Denny Dobson, Flying Legend?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Northants, UK
Posts: 667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
scopeland -
I'd expect a pilot to know the difference between 200 and 2000 feet as Denny's practices are at a good height and unless your house is a particularly good line feature, he isn't over it. He also spreads practices round the county a lot to lessen any perceived noise nuisance to the locals.
I would suggest if you have any serious objection to him practicing within your line of sight (as clearly the below 200 ft over your house thing is a nonsense), you have the common decency to pick up the phone and talk to him about it rather than making such a serious and unfounded allegation on a public forum.
I don't find his displays particularily impressive when they are conducted at less than 200ft over the top of my house.
I would suggest if you have any serious objection to him practicing within your line of sight (as clearly the below 200 ft over your house thing is a nonsense), you have the common decency to pick up the phone and talk to him about it rather than making such a serious and unfounded allegation on a public forum.
Guest
Posts: n/a
you know what DamienB, after several hundred hours of flying I have finally managed to get pretty good at depth perception and height estimation.
His display over my house this morning clearly broke the 500ft rule. Just to make sure I drove the 300m to the airfield so I could watch him from the opposite direction. I did not see you or anyone else there this morning so I am unsure how you can claim it to be an unfounded allegation!
He has no need to practice over our rooftops when there is SIGNIFICANT open space well away from the village.
He has proven to be so much of a nuisance that one of the reasons our airfield is getting licenced is to keep him out of the overhead.
I am sure that in most places he does practice above the legal minimums, but in most places he did not get evicted by the landowner and seems hell bent on making some sort of point????
However I am more than happy to discuss this with him in person, PM me his number as you are obviously very close to him.
His display over my house this morning clearly broke the 500ft rule. Just to make sure I drove the 300m to the airfield so I could watch him from the opposite direction. I did not see you or anyone else there this morning so I am unsure how you can claim it to be an unfounded allegation!
He has no need to practice over our rooftops when there is SIGNIFICANT open space well away from the village.
He has proven to be so much of a nuisance that one of the reasons our airfield is getting licenced is to keep him out of the overhead.
I am sure that in most places he does practice above the legal minimums, but in most places he did not get evicted by the landowner and seems hell bent on making some sort of point????
However I am more than happy to discuss this with him in person, PM me his number as you are obviously very close to him.
Guest
Posts: n/a
actually my dear chap I live 300m from the threshold. There are 15 based Group A aircraft and 2 helicoptors as well as around 60 microlights. The airfield has an A/G frequency and is definatley not disused.
What sane pilot practices aeros in someone elses overhead without permission (and I can assure you he does not have permission!)?
My neighbours originally fought against the aerdrome licence until they were made aware that an ATZ will keep him out and now they can't do enough to support it.
Hardly good advertising for him is it?
What sane pilot practices aeros in someone elses overhead without permission (and I can assure you he does not have permission!)?
My neighbours originally fought against the aerdrome licence until they were made aware that an ATZ will keep him out and now they can't do enough to support it.
Hardly good advertising for him is it?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Northants, UK
Posts: 667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps a pilot who wants a runway in easy reach if his engine quits on him? One minute you say he's 200 feet over your house, now you're saying he's overhead a neighbouring airfield, which is far more plausible (a runway makes a good line feature, wouldn't you say?). You're surely not one of these chaps who move near an airfield and complain about the noise of aeroplanes are you? 
Now you'll have to forgive as not being a pilot I don't know all the regulations but if he's not over a congested area (check - it's an airfield), and it's not a controlled zone (check - you admit it isn't), and he's not in your circuit (and I guess he isn't unless your circuit is some odd spiral descending down through the overhead and ending in a pile of wreckage on the runway), he's not breaking any rules is he? I trust you have by now phoned him to discuss anyway.
PS a simple enquiry found Denny wasn't evicted; from the sounds of it life was simply made so difficult for him to stay by someone being a bit dictatorial that he had no option but to leave. I would have thought somebody like yourself, evicted from Sywell, would have some understanding of such a situation.
Now you'll have to forgive as not being a pilot I don't know all the regulations but if he's not over a congested area (check - it's an airfield), and it's not a controlled zone (check - you admit it isn't), and he's not in your circuit (and I guess he isn't unless your circuit is some odd spiral descending down through the overhead and ending in a pile of wreckage on the runway), he's not breaking any rules is he? I trust you have by now phoned him to discuss anyway.
PS a simple enquiry found Denny wasn't evicted; from the sounds of it life was simply made so difficult for him to stay by someone being a bit dictatorial that he had no option but to leave. I would have thought somebody like yourself, evicted from Sywell, would have some understanding of such a situation.
Last edited by DamienB; 17th Sep 2003 at 20:47.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Let me say this again for the less attentive, he is at 200ft over my house.
For a none pilot you are quick to give sage advice yet you obviously understand little about airfields and the villages that are attached to them. I would suggest that you go and read the ANO before making further comment on the rules.
My village is an integral part of the airfield. Allowing a standard 2.5nm distance from the runway the village and the aerdrome are inside this "overhead".
I live 300m from the threshold of the runway. Therefore the same overhead that covers the airfield also covers the village. He practices over the village ( and often on the 300m gap between the village and the runway (this is the dsecent side of our circuit) and not over the runway. He does not have permission to operate in our overhead area and has no regard for the aircraft coming and going into the overhead. He often flies straight through the circuit pattern on some of his passes.
Whether it is a controlled zone or not common courtesy and good airmanship would prohibit you from flying aerobatics in the overhead of an airfield without permission?
And in answer to your smug comment, I moved close to an airfield to be closer to the noise of aircraft. I have no objection to his noise or his flying, just to his flight over my roof and through the overhead of the airfield. In fact if he chose to practice in the field behind me I would happily sit and watch until he was either finished or crashed if he was any good.
Oh, and yes he was evicted according to the landowner.
And perhaps as I fellow evictee I should have some sympathy..........
For a none pilot you are quick to give sage advice yet you obviously understand little about airfields and the villages that are attached to them. I would suggest that you go and read the ANO before making further comment on the rules.
My village is an integral part of the airfield. Allowing a standard 2.5nm distance from the runway the village and the aerdrome are inside this "overhead".
I live 300m from the threshold of the runway. Therefore the same overhead that covers the airfield also covers the village. He practices over the village ( and often on the 300m gap between the village and the runway (this is the dsecent side of our circuit) and not over the runway. He does not have permission to operate in our overhead area and has no regard for the aircraft coming and going into the overhead. He often flies straight through the circuit pattern on some of his passes.
Whether it is a controlled zone or not common courtesy and good airmanship would prohibit you from flying aerobatics in the overhead of an airfield without permission?
And in answer to your smug comment, I moved close to an airfield to be closer to the noise of aircraft. I have no objection to his noise or his flying, just to his flight over my roof and through the overhead of the airfield. In fact if he chose to practice in the field behind me I would happily sit and watch until he was either finished or crashed if he was any good.
Oh, and yes he was evicted according to the landowner.
And perhaps as I fellow evictee I should have some sympathy..........
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Northants, UK
Posts: 667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Conscious of my non-pilot status I did read the ANO hence my above response; he doesn't appear to have broken any rules - and I can't find any that require permission from anybody to be overhead any airfield.
You still persist in your allegations here instead of phoning him, as already suggested, and as you had already agreed to do.
Presumably then this is a personality conflict that you have with the man - maybe it was one of those that got you booted out of Sywell?
You still persist in your allegations here instead of phoning him, as already suggested, and as you had already agreed to do.
Presumably then this is a personality conflict that you have with the man - maybe it was one of those that got you booted out of Sywell?
Guest
Posts: n/a
oooh bitchy!! Attack me, attack me, make me feel cheap.
Sorry to knock the wind from your sails, but no personality conflict, never met him, don't know him or anyone else around him. I did not agree to call him, was merely being as sarcastic as you!
I am merely reflecting on personal experiance of his flying behaviour.
If your research revealed that a pilot does not need permission to be in any overhead I hope you don't take up flying. Right I am off to Heathrow for a jolly as now you have enlightened me to airlaw I will not be violating airspace and won't get prosecuted by the CAA, might throw a few aeros in while I am there.
Yes I guess my utterly attrocious personality along with all of the others must have been the reason for us being "booted" from Sywell. Thanks for taking the effort to point it out to me. I better mend my ways.
Anyway who are you his dad???
Sorry to knock the wind from your sails, but no personality conflict, never met him, don't know him or anyone else around him. I did not agree to call him, was merely being as sarcastic as you!
I am merely reflecting on personal experiance of his flying behaviour.
If your research revealed that a pilot does not need permission to be in any overhead I hope you don't take up flying. Right I am off to Heathrow for a jolly as now you have enlightened me to airlaw I will not be violating airspace and won't get prosecuted by the CAA, might throw a few aeros in while I am there.
Yes I guess my utterly attrocious personality along with all of the others must have been the reason for us being "booted" from Sywell. Thanks for taking the effort to point it out to me. I better mend my ways.
Anyway who are you his dad???
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Northants, UK
Posts: 667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have made no attack on you. Heathrow's overhead is a controlled zone. Where you are is not. I would have expected you to know this 
Anyway it's clear you would rather sling mud behind someone's back rather than simply picking up the phone to talk to them about the matter. I simply don't understand that sort of attitude.
Clearly all I am doing here is helping to keep your grudge on the go; if you have any real wish to resolve any perceived issue, you know where to find his contact details. If you have no real wish to resolve things, then that really says more about your supposed complaint than any amount of further discussion so I shall leave you to it.
Anyway it's clear you would rather sling mud behind someone's back rather than simply picking up the phone to talk to them about the matter. I simply don't understand that sort of attitude.
Clearly all I am doing here is helping to keep your grudge on the go; if you have any real wish to resolve any perceived issue, you know where to find his contact details. If you have no real wish to resolve things, then that really says more about your supposed complaint than any amount of further discussion so I shall leave you to it.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I beg to differ Sir, you did indeed attack me personally by commenting about my personality and Sywell which had no relevance to this post!!!
You also said:
"and I can't find any that require permission from anybody to be overhead any airfield"
According to your interpretation I can go and fly over Heathrow and do as I please in there overhead. As I recall I had to pass an exam on air law to gain my licence, perhaps that makes me a fraction better off in this discussion than you?
Mud slinging, that we would be saying things that are untrue to cause trouble. None of what I have said is untrue and is the reason these forums exist. I dont happen to share the view with you that he is a flying legend. This view is based on my experiance of seeing him in flight!
Phone call, mmmm "Brrrng, brrrg, hello Mr Dobson please stop practicing your display over my village and airfield.......... click..doooooooooooooooooooooooo"
Oh and nice website by the way Mr Burke.
You also said:
"and I can't find any that require permission from anybody to be overhead any airfield"
According to your interpretation I can go and fly over Heathrow and do as I please in there overhead. As I recall I had to pass an exam on air law to gain my licence, perhaps that makes me a fraction better off in this discussion than you?
Mud slinging, that we would be saying things that are untrue to cause trouble. None of what I have said is untrue and is the reason these forums exist. I dont happen to share the view with you that he is a flying legend. This view is based on my experiance of seeing him in flight!
Phone call, mmmm "Brrrng, brrrg, hello Mr Dobson please stop practicing your display over my village and airfield.......... click..doooooooooooooooooooooooo"
Oh and nice website by the way Mr Burke.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Dorset
Posts: 902
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gentlemen - I have politely suggested to Big Red 'L' that this thread be chilled until such time as the prime contributors for the last page or so manage to re-assemble their teddies within the peripheries of their prams!! 
All started out reasonably, but is just starting to get silly! No offence to either of you (who have both displayed a perfect ability to contribute constructively to PPRuNe on other threads), but IMHO, this thread is losing its novelty factor.
All we need is the Monty Python foot or the 16 Ton weight now. Oh, here it comes....
All started out reasonably, but is just starting to get silly! No offence to either of you (who have both displayed a perfect ability to contribute constructively to PPRuNe on other threads), but IMHO, this thread is losing its novelty factor.
All we need is the Monty Python foot or the 16 Ton weight now. Oh, here it comes....
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Brighton. UK. (Via Liverpool).
Posts: 5,068
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok chaps, I have had a few reports/e-mails concerning your posts above. I ask you to continue your banter privately by e-mail or PM and not on here. I am not going to ban either of you or anything silly like that as called by some people who mailed me but I hope common sense will kick in here.
Thanks for your co-operation and thank you to those who PM'ed me.
Brl.
Thanks for your co-operation and thank you to those who PM'ed me.
Brl.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Gone.........for good this time.
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Put your handbags away chaps and listen in.
Damien B,
You obviously didnt read all of the ANO, because Rule 5(1)(e) of the Rules of the Air Regs 1996 states:
Which means that he can do just that, as long as its open airspace. If the airfield in question has any persons, vessels, vehicles or structures on it (quite likely), then he cant legally fly within 500ft of them except with Permission from the CAA. If it has an ATZ, then he needs to inform the aerodrome of his intentions, and I'm sure that is all, if the airfield has either an A/G or FIS service
If, as a non-pilot you can tell how high an aeroplane is (and I, as a 3000hr pilot, sure as hell cant), then you ought to be given an award.
If Mr Dobson hasnt got the common decency to respect other airfields neighbourhood problems, maybe a call from the aerodrome owner to the CAA will curb his enthusiasm?
Not everyone appreciates lots of noise and smoke, least of all local nimby's!
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzlin 526
Damien B,
You obviously didnt read all of the ANO, because Rule 5(1)(e) of the Rules of the Air Regs 1996 states:
An aircraft shall not fly within 500ft of persons, vessels, vehiucles or structures.
If, as a non-pilot you can tell how high an aeroplane is (and I, as a 3000hr pilot, sure as hell cant), then you ought to be given an award.
If Mr Dobson hasnt got the common decency to respect other airfields neighbourhood problems, maybe a call from the aerodrome owner to the CAA will curb his enthusiasm?
Not everyone appreciates lots of noise and smoke, least of all local nimby's!
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzlin 526
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The best arbitrators of this thread would be the CAA Air Safety Enforcement Branch.
Ideally, scopeland would capture appropriate moving or still image to present to the CAA (with something in the foreground to allow interpretation of how close the aircraft is to any object named in Rule 5). Or Damien B will read up on the ANO and make sure the message gets to the pilot in question to ensure that the law is not breached and is not proven to be so.
Of course, the establishment of an ATZ will go some way to solving the problems of both camps .... does 'normal aviation' practice still apply to Rule 5 ?? Low level aerobatics in the context of this thread (without a dispensation from the CAA) does not fit.
Ideally, scopeland would capture appropriate moving or still image to present to the CAA (with something in the foreground to allow interpretation of how close the aircraft is to any object named in Rule 5). Or Damien B will read up on the ANO and make sure the message gets to the pilot in question to ensure that the law is not breached and is not proven to be so.
Of course, the establishment of an ATZ will go some way to solving the problems of both camps .... does 'normal aviation' practice still apply to Rule 5 ?? Low level aerobatics in the context of this thread (without a dispensation from the CAA) does not fit.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Sorry if it looked like it was toy throwing time but I was just trying to reflect on my personal experiance and did not expect to have my personality attacked.
For the record I did complain to the CAA and they told me that they would need more people to complain all with video or photographs before they would be prepared to act in order to be successful in a prosecution......... (they are not doing well at winning cases these days)
The aerodrome owner has complaied to the CAA repeatedly about this and it is one of the prime reasons that the aerdrome is seeking a licence.
I now rest my case.
For the record I did complain to the CAA and they told me that they would need more people to complain all with video or photographs before they would be prepared to act in order to be successful in a prosecution......... (they are not doing well at winning cases these days)
The aerodrome owner has complaied to the CAA repeatedly about this and it is one of the prime reasons that the aerdrome is seeking a licence.
I now rest my case.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why is it the CAA have only 2 modes of action - do nothing or prosecute?
Surely all it needs is for the CAA to ring up Mr Dobson and mention that there's been a complaint backed up with a bit of evidence and although it isn't sufficient to justify a prosecution they'd appreciate it if he'd stick to the rules in future. I'm sure if he had been bending the rules at all he'd be considerably more careful in future. I'm also sure he'd be more cautious about regular practice wherever the complaint originated. Safety enhanced, complainant happy, cost of one phone call, and should the CAA ever wish to prosecute in the future at least they can say he'd previously been warned.
Surely all it needs is for the CAA to ring up Mr Dobson and mention that there's been a complaint backed up with a bit of evidence and although it isn't sufficient to justify a prosecution they'd appreciate it if he'd stick to the rules in future. I'm sure if he had been bending the rules at all he'd be considerably more careful in future. I'm also sure he'd be more cautious about regular practice wherever the complaint originated. Safety enhanced, complainant happy, cost of one phone call, and should the CAA ever wish to prosecute in the future at least they can say he'd previously been warned.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: London
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And what about the Frenchmans Geese?? They are involved in a flying display - I have NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER that these b@stards have been practising less than 500ft over someone's house!
Prosecute I say (or make some nice Fois Gras!)
Prosecute I say (or make some nice Fois Gras!)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE]And what about the Frenchmans Geese?? They are involved in a flying display - QUOTE]
At least they were squawking but possibly not mode C.
I'll get my coat......
At least they were squawking but possibly not mode C.
I'll get my coat......