Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Air Cadets grounded?

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Air Cadets grounded?

Old 6th Feb 2018, 21:24
  #4201 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: 11 GROUP
Age: 72
Posts: 928
Fencing at Kenley

Kenley is already limited in size and any fencing should be more of a frangible statement of no go area's rather than a stock proof construction. This famous survivor of 100 years of RAF service deserves some special consideration so it remains 'in use' for Cadet flying.
Whilst still in use it has 'life' and what more fitting place to enthuse Cadets; it having served our country so well in two major conflicts.
I feel a watershed has arrived that should 'protect' its place for future generations of both young aviators and the 'walkers' that both can respect its place in our history.
If the City of London play it correctly it will only enhance the location for the future, as an unique time warp of modern history at a time when the whole of our country was in real peril. It was a typical 'British' solution to an immediate need, and was born into conflict despite it being a Surrey common.
Its main test came in 1940 and it played its part in keeping this country free at a time when all seemed lost. The Luftwaffe failed to kill it off in Aug 1940 so I dammed sure we will not let current 'crats' try it again. The 'fretwork fighters' kept an aviation presence for decades lets hope the 'Vikings' rise again to carry on the fight.

Last edited by POBJOY; 6th Feb 2018 at 21:48.
POBJOY is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2018, 22:00
  #4202 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: nr Ely, Cambs
Age: 56
Posts: 364
Pobjoy, I am with you on that, had a number of great days at Kenley accompanying cadet from 1924(Shirley) some years back.
brokenlink is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 08:16
  #4203 (permalink)  
Gnome de PPRuNe
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 55
Posts: 5,914
The newly erected signs all the way around the peri track make it clear that public access inside the peri track is not permitted - I wonder if Surrey Hills GC have had any problems with wandering public.
treadigraph is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 12:12
  #4204 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Head in the Clouds
Posts: 72
The Kenley Fence!

It seems that a minority of the locals do not like the "amateur plane enthusiasts" AKA Surrey Hills.

There needs to be balance in any proposal on the airfield. An unbalanced proposal serving the needs of a couple of amateur plane enthusiasts during the week is not serving the greater needs of the public. Happy to see the RAF taking a lead in this at the weekend - but an amateur club must take second place.
This is taken from RAFKenley [OC2FTS] Facebook Page!

Last edited by Freda Checks; 7th Feb 2018 at 16:04. Reason: Added reference!
Freda Checks is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 13:10
  #4205 (permalink)  
Gnome de PPRuNe
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 55
Posts: 5,914
Hmmmm, given the huge areas of public open space around the area (Kenley Common, Coulsdon Common, Farthing Down and Riddlesdown - which are all close to being contiguous - plus several other areas of woodland) I think the greater needs of the public are more than adequately catered for! Mostly thanks to the City of London Corporation who own much of the public access land hereabouts.

I've walked around the peri-track a number of times on weekday afternoons and evenings when SHGC have been active and I don't believe I've ever seen more than two or three dozen dog walkers, cyclists, runners and walkers...

Bloody NIMBYs!
treadigraph is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 13:56
  #4206 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,008
and not to mention that Surrey Hills have a lease and pay the MoD for the use of the site............

Arc
Arclite01 is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 14:17
  #4207 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Lovely morning at RAF Cosford, cadets to fly, serviceable aircraft, pilots current and ready to go, weather good and temperature within limits but.....

No Air Traffic Controller so no cadet flying.
Bigpants is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 14:29
  #4208 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Green and pleasant land
Posts: 657
This whole thing about public access, signs warning people not to walk across the airfield when glider operations are in progress and frangible fencing to ensure the idiots can't do that has been going on at KY for donkey's years.. at least since the mid 80s / early 90s when I was on 615.

It's a nonsense, simply because some people can't be bothered to read or who think they are fireproof and that their bodies are immune to a steel cable travelling at x00 mph..

ISTR that a note saying "Give a winch an inch and it'll take a foot" was pinned in the cab of one at a site somewhere.

Because that's exactly what happened and the surgeon who reattached this person's foot wanted to come and see 'what the hell it was that had taken off someone's foot more cleanly that my scalpel can'.

Potentially dangerous, yes. But not if people heed the warnings and stay away from them..

Hmmm, obviously this is advanced rocket science
cargosales is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 15:31
  #4209 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,008
Cargo

It's impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious I was once told........................ :-)

Arc
Arclite01 is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 15:38
  #4210 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: River Thames & Surrey
Age: 71
Posts: 8,320
Originally Posted by Bigpants View Post
Lovely morning at RAF Cosford, cadets to fly, serviceable aircraft, pilots current and ready to go, weather good and temperature within limits but.....

No Air Traffic Controller so no cadet flying.
Happened to me at Shawbury years ago. Pilot and cadet got in; aircraft started and just sat there. Phoned the tower; only AATCs no controller; but phoned SDO and hey presto he was a controller so he and I rushed over to the tower and opened up. The AEF 'boss' was on the point of sending me over to do it but as I tried to explain, I only had a civilian ATCO licence and no unit endorsement (I was an RAFVR[T] Officer y'see)
chevvron is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 15:57
  #4211 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Green and pleasant land
Posts: 657
Originally Posted by Arclite01 View Post
Cargo

It's impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious I was once told........................ :-)

Arc
You're so right Arc,

I once had an idiot walking his kid across the active line of cables who objected to the vehicle that then came 'screaming towards them' (so we could remind him about the dangers and ensure their safety. And get them the hell off the field !!!!

His rationale? "Well my son's in his buggy so he's perfectly safe"

Perhaps it's time for cigarette pack style piccies on the warning signs round the airfield boundary?? A leg removed? A Landie which has been sliced up by a cable? Blood and nasties? Oh, no, that wouldn't be terribly pc would it and might terrify innocent people... Aarghhhhh...

Hmmm, you have to remember that you can't teach stupid..
cargosales is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 16:13
  #4212 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: London
Posts: 127
In the summer of 1940 RAF Kenley used to regularly receive complaints from some of the locals about the noise of Merlins being run up around dawn. Not sure if these NIMBYs quietened down a bit after the first Ju. 88s arrived.

Staying (loosely..) on the gliding topic, there was the case years ago of a noise complaint against what turned out to be a glider doing aerobatics; complainant turned out to be a stone-deaf retired colonel.
Has Britain become an anti-aviation nation, certainly compared to some of our near neighbours? It seems to me that this started to be the case in the early 1960s. Any thoughts on this?
Buster11 is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 17:07
  #4213 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: River Thames & Surrey
Age: 71
Posts: 8,320
Originally Posted by cargosales View Post
You're so right Arc,

I once had an idiot walking his kid across the active line of cables who objected to the vehicle that then came 'screaming towards them' (so we could remind him about the dangers and ensure their safety. And get them the hell off the field !!!!

His rationale? "Well my son's in his buggy so he's perfectly safe"

Perhaps it's time for cigarette pack style piccies on the warning signs round the airfield boundary?? A leg removed? A Landie which has been sliced up by a cable? Blood and nasties? Oh, no, that wouldn't be terribly pc would it and might terrify innocent people... Aarghhhhh...

Hmmm, you have to remember that you can't teach stupid..
At Halton one year, we had a Scout Camp on the airfield. It was apparent nobody had bothered to brief the scouts on use of the airfield because all day long on saturday (they had arrived friday pm) we were sending a landrover out to intercept motrobikes being ridden across the airfield and over the cables; once again they had no concept of the damage a steel cable can do.
chevvron is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 17:27
  #4214 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Green and pleasant land
Posts: 657
Originally Posted by chevvron View Post
At Halton one year, we had a Scout Camp on the airfield. It was apparent nobody had bothered to brief the scouts on use of the airfield because all day long on saturday (they had arrived friday pm) we were sending a landrover out to intercept motrobikes being ridden across the airfield and over the cables; once again they had no concept of the damage a steel cable can do.

Ha ha, Slight thread drift Chevron but that reminds me of when our UAS went on summer camp to St Athan and nobody briefed us about using the airfield at night..

After a few beers at the dispersal building, we initially took the direct route, corner to corner, rather than walk all the way round the peri track, to get back to the mess.

This worked splendidly until one of our number came in, visibly shaken, saying "I've just walked across the airfield and met a huge horrible police dog. And it had a policeman attached to it!"
cargosales is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 18:17
  #4215 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: 11 GROUP
Age: 72
Posts: 928
Kenley 'The Future'

I suspect the only solution that will satisfy all the players will be a fence on the 'outside' of the peri-track. As a historic site and one that should be both used, and available for public viewing a heritage lottery grant should pay for it.
We are not talking about a 'security' fence designed to be impregnable as that would not satisfy the 'safety of flying' issue; but as alluded before a structure that clearly defines the limit of public access with suitable notices as to why.
It may be that some sort of overseeing will be required when operations start again, but as flying days get more numerous the situation will settle down and walkers could even be encouraged to visit the 'control' side which would be good for PR and recruitment. As mentioned before this could be a watershed for both Kenley and the ATC use, and if properly handled should be a benefit to all, especially as the ' youth experience' part can only be seen as an ongoing benefit to society. My only concern is the current level of expertise at 2FTS may be below that required to conduct negotiations of such a sensitive nature. and that a 'current' Air Rank with a flying background be designated to oversee the situation. Kenley deserves the best possible solution available and the Air Cadets (and indeed other youth bodies) would benefit greatly from its future use.
POBJOY is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 22:19
  #4216 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 203
I suspect the only solution that will satisfy all the players will be a fence on the 'outside' of the peri-track. As a historic site and one that should be both used, and available for public viewing a heritage lottery grant should pay for it.
I agree with you POBJOY, the fence should be on the outside of the peri track. The public could then see the peri track in it's entirety, and imagine how it was used.

As we know, WWII airfield runways were connected by taxiways called a perimeter track (peri-track), of a standard width of 50 feet (15 m). However, certain stations that were designated to be fighter bases sometimes had a narrower perimeter track, such as RAF Coltishall, whose peri-tracks measured 40 feet (12 m) across. Perimeter track gradients could not exceed 1 in 40 in any direction, and no building could be placed closer than 150 feet (46 m)from the edge of the track.

The peri track at Kenley is an important piece of history and should not be carved up to keep the minority NIMBYS quiet! Put the fence on the outside JM, keep the whole of the peri track safe for airfield movements, and have the local tax payers contribute towards a walking/running/dog walking track on the outside, if they want it that badly!

....and whilst you are reading this get the fence built quickly so that the Air Cadets can enjoy that which was taken away from them 4 years ago!
Frelon is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2018, 10:23
  #4217 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 69
The plans proposals and local engagement for Kenley are all on the dedicated facebook page.

Just search 'RAF Kenley'
Tingger is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2018, 13:43
  #4218 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: 11 GROUP
Age: 72
Posts: 928
Kenley Peri-track

Looks like the proposal is for a per-track 'split'.
Dreadful solution for an active airfield and also will reduce the historic nature of the per-track which is normally an open space that allows aircraft wings to overlap the tarmac area.
This is the original track that was built when the runways were installed and therefore part of the 'Airfield'.
This will completely alter the visual effect of the wartime area and also reduces the space for emergencies.
Not sure whether this is just the 'proposal' or the final solution so some probing required to see who agreed it all; although 2FTS seems to feature in the information.
POBJOY is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2018, 14:40
  #4219 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,008
I think any fence anywhere inside the airfield area (by that I mean within 50 yards of the peritrack) is actually a flight safety hazard at Kenley. Anyone who knows the site realises that it is actually fairly small and the DLA is actually close to the peritack itself in some launch/landing directions and also that the trees and undergrowth and buildings actually mean that there is no real undershoot option in a lot of cases. This means you have to land on the airfield - or nowhere at all. Putting up a fence effectively introduces a hazard to the operations. That is why the fence (and it is required IMHO) needs to be set away from the peritrack - hence my earlier comment (slightly tongue in cheek) about the AM boundary blocks being a suitable demarcation line............

A 'viewing area' could be created at one of the ends of the site (say Kenley Common end) and this could allow people to watch the gliding (without risking their or the Pilot's necks) and stay safe.

From a safety perspective the operations are no less hazardous than any other airfield, we wouldn't let people walk over Coningsby or Marham so why Kenley ?

Just my 2 pennyworth............

Arc
Arclite01 is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2018, 17:54
  #4220 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: 11 GROUP
Age: 72
Posts: 928
Kenley fence

Hi Arc As stated Kenley can be challenging for c-breaks and indeed has a peculiar shape (leg of mutton) that adds to its 'charm'. Someone has to decide if it is an airfield or not, and then start from that point. A fence adds nothing to the historical element and indeed merely destroys another part of the 'structure' that is supposed to be protected. Anyone with a grain of aviation knowledge knows that 'space' is one of the greatest benefits in an emergency and in gliding where every approach and landing has to be a 'full stop' any hazards on the operational area are UNSAFE.
It is nonsense to try to make the flying fit in with people, and especially when you are running a TRAINING ORGANISATION.
I have no confidence that 2FTS has any real handle on all this as it seems the die is cast.
If people visit a 'common' then you expect to walk on a natural surface not tarmac so why the big deal to let anyone near the peri-trac.
I know the area very well and there are plenty of options that give good access to the 'remains' of the listed blast-bays without having to use the peri-track.
Of course not having much activity for 4 years does not help the case, and therefore we are starting from a low point. However there may be a glimmer of hope if the 'fence' needs planning permission as it is not replacing an existing structure and is altering the use of the area. Trying to appease everyone usually pleases nobody so why not make a stand and get the correct solution. If it came to an enquiry the location would be classed as an airfield not a common so that would be a valuable negotiation point to get a better solution.
POBJOY is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.