Woodford woes

[Reheat On]

Anyone else read today that BWOS Woodford are having a humungous battle with the NIMBY owner of tall trees at the end of their main runway. The result is they cannot presently be lopped. The consequence is a 1200' shortening of the runway, and the completed MR4 Nimrods will not be able to depart...... allegedly.

Anyone care to bet this bu$$er is being paid by HM Treasury to ensure yet another delay to the contract.... ;)

[ORAC]

They've been in court about it since 1988 when the CAA restricted the runway length.

You'd think they would have worked out how to get them out before they started, just in case.
=====================

The Times 20th June:

June 20, 2002

Jobs at risk in runway trees row
By Russell Jenkins



THE refusal of a wealthy landowner to prune trees growing at the end of a runway is putting hundreds of jobs at risk at an aircraft repair plant.
BAe Systems, of Woodford, near Stockport, is pinning its hopes for the future on a £2.2 billion contract running through to 2007 to refit and test engines for RAF Nimrod aircraft.

However, the reconnaissance planes will not be able to land at the aerodrome because of restrictions on the length of its runway because of the treeline along its perimeter.

BAe management has been locked in a legal dispute with Michael Kingsley for 14 years about the height of trees in Lostock Hall farm. It wants to prune 26 species of trees, including poplar, willow, horse chestnut, sycamore and Corsican pine.

The company shed 900 jobs last November. Malcolm Adams, BAe Systems spokesman, said: “The issue over the trees threatens the very viability of the site itself and puts all contracts in jeopardy.”

Mr Kingsley who lives in nearby Poynton, said last night: “I cannot comment because the matter is not dead and therefore there is a likelihood I may have to return to the courts.”

The Civil Aviation Authority restricted the length of the runway in 1988. In 1999 Mr Kingsley mounted a legal challenge to BAe Systems’s right to reduce the height of trees around the airfield.

The company is now awaiting fresh directions from Alistair Darling, the Transport Secretary, ahead of fresh legal action. A spokesman for the Secretary of State said: “We have been in consultations with both BAe Systems and the landowner. The Secretary of State expects to reach a decision shortly.”

[kippermate]

I allowed my co to land there in the dark once. Its even shorter in the dark ! I hadn't realised, coz the Red Book only had the reduced length available at night as a note ( no excuse !). It was a typical co right hand seat landing; firm and 1500' long. A little disturbing to see the 'distance to go' markers with very low numbers shooting passed.

I heroicly jumped on the brakes, sweated and learnt about Woodford from that.

I read the Red Book more closely now !!!

:eek: :eek:

[Wycombe]

...but they still manage to get An124's in there with the Mighty Hunter inside :confused: :confused:

[Reheat On]

Thats aerodynamics for you - size matters! 4 [small] blowing and a small albeit highish lift wing ain't nuffink against the Ant's ability to shift air. No matter what the slats they fit. Not enough airspeed in a short enough time. Maybe they will have to fit temp rocket assistance to crank up the accelleration? Shades of Hatfield/Victor yonks ago :)

[solotk]

Or just buy the bast. out?

Tony

[canberra]

im suprised that nimrods need that long a runway, after all kinloss is only 7500'. i saw a nimrod get airborne at marham with a full crew and 20 pax(yes it was a mk 1) in under 2000', you should have seen all the smoke coming out of the back, looked like he was burning anthracite!

[SPIT]

Is this the same landowner who sees to benefit each year at the DISPLAY by renting out his fields to camper/caravaners to get a good view of the display:rolleyes???: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[DamienB]

Be a damn boring display - there isn't one at Woodford any more.

[SPIT]

Point takenI know that , you know that but we must not tell everyone.
The NW RAFA who organised it now have a large part to play in the Southport Air Disp, trying to keep something in the area.;) ;) :confused:

[Gash Handlin]

I assume this NIMBY chap owns land at both ends of the runway otherwise why don't they just take off using the end with tall trees as the threshold ???

[FJJP]

GH - Oh yeh? A 20 knot tailwind would make any take-off or landing great fun. Get real - clearly you know nothing about flying, or maybe you do and your handle betrays your attitude.

[BEagle]

Actually it seems pretty typical of 't Bungling Baron Waste o' Space to dream up yet another reason for 't delay to 't Nimrod Y3K.

"Ney- tha can't blame us for 't delay. It's terr do wi' 't boog.er as owns 't trees at 't end of 't werrks. Tha'll need to come oop wi' more brass 't buy 't boog.er owt. Till then 't owd Comet 'll have to stay in us werrks as us can't fly 't boog.er"

[Gash Handlin]

FJJP

calm down chap, I dont know anything about Woodford actually, I just assumed that it was like everyother part of the UK where the wind doesnt always blow from the same direction, but thanks for the well reasoned answer to my honest question :rolleyes: