Horse Breeder sues MOD over Jets
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Retired to Bisley from the small African nation
Age: 67
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OOOPS!
Naughty.
I have worked in that world before, and must admit that when given a target grid to set up always assumed that I was OK to carry on in the field. But mistakes do happen. Did they just turn up, or was it a cock-up with grids / wrong fields / misidentifying who owned the land / some such?
Sven
Naughty.
I have worked in that world before, and must admit that when given a target grid to set up always assumed that I was OK to carry on in the field. But mistakes do happen. Did they just turn up, or was it a cock-up with grids / wrong fields / misidentifying who owned the land / some such?
Sven
Waterhorse -
Having taken off the old boots and had an end of week restorative beverage I have calmed down a little now, and in answer to your comment, you will no doubt be pleased to hear that in a professional capacity I try not to let the side down ranting at work and am generally far more diplomatic and tactful than I would like to be on a daily basis. Probably to the point that I tend to use this forum as a bit of a safety valve on occasions having spent most of the day biting my tongue at serial incompetence of the highest order. (Ed - however, that safety valve has more to do with a genuine passion for the RAF as an entity and its people, and an associated horror at what is being done to it, rather than the chance to spew out a few ill chosen remarks and rants).
However, I stand by my original sentiment, and agree wholeheartedly with Antelope - we must stand firm and fight our corner. This wil cost the MOD thousands we can ill afford and that could be spent on kit and making the lives of serving personnel that little bit better.
The forces as a whole are under attack from too many sides these days, whether it be the accountants salami slicing, the politicians lying, industry failing to deliver and once we've got past that lot, the enemy trying to give us lead poisoning! If we repeatedly cave in every time somebody doesn't like what we do or how we do it, then we may as well pack up and go.
And NIMBYism - and there is no other way to describe this - is just another attack on the forces and how we have to operate in order to do the basics of our job. Her life would be perfect without the jets (or something along those lines according to the report) - how long has she been there? If she chooses to make her living from a horse factory in the middle of a tactical training area, that is her choice. She can do it anywhere in the UK; we cannot conduct operationally vital tactical training anywhere in the UK. Having come from a tactical background, I know that it is more than most crews lives are worth to deliberately fly over areas like this - the resulting investigations, paperwork and general hassle are enough to ensure deliberately annoying someone doesn't happen.
People are quick to jump to her defence saying it is her livelihood etc etc etc and are missing the point that it is also the livelihood of those crews who are being asked to go and do the job and then being stopped from preparing for it in the required manner. What about our livelihoods? Quite frankly, the lives of crews and those they are there to support are far more important than a few horses, especially when their presence in a TTA is optional.
And of course, she will have also given a perfect assessment of the aircrafts' attitude and altitude and track over the ground to come up with her view that the aircraft must be operation in violation of various orders or acting in an unsafe and inproper manner that was putting her horses in danger. It would also be interesting to see how high she thinks the trees are and then actually measure them before assessing whether or not the RAF is to blame. However, I suspect that she would not be able to provide fully accurate statements to any of those points.
If my original post offended, well, quite frankly the sentiment behind it stands - even if I was a little blunt. Given her choice of location, I view her complaint selfish and without due regard to the reasons behind OLF and motivated purely by a desire for gain on her part.
Having taken off the old boots and had an end of week restorative beverage I have calmed down a little now, and in answer to your comment, you will no doubt be pleased to hear that in a professional capacity I try not to let the side down ranting at work and am generally far more diplomatic and tactful than I would like to be on a daily basis. Probably to the point that I tend to use this forum as a bit of a safety valve on occasions having spent most of the day biting my tongue at serial incompetence of the highest order. (Ed - however, that safety valve has more to do with a genuine passion for the RAF as an entity and its people, and an associated horror at what is being done to it, rather than the chance to spew out a few ill chosen remarks and rants).
However, I stand by my original sentiment, and agree wholeheartedly with Antelope - we must stand firm and fight our corner. This wil cost the MOD thousands we can ill afford and that could be spent on kit and making the lives of serving personnel that little bit better.
The forces as a whole are under attack from too many sides these days, whether it be the accountants salami slicing, the politicians lying, industry failing to deliver and once we've got past that lot, the enemy trying to give us lead poisoning! If we repeatedly cave in every time somebody doesn't like what we do or how we do it, then we may as well pack up and go.
And NIMBYism - and there is no other way to describe this - is just another attack on the forces and how we have to operate in order to do the basics of our job. Her life would be perfect without the jets (or something along those lines according to the report) - how long has she been there? If she chooses to make her living from a horse factory in the middle of a tactical training area, that is her choice. She can do it anywhere in the UK; we cannot conduct operationally vital tactical training anywhere in the UK. Having come from a tactical background, I know that it is more than most crews lives are worth to deliberately fly over areas like this - the resulting investigations, paperwork and general hassle are enough to ensure deliberately annoying someone doesn't happen.
People are quick to jump to her defence saying it is her livelihood etc etc etc and are missing the point that it is also the livelihood of those crews who are being asked to go and do the job and then being stopped from preparing for it in the required manner. What about our livelihoods? Quite frankly, the lives of crews and those they are there to support are far more important than a few horses, especially when their presence in a TTA is optional.
And of course, she will have also given a perfect assessment of the aircrafts' attitude and altitude and track over the ground to come up with her view that the aircraft must be operation in violation of various orders or acting in an unsafe and inproper manner that was putting her horses in danger. It would also be interesting to see how high she thinks the trees are and then actually measure them before assessing whether or not the RAF is to blame. However, I suspect that she would not be able to provide fully accurate statements to any of those points.
If my original post offended, well, quite frankly the sentiment behind it stands - even if I was a little blunt. Given her choice of location, I view her complaint selfish and without due regard to the reasons behind OLF and motivated purely by a desire for gain on her part.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Scottish FIR
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sven Sixtoo
It was a cluster of f*ck ups. The weather for the primary areas were not good. Permissions were not in place for the secondary or fall back areas. Not only did the light brigade charge in with re-heat, ground movements buggered up bio-security on a number of farms. I lost five grand in one week due to lost work and running around trying to patch things up with Environmental Health Officers and SEERAD animal health. Not a happy bunny.
It was a cluster of f*ck ups. The weather for the primary areas were not good. Permissions were not in place for the secondary or fall back areas. Not only did the light brigade charge in with re-heat, ground movements buggered up bio-security on a number of farms. I lost five grand in one week due to lost work and running around trying to patch things up with Environmental Health Officers and SEERAD animal health. Not a happy bunny.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the real issue here, is not do we need low flying? (We do)
Or does this lady have the right to live peacefully in the countryside? (She does)
The real issue is how has it got to this stage without a compromise being reached. If the lady in question contacted the MoD and she was told to 'blow it out her ass', and no attempt to explain the need for low-flying or thought of an avoid was made, then quite right her next step would be to take it to the next level.
If however, an avoid was not possible and everything was done to explain to her the operational requirements of the crew, or worse, she did not contact the MoD and then decided to take it to the courts, then I have zero sympathy.
Without knowing the facts of the individual case it would be difficult to come to a conclusion either way.
Or does this lady have the right to live peacefully in the countryside? (She does)
The real issue is how has it got to this stage without a compromise being reached. If the lady in question contacted the MoD and she was told to 'blow it out her ass', and no attempt to explain the need for low-flying or thought of an avoid was made, then quite right her next step would be to take it to the next level.
If however, an avoid was not possible and everything was done to explain to her the operational requirements of the crew, or worse, she did not contact the MoD and then decided to take it to the courts, then I have zero sympathy.
Without knowing the facts of the individual case it would be difficult to come to a conclusion either way.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: World Citizen
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Low Flying Complaints
I remember being surprised when reading John Terraine's excellent 'The Right of The Line' about the low flying complaints being received when the Pathfinder Force were in training. If people couldn't see the reason for Low Flying then, they are probably hard pushed to do so now. I also agree with Melchett, and the NIMBYism line - but then again I'm a townie.
I also remember receiving a letter at Brize from an estate agent asking if we could avoid flying over a certain grid reference at a specific time and date as he was going to show a rather large house to prospective buyers!
I also remember receiving a letter at Brize from an estate agent asking if we could avoid flying over a certain grid reference at a specific time and date as he was going to show a rather large house to prospective buyers!
Quote: "I also remember receiving a letter at Brize from an estate agent asking if we could avoid flying over a certain grid reference at a specific time and date as he was going to show a rather large house to prospective buyers! "
And a pliot at Brize got ATC to declare visual circuits to the south in force while he showed prospective buyers round his house which was to the north of the airfield!
I come from an agricultural community. The practice of getting the MOD to stump up compensation is a well known moneymaker in the farming comunity as they rarely contest in court and nearly always cough up. I had a claim against me once. It had to be me as I was the only aircraft of that type in that area all day. The claim was for a horse which had allegedly bolted and injured itself when I flew over the farm. I got a visit from the plods and a grilling with all sorts of accusations being thrown around. However, the ATC video showed I was at 8000' above the farm in question. But the MOD still paid up.
10/10 for the farmer's aircraft recognition though!
And a pliot at Brize got ATC to declare visual circuits to the south in force while he showed prospective buyers round his house which was to the north of the airfield!
I come from an agricultural community. The practice of getting the MOD to stump up compensation is a well known moneymaker in the farming comunity as they rarely contest in court and nearly always cough up. I had a claim against me once. It had to be me as I was the only aircraft of that type in that area all day. The claim was for a horse which had allegedly bolted and injured itself when I flew over the farm. I got a visit from the plods and a grilling with all sorts of accusations being thrown around. However, the ATC video showed I was at 8000' above the farm in question. But the MOD still paid up.
10/10 for the farmer's aircraft recognition though!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: In a hole, in the garden.
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Haven't read it all but raised eyebrows slightly especially at the alleged 'white spots' on the horses! Pretty common and possibly ...'bird catcher' spots..
That aside. I have been a yard manager to approx. 16 horses ranging from Arabs to Thoroughbreds and they all get used very rapidly to Jets and although not FJ's but with the occassional visitor, they were stabled on an active RAF station! Marham, Cottesmore, Coningsby all have riding schools or training yards within 2 miles of the runway....No problems. The yard near Marham has a flying programme passed (or used to) daily to it on request, no problems. I am married to RAF (my husband competes and rides) and I have a fair bit to do with horses. Husband has been in for 18 years riding for 13 of them and we have never ever experienced any problems with low flying jets....I do not deny she is having problems and would have to see all scenarios but really am inclined to (based on my own experience) say there is some compromise that could easily be reached without the need to set the precendent of sueing.
That aside. I have been a yard manager to approx. 16 horses ranging from Arabs to Thoroughbreds and they all get used very rapidly to Jets and although not FJ's but with the occassional visitor, they were stabled on an active RAF station! Marham, Cottesmore, Coningsby all have riding schools or training yards within 2 miles of the runway....No problems. The yard near Marham has a flying programme passed (or used to) daily to it on request, no problems. I am married to RAF (my husband competes and rides) and I have a fair bit to do with horses. Husband has been in for 18 years riding for 13 of them and we have never ever experienced any problems with low flying jets....I do not deny she is having problems and would have to see all scenarios but really am inclined to (based on my own experience) say there is some compromise that could easily be reached without the need to set the precendent of sueing.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
Surely, if horses get used to low flying jets, in this case they just need more exposure and training? 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: In a hole, in the garden.
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Like I said...I would need to see the whole picture for myself and unless the jets are coming from nowhere, with full bottoms on fire, I think that yes....most horses will get used to it!
But I take the slightly mischievious tone of your question!
But I take the slightly mischievious tone of your question!
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kinloss
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Melchett, and others:
I'm interested to know how any ordinary person can be criticised for not doing research into whether or not the property they want to buy is in an RAF low flying area.
Clearly, prospective buyers should take into account a local airfield and other obvious clues, but when you visit an apparently idyllic property in the middle of nowhere during a weekend, the RAF is not flying low level and our training routes will never come to mind. The seller is not required to volunteer information, but they must not lie, if asked. The subject will probably not come up in discussion.
I have some sympathy for the horse breeder's situation. I think LBGR's message is on the button.
Ed Sett
I'm interested to know how any ordinary person can be criticised for not doing research into whether or not the property they want to buy is in an RAF low flying area.
Clearly, prospective buyers should take into account a local airfield and other obvious clues, but when you visit an apparently idyllic property in the middle of nowhere during a weekend, the RAF is not flying low level and our training routes will never come to mind. The seller is not required to volunteer information, but they must not lie, if asked. The subject will probably not come up in discussion.
I have some sympathy for the horse breeder's situation. I think LBGR's message is on the button.
Ed Sett
Didn't know it was an LFA?
Isn't that why one employs solicitors to carry out the necessary searches and the requirement for the vendor to exercise due dilligence in declaring matters that affect the property and its environs?
Get a better solicitor - one with local knowledge...
BTW - I live in the Lake District and revel at seeing all manner of aircraft transiting at snot feet. The locals don't even notice them - it's the 'Beatrix Potter' or the 'knobbly-kneed' cagoul-wearers tourists that complain.
Isn't that why one employs solicitors to carry out the necessary searches and the requirement for the vendor to exercise due dilligence in declaring matters that affect the property and its environs?
Get a better solicitor - one with local knowledge...
BTW - I live in the Lake District and revel at seeing all manner of aircraft transiting at snot feet. The locals don't even notice them - it's the 'Beatrix Potter' or the 'knobbly-kneed' cagoul-wearers tourists that complain.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Transiting the M27
Age: 50
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Compensation culture gone mad! I learned to ride in Lincolnshire and there were some pretty large aircraft flying about from Waddington at the time (Nimrod AEWs and visiting fast jets). The horses were fine. Would horse owners sue car and wagon owners for spooking their horses whilst on the roads?
I've heard some pretty miserable low flying stories over the years (and that's what most are - stories). Flying causing subsidence, chimney pots being knocked off houses, many of them unsubstantiated by thorough investigation. Instead of running to court and suing, how about a little investigation as to frequency of flying and the effect on the animals?
After the Bell case in Lincolnshire (a rider was killed after her horse was startled by a Chinook in 2003) the MoD had safety trials and, working with the British Horse Society, began issuing high vis jackets to horse riders so that pilots could pick them out and take evasive action. I believe the scheme started in Scotland first a couple of years ago. Has the horse owner contacted the Society for a jacket?
I've heard some pretty miserable low flying stories over the years (and that's what most are - stories). Flying causing subsidence, chimney pots being knocked off houses, many of them unsubstantiated by thorough investigation. Instead of running to court and suing, how about a little investigation as to frequency of flying and the effect on the animals?
After the Bell case in Lincolnshire (a rider was killed after her horse was startled by a Chinook in 2003) the MoD had safety trials and, working with the British Horse Society, began issuing high vis jackets to horse riders so that pilots could pick them out and take evasive action. I believe the scheme started in Scotland first a couple of years ago. Has the horse owner contacted the Society for a jacket?
Join Date: May 2002
Location: In a hole, in the garden.
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that in this case it is a stud so the horses are not probably being ridden. The complaint seems to be of animals spooking in the field/stable and probably charging around doing themselves a mischief so the high visiblity jacket scenario is not relevant,
Saying that, the absolute stupidity of some riders on country roads still astounds me. Many have taken up the banner of high vis. but many sadly, haven't and usually cars are the main problem!
I was once walking our 14 stone dog near Cottesmore. The dog never barked at horses and was sitting at my side on a lead/harness whilst I waited for a rider to pass. The horse took one look at my silent, obedient dog and threw it's rider. The rider proceeded to give me abuse. The horse once caught repeated this twice. All the time Harrier's were flying with no effect. The horse threw the rider as it was scared of my silent dog. There will be people who would love to blame the MOD as it's easier to do that than admit their animals are the problem. Maybe not this case but possibly others.
If the lady in question is a stud owner, she will have youngstock and probably a fair few of the horses will not have time to acclimatise as they maybe visiting horses coming in for covering... Silly place to have a stud. A compromise could be reached.
Saying that, the absolute stupidity of some riders on country roads still astounds me. Many have taken up the banner of high vis. but many sadly, haven't and usually cars are the main problem!
I was once walking our 14 stone dog near Cottesmore. The dog never barked at horses and was sitting at my side on a lead/harness whilst I waited for a rider to pass. The horse took one look at my silent, obedient dog and threw it's rider. The rider proceeded to give me abuse. The horse once caught repeated this twice. All the time Harrier's were flying with no effect. The horse threw the rider as it was scared of my silent dog. There will be people who would love to blame the MOD as it's easier to do that than admit their animals are the problem. Maybe not this case but possibly others.
If the lady in question is a stud owner, she will have youngstock and probably a fair few of the horses will not have time to acclimatise as they maybe visiting horses coming in for covering... Silly place to have a stud. A compromise could be reached.
Last edited by El Mirador; 8th Jun 2008 at 09:05.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: The Land of the Sabbath and of the Priest
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
On my last visit to Valley a year or so back, I was astonished to see that what looked very like a stables had been built along the back road to Fraggle Rock and the "spotters" area.
Tell me it only looks like a stables, please? Anyone??
Tell me it only looks like a stables, please? Anyone??
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bouncing around the Holding pattern
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
M609, no fur farms I think unlike Canada(where I've seen them before), but there are plenty of industrial avoids plus medical institutions and other sensitive areas.
That area is littered with Tactial Training Avoids, those little red triangle thingys. Surely a compromise could be struck such that she doesn't get dusted off by OLF traffic, but normal LFA traffic remains unaffected by popping one of these over her gaff.
As I understand it the noise footprint is increased significantly when one flies a wee bit lower. Can't remember the exact figures, but it did surprise me.
Hope this gets cleared up soon.
That area is littered with Tactial Training Avoids, those little red triangle thingys. Surely a compromise could be struck such that she doesn't get dusted off by OLF traffic, but normal LFA traffic remains unaffected by popping one of these over her gaff.
As I understand it the noise footprint is increased significantly when one flies a wee bit lower. Can't remember the exact figures, but it did surprise me.
Hope this gets cleared up soon.
Last edited by TurbineTooHot; 8th Jun 2008 at 08:57.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: London
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are mink farms in North Devon but no avoids around them......Unlike the Mink farms in Norway where if you inadvertantly penetrate a mink farm avoid you are in the poo big time and fined lots of wonga..... avoid the mink farms as much as you would avoid the wires.....
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote: "The practice of getting the MOD to stump up compensation is a well known moneymaker in the farming comunity"...
When carrying out aerial photography for BAe at Dunsfold, ( light aircraft )I was often asked by pilots to confirm that the cattle etc. below were undisturbed, as the local farmers tried it on regularly.
So did the gypsies, but their claims were so absurd that no-one took them remotely seriously.
We kept most of the farmers placated by holding a reasonably lavish cricket match & party between the farmers and airfield management / Test Pilots.
When BAe left the airfield in the hands of property developers ( see ' Save Dunsfold Campaign ' ) the developers held an open meeting, mostly attended by people who had moved into the area during the 'fields' brief period of inactivity - there are occasional aircraft movements now, including the Brooklands Vimy replica and a large annual airshow.
A roving microphone was provided for people to air their views, the majority of which were NIMBY'S asking " there aren't going to be any nasty aeroplanes are there ?! "
I managed to get a go on the mic', and asked these people if they'd noticed the airfield, which has been there since 1942 !
My comment that without such places UK Ltd would be a lot worse off re. exports, and they'd be doing their complaining in German, seemed unpopular but I think I hit them below the waterline...
This woman and her precious horses deserves a special flypast - the comment posted above that one employs solicitors to 'search' before buying a property is spot on.
Maybe a helo' could stop and spray a roundel on her roof as a gesture of appreciation of her views, and an aiming point ? I'm sure she'd like a Harrier to hover & bow too.
I wouldn't mind betting she'd be suddenly very keen if offered an aerial photo' of her place by some berk like me in a Cessna...
When carrying out aerial photography for BAe at Dunsfold, ( light aircraft )I was often asked by pilots to confirm that the cattle etc. below were undisturbed, as the local farmers tried it on regularly.
So did the gypsies, but their claims were so absurd that no-one took them remotely seriously.
We kept most of the farmers placated by holding a reasonably lavish cricket match & party between the farmers and airfield management / Test Pilots.
When BAe left the airfield in the hands of property developers ( see ' Save Dunsfold Campaign ' ) the developers held an open meeting, mostly attended by people who had moved into the area during the 'fields' brief period of inactivity - there are occasional aircraft movements now, including the Brooklands Vimy replica and a large annual airshow.
A roving microphone was provided for people to air their views, the majority of which were NIMBY'S asking " there aren't going to be any nasty aeroplanes are there ?! "
I managed to get a go on the mic', and asked these people if they'd noticed the airfield, which has been there since 1942 !
My comment that without such places UK Ltd would be a lot worse off re. exports, and they'd be doing their complaining in German, seemed unpopular but I think I hit them below the waterline...
This woman and her precious horses deserves a special flypast - the comment posted above that one employs solicitors to 'search' before buying a property is spot on.
Maybe a helo' could stop and spray a roundel on her roof as a gesture of appreciation of her views, and an aiming point ? I'm sure she'd like a Harrier to hover & bow too.
I wouldn't mind betting she'd be suddenly very keen if offered an aerial photo' of her place by some berk like me in a Cessna...