Anti Airfield letter in todays Daily Mail
Apparently false accusations against an unknown aircraft even!
All this talk of legal action is misplaced though, and adds undue credence to her seemingly unfounded claims. If she had named an valid a/c reg things might have been different, but as she hasn't, who can sue and for what?
All this talk of legal action is misplaced though, and adds undue credence to her seemingly unfounded claims. If she had named an valid a/c reg things might have been different, but as she hasn't, who can sue and for what?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We get this sort of tosh from our local nimbies all the time. Accusations of low flying, buzzing houses, dive-bombing etc.
The usual mantra is "I have photos of the aeroplane and its registration and have taken legal action - you just wait". So wait we do - and wait, and wait, and wait..........
No legal action is ever taken, despite all the bluster, because there is never a case to answer.
All the credibility of a Zimbabwean presidential election.
The usual mantra is "I have photos of the aeroplane and its registration and have taken legal action - you just wait". So wait we do - and wait, and wait, and wait..........
No legal action is ever taken, despite all the bluster, because there is never a case to answer.
All the credibility of a Zimbabwean presidential election.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Tyne and Wear
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
we have had a plane circling overhead now for 8 hours
Can I just say to the pilot that has been asked to orbit by the ATC, and then was forgotton about for 8 hours, you have my deepest sympathy. Especially if you are a student doing your first solo! My god how much would that have cost?
8 x £120 ish = £960 I wonder if he/she got charged a landing fee as well. (Gumpfff)
8 x £120 ish = £960 I wonder if he/she got charged a landing fee as well. (Gumpfff)
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Apart from the soon-to-be-defunct burners of heavy oil, is there a single-engined aircraft that has a duration approaching eight hours at 100' AGL? 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, a TB20 could do 10-12hrs, at some ridiculously low power setting and flying ~ 100kt. Mind you, it would be damned difficult to pee into the plastic bottle and then screw the cap onto it while flying at 100 ft 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UK
Age: 35
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, a TB20 could do 10-12hrs, at some ridiculously low power setting and flying ~ 100kt. Mind you, it would be damned difficult to pee into the plastic bottle and then screw the cap onto it while flying at 100 ft
.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Age: 45
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was just wondering, given all these reports of parachutists, low flying aircraft, endless circling, extreme noise, registrations which don't seem to exist etc...
I wonder if Ms Lacey isn't recalling events from some 60 odd years ago
Have you tried sending your complaints to the Luftwaffe?
I wonder if Ms Lacey isn't recalling events from some 60 odd years ago
Have you tried sending your complaints to the Luftwaffe?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Swindon
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rotten Pilots
We are in the 21st Century and aviation needs to get with it...At least the Luftwaffe were honorable Gentlemen which is more than can be said for the appalling dregs of humanity who are flying from Redlands and some other north Wiltshire airfields.
Since I complained on this forum my property and I have been overflown, I assume deliberately by the following planes at low height - G-AXUB, G-VANA, G-MVVP, G-MVAF, G-BBBY. Indeed at 4.30 p.m. today G-VANA flew over me at about 100-120 feet whil'st I was lying in my garden. I had a good view of its underside and its doorless body...how do I know how high it was flying? Well I could read its reg. no unaided and it was just above Poplar trees whose height is about 70-80 feet.
So why do they fly over my property so low when they know it causes offence, is a nuisance and could be dangerous? We do shoot pigeon here..best not to fly under 200 feet!
Interestingly, people at the other end of the runway believe that pilots fly better when the camcorders are pointing at them. The footage will be going up on You-Tube soon along with the reg. no's and owners details..
the question is - why do these pilots fly so low? They must be very bad pilots - there is oodles of farmland around our houses, indeed to come near houses takes some effort! Also why does the owner of G-VANA, Peter Marsden, allow his plane to be flown so recklessly? - after the Standard Board investigation which condemned the behaviour of the airfield owner, the pilot flew this plane only 30 feet above the roof of my house on three separate occasions. All reported to the CAA - even if they can't do anything they need to be aware of rogue pilots. A pilot also seems to like flying along the busy A419 as someone else reported this plane to the CAA for flying low over a main road near the local hospital. to recap - not only was I overflown because I did my civic duty but someone left a bag of human excrement of my driveway, and threw broken glass and nails there too. A coincidence? I don't think so.
Is it acceptable to fly in circles over built up areas with thousands of residents for hours at a time? Over the last few weekends we have had 9 1/2 to 10 1/2 hours of skydiving flying a day with no rest.
We are also under the Heathrow and Lyneham flight paths so planes are common, but these do not cause a nuisance.
We have still not had an answer as to how the council has allowed the runways to be widened and lengthened without planning permission - nor have we had a reply from the council over the aircraft that are being used and whether they comply with planning permission.
As to pilots flying without licences - we'll I'm sure they could fly from Redlands and other strips in this area without any trouble. I have also recorded the reg. no of an aircraft which dosn't officially exist on another occasion..and no, I don't think I misread it...don't you just like a good mystery?
One of the problems is - no one enforces aviation planning permission. If skydiving planes at Lewknor can fly 42 days a year instead of the legal 28 and get away with it, what kind of a message does this send out? And yes, there are four local councils around the airfield who object to skydiving there...but are powerless to stop the nuisance - is there anywhere where skydiving is popular with local people?
All I can say is, those who have been forced to object to nuisances such as skydiving and gliding - are now starting to talk to each other and unite...
Since I complained on this forum my property and I have been overflown, I assume deliberately by the following planes at low height - G-AXUB, G-VANA, G-MVVP, G-MVAF, G-BBBY. Indeed at 4.30 p.m. today G-VANA flew over me at about 100-120 feet whil'st I was lying in my garden. I had a good view of its underside and its doorless body...how do I know how high it was flying? Well I could read its reg. no unaided and it was just above Poplar trees whose height is about 70-80 feet.
So why do they fly over my property so low when they know it causes offence, is a nuisance and could be dangerous? We do shoot pigeon here..best not to fly under 200 feet!
Interestingly, people at the other end of the runway believe that pilots fly better when the camcorders are pointing at them. The footage will be going up on You-Tube soon along with the reg. no's and owners details..
the question is - why do these pilots fly so low? They must be very bad pilots - there is oodles of farmland around our houses, indeed to come near houses takes some effort! Also why does the owner of G-VANA, Peter Marsden, allow his plane to be flown so recklessly? - after the Standard Board investigation which condemned the behaviour of the airfield owner, the pilot flew this plane only 30 feet above the roof of my house on three separate occasions. All reported to the CAA - even if they can't do anything they need to be aware of rogue pilots. A pilot also seems to like flying along the busy A419 as someone else reported this plane to the CAA for flying low over a main road near the local hospital. to recap - not only was I overflown because I did my civic duty but someone left a bag of human excrement of my driveway, and threw broken glass and nails there too. A coincidence? I don't think so.
Is it acceptable to fly in circles over built up areas with thousands of residents for hours at a time? Over the last few weekends we have had 9 1/2 to 10 1/2 hours of skydiving flying a day with no rest.
We are also under the Heathrow and Lyneham flight paths so planes are common, but these do not cause a nuisance.
We have still not had an answer as to how the council has allowed the runways to be widened and lengthened without planning permission - nor have we had a reply from the council over the aircraft that are being used and whether they comply with planning permission.
As to pilots flying without licences - we'll I'm sure they could fly from Redlands and other strips in this area without any trouble. I have also recorded the reg. no of an aircraft which dosn't officially exist on another occasion..and no, I don't think I misread it...don't you just like a good mystery?
One of the problems is - no one enforces aviation planning permission. If skydiving planes at Lewknor can fly 42 days a year instead of the legal 28 and get away with it, what kind of a message does this send out? And yes, there are four local councils around the airfield who object to skydiving there...but are powerless to stop the nuisance - is there anywhere where skydiving is popular with local people?
All I can say is, those who have been forced to object to nuisances such as skydiving and gliding - are now starting to talk to each other and unite...
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Swindon
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
no licence
Micriolight pilots can own their own aircraft...you can buy one on e-bay - well, THEY think that they are aircraft - the rest of us think of them as flying lawnmowers....
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Swindon
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a cheek - maybe I should drop the bag of excrement that some aviation person left in my driveway on you....
I wouldn't say I was enraged - I'm Athene Pallas - and my wings carry my wisdom around the world...
I wouldn't say I was enraged - I'm Athene Pallas - and my wings carry my wisdom around the world...
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Swindon
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What bluster? We have videos - we have photos - even the local council and the local MP have them... It's not a good idea to bait a bear who is biding its time - you are likely to get eaten...I love a fight and I love the cut and thrust of litigation - just the thought of entering a court room and performing gives me a high...better than the orgasmic groans we get here from the skydivers as they fall to earth..and now you know why grown men who should know better jump out of planes at £250 quid plus a time for a two to three minute drop - not as cheap tho' as going to a red light diistrict....
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Swindon
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about coming to this area and listening to the noise and watching the nuisance aircraft or ARE YOU one of the pilots who are wicked? How about doing something useful like trying to trace the aircraft that flew over me at 100 feet from Lotmead Farm- I note the owner Mr Norman Parry dosn't return my phone calls? Why? Is he guilty? He doen't answer the phone to other people either...
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Swindon
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about being a nice person and finding out who flew over me with a dodgy registration number or do you believe that all car registration numbers are legal? I can make allegations based on what we have witnessed and I would state so in a court of law - it is for you to disprove them...furthermore I'd love to sue YOU for libel - I must say that those of you on this forum have a nice line in sexism, homophobia, prejudice, probably racism, disbelief....what a lovely lot of people I don't think!
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I note the owner Mr Norman Parry dosn't [sic] return my phone calls? Why? Is he guilty? He doen't [sic] answer the phone to other people either...
- The Malicious Communications Act 1988, which lists offences relating to sending indecent, offensive or threatening letters, electronic communications or articles with the intention of causing distress or anxiety to those receiving them.
- The Protection From Harassment Act 1997, under which a person must not pursue a course of conduct
(a) which amounts to harassment of another person, and
(b) which he/she knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of another person. - The Telecommunications Act of 1984, which states that a person who:
(a) “sends, by means of a public telecommunications system, a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character;
or
(b) sends by those means, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, a message that he knows to be false or persistently makes use for that purpose of a telecommunications system,”
is guilty of an offence.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Swindon
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airfield Regulation Part 2
Airfield Regulation Part two.
Why do airfields need to be regulated?
When our local dairy farm decided to become an airfield neither the council nor the owners asked the electricity company whether it would be safe with high voltage electricity cables all over the land. I did point out to the council of the dangers of these cables but no one took any notice. Where was the legal requirement to declare a danger? Where was the guidance to the council so that they would know what questions to ask? where was the legislation to ensure that the council would do a good job in granting planning permission? Well, last year I had a very interesting conversation with an electrician working for the electricity board. He said that they had only just discovered that the cables were live and uncovered and if an aircraft had hit one the occupants would have been electrocuted. As these cables were by the barn where aircraft are stored he said that it had been dangerous. So there you have it - those pilots using this airfield had been put in danger and at risk for nearly 10 years. It's not something the owners would publiciize is it? The owner, I was told,had to pay to have the cables replaced. The owner at about this time also sold his business to another company. I wonder if they know that the land is scheduled for development and we have been told that building is due to start on the northern end at the end of this year? Who would invest in a business with a limited lifespan? Or perhaps the owners know something that the rest of us don't - that development won't go ahead!
Secondly there was no environmental impact assessment undertaken - even though a local pilot told us that it should have been - and also Manches the law firm said the same. Where was the legislation and guidance to ensure that this was done? The council said they didn't need to do it - if they had - maybe the overhead electricity cables issue would have been discovered...
So a poor airfield gives aviation a bad name...
Why do airfields need to be regulated?
When our local dairy farm decided to become an airfield neither the council nor the owners asked the electricity company whether it would be safe with high voltage electricity cables all over the land. I did point out to the council of the dangers of these cables but no one took any notice. Where was the legal requirement to declare a danger? Where was the guidance to the council so that they would know what questions to ask? where was the legislation to ensure that the council would do a good job in granting planning permission? Well, last year I had a very interesting conversation with an electrician working for the electricity board. He said that they had only just discovered that the cables were live and uncovered and if an aircraft had hit one the occupants would have been electrocuted. As these cables were by the barn where aircraft are stored he said that it had been dangerous. So there you have it - those pilots using this airfield had been put in danger and at risk for nearly 10 years. It's not something the owners would publiciize is it? The owner, I was told,had to pay to have the cables replaced. The owner at about this time also sold his business to another company. I wonder if they know that the land is scheduled for development and we have been told that building is due to start on the northern end at the end of this year? Who would invest in a business with a limited lifespan? Or perhaps the owners know something that the rest of us don't - that development won't go ahead!
Secondly there was no environmental impact assessment undertaken - even though a local pilot told us that it should have been - and also Manches the law firm said the same. Where was the legislation and guidance to ensure that this was done? The council said they didn't need to do it - if they had - maybe the overhead electricity cables issue would have been discovered...
So a poor airfield gives aviation a bad name...
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I can make allegations based on what we have witnessed and I would state so in a court of law - it is for you to disprove them
Best to know how the law works
