in a privatised world, someone has to pay to keep assets online not generating to be used when the turbines and PV arrays stop generating and of course with the gas supply used for domestic heating increasingly wasted as fast buck for power generation, and now looking a decidedly unstable supply, we could be heading for the rocks in the next bad winter. Domestic produced coal fired and a number of modern nuclear stations are the only way to guarantee a stable grid even if through politics, they just sit there on standby. anyhow we drifted off radar somehow


https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSj2SSCd7jX06T_Tu3b9ZRLf7j0tjULMoxX_Dw01IN BZpo46cSPLA

Wot you mean like giving the control of fissile materials to a profit driven organisation? **** off!

[thing]

Big Dave's dad in law is a big supporter of wind farms, he makes quite a few bob out of them so I guess there's not much chance of seeing them curbed unless they get booted out next year.

I used to think they were OK actually, they made navigating over the wastes of the Cambridge and Lincolnshire Fens much easier. There are so many of them now though that you don't know which farm you're looking at. They really are popping up all over the place. I have a plan to have them painted in different colours as an aid to aviators.

[Mr C Hinecap]

or live the with consequence of no power

or perhaps use energy storage. Just the modern stuff rather than the energy storage that requires many thousands of years like that carbon-based stuff.

[sunnybunny]

interesting articles about the problems with solar power it's storage and possible solutions

BBC News - Vanadium: The metal that may soon be powering your neighbourhood (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-27829874)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27071303

and off topic

There is a pumped storage scheme to store off peak generation capacity and release at high demand in wales, very interesting trip round there a few years go

http://www.fhc.co.uk/dinorwig.htm

[The Old Fat One]

Anything with "wind turbine" in the title is bound to invite a lot of trolling from the energy armchair specialists...so here's a little fuel for the fire...

Nuclear power is by a country mile the most expensive way the human race has ever discovered to produce electricity. And BTW, pumped storage was originally built in the UK grid in the fifties, to stabilise what what was planned to be an predominantly nuclear powered grid, because back then, nuclear power was pretty much completely inflexible.

If you want to see what a modern flexible power grid looks like, hop over the water to Norway...it's the envy of the modern world. Guess what...it's got a shedload of pumped storage and interconnectors...which means its flexible to the problems of intermittency and can adapt to most power sources.

The UK is headed towards a power gap in a few years time, with blackouts an increasing possibility. Neither additional nuclear power nor locally sourced shale gas will have any effect whatsoever on this power gap, because neither is remotely close to coming on stream.

Currently there are no (no as in zero, zilch, nothing) shale gas reserves in the UK (as reported to the UK Parliamentary Committee on Energy, by the British Geological Survey). There are shale gas deposits, but it will take some years of exploratory drilling before anybody knows if they are economically exploitable or not.

I could go on but you are all bored and wondering what my point it.

It is this...99% of everything you read and hear about energy in the UK is pure spraff and hot air (pun intended). That's how we do it over here...it allows the politicians and energy companies to treat us like the mugs we are, by getting us to argue amongst ourselves about stuff we do not have a scoobies about.

[Willard Whyte]

Nuclear power is by a country mile the most expensive way the human race has ever discovered to produce electricity. And BTW, pumped storage was originally built in the UK grid in the fifties, to stabilise what what was planned to be an predominantly nuclear powered grid, because back then, nuclear power was pretty much completely inflexible.

From one armchair expert to another, the cost is not really the issue when one looks at the long term. In terms of availability ther is enough fissile thorium to last (the planet) several hundred years. In addition the principal deposits are in 'friendly' countries.

[Mr C Hinecap]

the cost is not really the issue when one looks at the long term

Well yes it is. Cost is one of the VERY BIG issues associated with energy.

[Willard Whyte]

Not if thorium reactors become the norm, and coal/oil/gas isn't going to get any cheaper. Besides, your contention that nuclear is the most expensive - you used somewhat more exagerated terms than that - is seemingly false if one takes the time to indulge in a small amount of research and look at a few facts and figures.

http://www.pbworld.com/pdfs/regional/uk_europe/pb_ptn_range_costs.pdf

Oil especially seems to be largely in the hands of nations who would quite happily take actions to bump up the price when they feel like it, they have done in the past. There may be untapped sources of black gold but they're going to have to be in quantities as yet undreamt of to keep the world in the lifestyle to which it has become acostomed to for any length of time. And of course the majority of places in the world best placed to collect solar energy are controlled by 'those of a certain disposition'. USA may be ok re. solar if they build a swathe of them across the S. Western States, but Northern Europe won't be.

[Flash2001]

Notes to some posters:

There is a difference between fissile and fissionable. No sane person proposes that much fissile material be placed in private hands (Though I could think of a good use for some).

Present wind turbine technology cannot provide much more than 20% of the electricity supplied to a grid.

After an excellent landing etc...

[Barbel]

Going back to Jamesman's original question. He is looking for reasons to block a wind turbine he doesn't like. Whether that dislike is justified or not I don't know, not being familliar with the case. However I'm a bit twitchy about what seems to be the principle of just looking for any objection. This is dangerously like 'crying wolf'. If objectors to just play the aviation card as routine eventually it becomes harder to identify the genuine concerns.

For what it is worth I have been on the other side, getting planning permission for wind energy. I have found the CAA and MOD both very professional, impartial and fully up to speed on all defence and civil radar and ATC issues - unlike some in the gliding and GA communities but that is another story!

[NorthSouth]

Barbel:I have found the CAA and MOD both very professional, impartial and fully up to speed on all defence and civil radar and ATC issuesIn that case you must be living somewhere other than the UK. MOD has a sorry history of making up policy on the hoof, changing policy every time there's a personnel change, putting personnel that know nothing about the issues into post without giving them training or proper handover, and issuing objections with no foundation that are then withdrawn after multiple attempts to get any response whatsoever. Meanwhile the people that really know about the effect of wind turbines on radar - MOD's own controllers - are probably the most experienced and capable in the world at dealing safely and successfully with clutter from any and all sources, and the Watchman routinely sees lots of clutter and always did, long before wind turbines came along.

MOD's real problem is that very soon they will have to decide whether to embrace plot-extracted radar. This will give them a much cleaner picture, but almost certainly at the expense of not seeing some things that they want to see, and currently do see.

My prediction is that they will install plot-extracted radars, but will then spend squillions trying to make those radars behave more like the analogue radars they replaced.:ugh:
NS

[handleturning]

I do some work on the impact of turbines on aviation assets. MOD are very switched on when it comes to the impact on low level flying. They are also very pragmatic and recognise that such flying is extremely dynamic and flexible. routing around a wind farm isn't really an issue. Radar on the other hand remains a real problem. I would say that the civil world have a much greater understanding than MOD.

[Barbel]

The MOD often require infra red warning lights, preferable to visible for the neighbours (However I know of a GA airfield, grass strip, no naiads, requesting a visible light which was refused).

As regards radar, I believe there is a project underway at Marshalls, Cambridge to investigate ways round this problem.

[Cpt_Pugwash]

Jamesman,

The proposed Thoulstone wind turbine is less likely to be a problem than the proposed turbines to be sited on the ridge at West Ashton, very close to the Keevil approach. I am not aware of MOD objections to that one, although like Chapmanslade, the locals are very definitely opposed.

I think there was a project on the east coast for which the MOD withdrew its objection after reaching agreement with the developer to provide a 'gap-filler' radar to resolve ambiguities in returns.