Anti Airfield letter in todays Daily Mail

[IO540]

According to google, Burscough Airfield closed in 1957.

[gpn01]

Ahhh....the old "I found it on Google/Wikipedia, so it must be true".....Maybe the RN operation ceased in 1957. There was a Cessna operated by the West Lancs Parachuting Club (G-FALL I think) out of Burscough in the early 80's. I know because I did the odd static line jump from it. Seem to recall there was some microlighting there a few years later too.

[Ken Wells]

The field was still active well into the eighties as a private filed. I know we used it many an occasion so Google is wrong! and anyway it was posted on Google by a tourist!! so hardly a basis for fact!!

Also had a parrachute opperation for a while till the local's complained!!!!

It also had a microlight operation for a short time in the nineties.

We based our aircraft there once from Woodvale when the Model Aircraft Show closed RAF Woodvale for the weekend and instructed out of there.

The runway is still there today as a farm store for hay and vehicles such a waste!!

Ken

[K.Lacey]

Reply

As someone who is a co-owner of an aviation related business with a father who used to design light aircraft I spent much of my childhood on airfields and with those in the aviation industry, so I am rather appalled at the assumptions some of you are making and the vile aspersions on my character- libellous? I do however rather like the idea of being Miss Marple, as she always won her cases! I suppose the man who called me that is a Julian Clary lookalike or on second thoughts, Michael Barrymore. A much more dubious character.
I am not anti-aviation, but I am against irresponsible, dangerous and, noisy and intrusive flying. There are always two sides to a story. Please remember this. I did not choose to live next to an airfield - I had one imposed upon me after I purchased. There was no planning permisison for a permanaent or temporary airfield when I bought. Because I have had the temerity to complain about being overflown at low height - I get attacked on places such as your forum. Why have I and other villagers been overflown at low height? Well I and others in this village have objected to planning applications, as is our democratic right, and complained about dangerous incidents to the Council, the CAA, the BMAA, BPA, and employed very expensive specialist aviation solicitors. How would you like a skydiver or a piece of their equipment landing near you? The owner of this airfield changed the use of his buildings without planning permission, has allowed light aircraft for which he had no planning permission to use his airfield, attended as a parish councillor his own planning applications at which he spoke (he and the parish council were punished for this) and made statements in his planning applications which were untrue. Well, I studied law, and I am not impressed with what has been happening: so like any responsible citizen I complained. It may be that the aviation lobby dosn't like it, but remember that there are two sides to a story... my experiences have meant that I have become an expert in aviation law. When aircraft such as G-VANA stop skimming the roof of my house at dangerously low height and when the pilot apologizes then maybe I will stop complaining. The pilot did this after the Standards Board found againt the airfield owner. Suspicious. Coincidence? I don't think so. I think vindictive. Dangerous. Wicked. Remember there are rogue pilots just as there are rogue airfield owners, remember that some airfields are not well run...for example several airfield owners in Wiltshire have put up hangers without permission. Oh, and Swindon Borough Council rewrote the initial planning application when the last application was made- also illegal, and attempted to change the permission from a personal permission to a business one...also illegal. On Saturday a skydiver narrowly missed landing on the roof of my house and only just managed to land on a field at the bottom of my garden. Traumatic and distressing? I'll let you decide.
Why should I have to tolerate planes circling for hours at a time, over the roof of my house, or 50 feet from it whilst they do training circuits? Do I not have a right to peace and privacy? If the flying business is making money why shouldn't I get compensation? How about triple glazing my house? How about compenstation because I cannot work inside because of the vibrations from these aircraft reverberating inside the house? How about buying me out? If these planes were not flying so close, in circles above and around my house I wouldn't have a problem. If they took off and flew away - fine, but they don't! They circle over me and around me - often well below 500 feet. My specialist aviation solicitor agrees that private airfields need more regulation - you may not agree, but maybe the Europen court will. If you think it's ok for pilots to behave as they are in our little village - fine - but lots of us think not. You want people like me to stop complaining and being a thorn in the side of Swindon Borough Council? Well stop buzzing my house and garden, stop dropping parachtists over it and behave better!
Oh, and there have been three newsworthy crashes at Biggin hill since 2001 so Mr Robinson is wrong, although only one landed on a house!

[PPRuNe Radar]

Now that we appear to have representatives from both sides of the fence on board, the debate can develop further

What won't be allowed will be name calling and resorting to abuse, regardless of how strong the posters views might be. If you disagree with someone, make a counter argument, don't bother with any petty attacks or you will simply be deleted and banned.

At the moment, that's mostly directed at some old hands on here, but it's relevant to everybody who wishes to use PPRuNe.

[vanHorck]

I am glad this happens. I can read the anger in your posting. But it s a start.

Respect for one another is what s needed. Tolerance

As well as the total truth, not the single sided truth, so perhaps the pilots concerned can explain their low flying escapades? their truth?

How about all of you sitting down for a coffee or a beer and start afresh living and flying together with respect for each other s lives and hobbies, without resorting to legal ways just because it s your right or to low level flying just to annoy someone?

[airborne_artist]

Why should I have to tolerate planes circling for hours at a time, over the roof of my house, or 50 feet from it whilst they do training circuits?

They circle over me and around me - often well below 500 feet

None of these is at all likely, in my experience. If you have the real evidence, then present it.

attended as a parish councillor his own planning applications at which he spoke (he and the parish council were punished for this)

Parish councils are consulted during the planning process, but all the parish council can do is recommend - they do not decide. District/borough councils do this.

On Saturday a skydiver narrowly missed landing on the roof of my house and only just managed to land on a field at the bottom of my garden. Traumatic and distressing? I'll let you decide.

Traumatic and distressing, no. Slightly surprising, perhaps. If he landed on a field at the bottom of the garden, then he can't really have got too close to the roof of the house, can he? Parachutes descend quite fast, and can't just level off and then fly too far.

Well I and others in this village have objected to planning applications, as is our democratic right, and complained about dangerous incidents to the Council, the CAA, the BMAA, BPA, and employed very expensive specialist aviation solicitors

It sounds to me as though you thought that an expensive solicitor could make sure it all went your way, and that really you are just very cross that you spent all that money to no avail.

[DeeCee]

I have flown from a variety of Airfields and Farmstrips and without exception they all had rules and advice for pilots regarding noise sensitive areas. Many also seemed to suffer from unfair complaints - sometimes quite unreasonable.

I have always thought that many people regard flying as an activity for the rich. Anyone that flies knows that is not so and most people have to stretch to afford it. GA in this Country struggles to get by.

I cannot imagine flying at 50' over someone's roof. If somebody did that then further action should be taken, but how do you determine the altitude of an aeroplane by sight? I know that I can't do it.

I am personally very glad that Ms Lacey has joined this forum. Let us have an educated debate by all means and try to see both sides.

I would not want to annoy anyone with any of my hobbies. There is however give and take possible here - there are some people's activities that I personally cannot stand...........

[airborne_artist]

Note the hard work put into keeping the noise down by the airfield. Ms Lacey's house is just S of the Y junction and at 7 o'clock the the threshold of 06. Not as I wrote here earlier. It is within the hatched exclusion zone.

This image is from http://www.redlandsairfield.co.uk/findus.htm

[Bravo73]

aa,

Are you sure that Ms Lacey lives in the single house, at '9 o'clock' to the runway intersection?

The only reason I ask is that Ms Lacey refers to 'other villagers', 'I and other villagers' or 'I and others in this village' on multiple occasions.

The closest village that I can see on multimap is Wanborough, several miles to the south. I struggle to see how any aircraft using Redlands could overfly Wanborough at 50ft, unless the aircraft was in some sort of trouble.


Would you mind confirming for us, Ms Lacey, whether or not you live in the village of Wanborough or if you are actually remote from the village?

[Contacttower]

Ms K Lacey,

What I think irritated many of us was that you appeared to be 'using' the Biggin crash as an opportunity to vent your views on an issue that was only at a stretch really related...I mean the very rare occurrence of a jet crashing near houses (lets not forget that the last third party death, with the exception of a glider accident, caused by a plane was the Lockerbie bombing) out of a major airport and the problem of noise and alleged endangering of houses from a microlight strip.

That simply struck people as being a little distasteful.

Leaving that aside, are there any Redlands users who can comment on this?

Complaints about dangerous and inconsiderate flying should always be taken seriously and I hope we can give Ms Lacey a fair hearing. It was good of her to show up actually.

[eharding]

Ms Lacey.

ContactTower has provided an excellent summary of the situation. I would add that if you indeed have a genuine grievance, supported with reliable documentary evidence (particularly photographic evidence), then the CAA Enforcement Branch would persue the offender in a particularly relentless fashion, should you choose to furnish them with such evidence - and should the allegations prove to be true, I don't think there is anyone here who would have much sympathy for the pilot involved. On the other hand, if you are unable to provide such evidence, you'll understand that many people will have trouble taking your allegations seriously.

[Pudnucker]

I think noise and vibration are a moot point to be honest. We did a huge amount of noise tests and it was interesting that the lorries coming past my house and next doors lawn mower was noiser than an aircraft overhead at 500'. I will attempt to dig out the actual findings but Ms Lacey seems to be believing in a lot of subjective matter.

I think turning up here was a very honourable thing to do. Ms Lacey, I trust you will comment on our replies.

[FREDAcheck]

I support Contacttower’s comments.

I don’t agree with Ms Lacey that we need more regulation of small airfields, but…

A small minority of pilots don’t bother about noise abatement procedures, and some airfields don’t always ensure procedures are followed (I’m not suggesting Redlands is one such). Without radar or ATC you can’t track every plane, but complaints need to be taken seriously, and pilots made aware that disregard for noise avoidance procedures won’t be tolerated.

Rather than grumble about Ms Lacey’s call for more regulation (in an already heavily regulated activity), it’s better that we should demonstrate that more regulation is not necessary. I mean: show others we’re acting responsibly, not just persuade ourselves.

And please: no more talk of organising low-flying over the houses of complainers. I’m sure posters that suggested that didn’t mean it; in the end it would only be self-defeating. And about as socially responsible as chucking a brick through their windows. Kids get ASBOs for unnecessary noise in residential areas. We shouldn’t expect special treatment.

[Pudnucker]

Sorry, just re-read the thread and have to add this...

Ms Lacey, the crash at Biggin Hill cost people their lives.. Using it for point scoring is bad taste at best... "Vindictive" and "wicked" in your own words come to mind. While you have every right to complain and enter into debate about noise and intrusion using people's unfortunate deaths for your own arguments is bang out of order. By the way, it was a business jet that crashed not a SEP aircraft - VERY different flying machines.

Put yourself in this position - If you were to lose a member of your family in an accident, say on a motorcycle, how would you like it if I used it to advance my argument about the 200 or so bikes that go past my house every Tuesday in the Summer (a major issue in my village) - I wouldn't do it. Apology needed.

[airborne_artist]

Edit - Pulse one is correct. See below.

[pulse1]

Warnborough House is about 150 yds South of the 06 extended centre line and about 300 yds from the threshold.

[lauchiemb]

Parachutists are welcome on my patio

I must say that having a parachutist land on my patio would certainly liven up my day. I would happily make them tea and deliver them back to wherever they came from.

Wishing to have triple glazed windows paid for by the airfield owner is a great idea to cut your carbon ommissions but is not going to stop the noise when you are in your garden on a nice summers day (when the aircraft are around). I have seen some very reasonably priced airplugs at B&Q.

If you don't like where you live, why not move?

[S-Works]

Er hang on a sec guys.......

Whist I don't support her actions or the disgraceful way that she used the Biggin accident to perpetuate her own cause she does have a point however badly she has managed it. If she is indeed 300 yards from the end of the runway then when that runway is in use she is pretty close to the action. She also pointed out that the airfield came into existence after she moved their. So telling her if she does not like it move really does us no favours as pilots!!

Perhaps if she had tried more constructive discussion with the airfields operators she would not be in a situation where everyone now thinks of her as a crank and treats her accordingly. But the optimist in me says it should not be too late for anyone to hold out the peace pipe and I am sure that with some effort a compromise can be reached. Offset approaches etc. are one of many options.

[Captain Smithy]

Ms. Lacey,

I would echo the sentiments already expressed here. It's good that you've come here and now you've put across your point of view. I'm sure most of us at least understand your concerns. However... I'm not so sure about these parts:

1. "Why should I have to tolerate planes circling for hours at a time, over the roof of my house, or 50 feet from it whilst they do training circuits?"
No pilot would even think about flying at 50 feet above anywhere, never mind someone's house... even a stupid pilot would not do this... methinks you are exagerrating a little. Most pilots I know would avoid flying anywhere near someone's house altogether.
Also, aircraft cannot "train" at unlicensed airfields. These aircraft are probably flying purely for pleasure.

2. "Do I not have a right to peace and privacy?"
Yes, but people also have a right to fly. Please respect this.

3. "If the flying business is making money why shouldn't I get compensation?"
Why and for what? What does "making money" have to do with compensation?

4. "How about compensation because I cannot work inside because of the vibrations from these aircraft reverberating inside the house?"
This sounds like more exaggeration... aircraft do not cause "vibrations", or at least in my experience. Giving an excuse that you "cannot work" because of noise seems silly. How do you think people work at/near major international airports?

I don't mean any offense in my statements, I've tried to explain things, but I strongly disagreed with some parts of your post which seemed almost histrionic at times. Aircraft do not fly over anywhere at 50', never mind over houses. The noise/vibration issue seems very exagerrated... I speak from personal experience. Also, talk of compensation is going a little too far indeed.

Smithy.