Fife Airport threatened by Wind farm Proposal
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Perth & Kinross
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fife Airport threatened by Wind farm Proposal
A company named Infinis has submitted an application for planning permission to site five wind turbines within the Fife Airport ATZ. The tips of the blades would be 360 feet agl. The proposed location is almost exactly on the extended runway centreline, approximately 1.5nm from the Rwy-07 threshold.
Full details of the application and any comments can be seen on the Fife Council website at 09/01861/EIA | Erection of 5 wind turbines, one anemometer mast, substation building, construction of access, hardstandings and temporary construction compound. | Westfield O C C S Fife where objections may be submitted by clicking on the ‘Do It Online’ tab. Fife Flying Club has submitted its objection and hopes that other pilots will lend their support. The FFC letter of objection includes a map showing the layout of turbines in relation to the runway.
Full details of the application and any comments can be seen on the Fife Council website at 09/01861/EIA | Erection of 5 wind turbines, one anemometer mast, substation building, construction of access, hardstandings and temporary construction compound. | Westfield O C C S Fife where objections may be submitted by clicking on the ‘Do It Online’ tab. Fife Flying Club has submitted its objection and hopes that other pilots will lend their support. The FFC letter of objection includes a map showing the layout of turbines in relation to the runway.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Strathaven Airfield
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fight for Fife
Hi,
An objection will be lodged on behalf of the flyers at Strathaven Airfield.
A query. Why has there been no submission as yet by the owners of Fife. The CAA response states that the owners were given the opportunity to give feedback early on but didn't.
The application is dated the end of July. Why is it only now that it is getting publicity? I had heard of it - but asumed it was pre-application consultations - a couple of months ago.
This needs to be fought. It needs to be fought seriously. And the objections need to be focussed completely on Planning Policy - which, I am afraid to say, a focus on EFATO doesn't cover.
We at Strathaven are 5km from Europe's largest onshore windfarm and INSIDE the council's preferred area for windfarm development, so I have been doing some research, and so perhaps know some of what I am talking about.
The Royal Aero Club is having a seminar on wind farm development threats in London on November 12th. It is free, so someone from Fife should be there.
The aviation community also needs to get specialist planning consultants on board right now to fight for Fife.
I am surprised, though, that the owners of Fife Airport are not already doing this - or if they have, no-one is being told.
If money is needed, the British Microlight Aircraft Association have a small fighting fund. And I am sure there are others. Indeed, I hope there are, for we at Strathaven will be needing their help in due course.
An objection will be lodged on behalf of the flyers at Strathaven Airfield.
A query. Why has there been no submission as yet by the owners of Fife. The CAA response states that the owners were given the opportunity to give feedback early on but didn't.
The application is dated the end of July. Why is it only now that it is getting publicity? I had heard of it - but asumed it was pre-application consultations - a couple of months ago.
This needs to be fought. It needs to be fought seriously. And the objections need to be focussed completely on Planning Policy - which, I am afraid to say, a focus on EFATO doesn't cover.
We at Strathaven are 5km from Europe's largest onshore windfarm and INSIDE the council's preferred area for windfarm development, so I have been doing some research, and so perhaps know some of what I am talking about.
The Royal Aero Club is having a seminar on wind farm development threats in London on November 12th. It is free, so someone from Fife should be there.
The aviation community also needs to get specialist planning consultants on board right now to fight for Fife.
I am surprised, though, that the owners of Fife Airport are not already doing this - or if they have, no-one is being told.
If money is needed, the British Microlight Aircraft Association have a small fighting fund. And I am sure there are others. Indeed, I hope there are, for we at Strathaven will be needing their help in due course.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Strathaven Airfield
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personal objection lodged:
As a private pilot in central Scotland who visits Glenrothes, I object to this application on the grounds of safety which would make Fife Airport unusable, and therefore be contrary to the local plan which seeks to protect and promote it. The safety grounds are obstacle clearance and wake turbulence. The issue of obstacle clearance in emergencies is such that the construction of these proposed turbines would render the airfield unusable. In aviation, we are taught to prepare for the worst case, and in the case of engine failure on take-off, or wind shear/wind gradient on arrival, the worst case would be impact with these turbines. So, in assessing the safety case prior to choosing to fly from Fife, I would then decide not to use the airfield. From an economic point of view, it only takes the loss of a small proportion of business to make the airfield unviable. The second - and perhaps more major problem - is that of wake vortex. To my knowledge, there has been no data collected on the wake vortex generated by wind turbines. The CAA's official submission agrees. Obviously, the stronger the wind, the stronger the vortex, then the more difficult it is for pilots to control their aircraft. Indeed, this may be why no volunteers have investigated this problem. I would suggest, that if minded to proceed with this application, the council should insist on a pre-condition being such a survey of wake vortex and its affects on aircraft. A similar such survey in respect of the effect of wind turbines and secondary surveillance radars is being carried out at Strathaven Airfield at present at a cost of tens of thousands of pounds to the windfarm developers. If the proposers of these turbines are certain of the lack of effect of wake vortex, may I suggest they complete an in-depth survey. This would not place an undue cost on them, since the data if made available commercially worldwide would easily more than earn back its costs.
Strathaven Airfield one will be written with proper references.
As a private pilot in central Scotland who visits Glenrothes, I object to this application on the grounds of safety which would make Fife Airport unusable, and therefore be contrary to the local plan which seeks to protect and promote it. The safety grounds are obstacle clearance and wake turbulence. The issue of obstacle clearance in emergencies is such that the construction of these proposed turbines would render the airfield unusable. In aviation, we are taught to prepare for the worst case, and in the case of engine failure on take-off, or wind shear/wind gradient on arrival, the worst case would be impact with these turbines. So, in assessing the safety case prior to choosing to fly from Fife, I would then decide not to use the airfield. From an economic point of view, it only takes the loss of a small proportion of business to make the airfield unviable. The second - and perhaps more major problem - is that of wake vortex. To my knowledge, there has been no data collected on the wake vortex generated by wind turbines. The CAA's official submission agrees. Obviously, the stronger the wind, the stronger the vortex, then the more difficult it is for pilots to control their aircraft. Indeed, this may be why no volunteers have investigated this problem. I would suggest, that if minded to proceed with this application, the council should insist on a pre-condition being such a survey of wake vortex and its affects on aircraft. A similar such survey in respect of the effect of wind turbines and secondary surveillance radars is being carried out at Strathaven Airfield at present at a cost of tens of thousands of pounds to the windfarm developers. If the proposers of these turbines are certain of the lack of effect of wake vortex, may I suggest they complete an in-depth survey. This would not place an undue cost on them, since the data if made available commercially worldwide would easily more than earn back its costs.
Strathaven Airfield one will be written with proper references.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Is Fife Airport officially safeguarded with the Council? Even if not, has the owner reached an agreement to be told about any contra developments within a certain distance?
If an aerodrome owner fails to look out for threats to their business, be it wind farms, birds, housing developments or whatever, then shirley some acceptance of negligence must attach?
If how ever, they have fully engaged in the system and have been let down to the extent their business fails, then a case against the council should stand a reasonable chance of success.
The is a British Wind Energy Group or something like that. Maybe a call to them might diffuse the situation?
Sir George Cayley
If an aerodrome owner fails to look out for threats to their business, be it wind farms, birds, housing developments or whatever, then shirley some acceptance of negligence must attach?
If how ever, they have fully engaged in the system and have been let down to the extent their business fails, then a case against the council should stand a reasonable chance of success.
The is a British Wind Energy Group or something like that. Maybe a call to them might diffuse the situation?
Sir George Cayley
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Perth & Kinross
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the support and advice so far. I am just a humble member of Fife Flying Club so I cannot speak for the owners/operators of Fife Airport, but potential objectors may care to approach them asking for their views so they may be backed-up in personal objections to the planning authorities.
The Club has taken professional advice on the issues and members are working to try and bring matters to a successful conclusion. Sorry to be so cryptic.
Lurker06
The Club has taken professional advice on the issues and members are working to try and bring matters to a successful conclusion. Sorry to be so cryptic.
Lurker06
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Kilmacolm
Age: 47
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you have a look at the Fife Flying Club objection comments then you will find point 2.7 which points to a "draft" Kirkcaldy and Mid-Fife Local Plan (Ref: GLE45) which states "Fife Airport and associated land will be safe guarded for airport and aircraft-related employment purposes".
I'm just a member of Fife Flying Club with a share in a private aircraft based at Fife. I'm going to be writing my personal objection and will submit it in due course.
Not sure why Tayside Aviation who own the airport haven't objected yet. Unless I missed something in the Fife Flying Club objection although I'm sure Tayside Aviation will submit their own? Surely?
I'm just a member of Fife Flying Club with a share in a private aircraft based at Fife. I'm going to be writing my personal objection and will submit it in due course.
Not sure why Tayside Aviation who own the airport haven't objected yet. Unless I missed something in the Fife Flying Club objection although I'm sure Tayside Aviation will submit their own? Surely?
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Aberdeen, UK
Posts: 526
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of our (Aberdeen based) group members is a local councillor and has these points to make (reposted with his permission):
He's also alerted "Action for Airfields" to the proposal to give it a wider audience, and he's a friend of the chap who drafted the Edinburgh objection.
If anyone would like to be put in touch with him for advice/discussion, drop me a PM and I'll facilitate it - not sure if he's on here directly.
Cheers,
S.
As your friendly local member of Aberdeenshire Council let me offer some
advice on this matter:
1 - the objectors need to write in to the planning service for Fife with
their objections. Objections from users of the airfield should be
considered valid so make sure you note you are a user of the airfield.
2 - individual letters are a lot more effective than copying a widely
circulated letter. So do write your own letter.
3 - letters to planning officers need to address substantive issues that
relate to the local development plan. This is what makes the major
difference. Lots of objectors say they are against it but fail to say
why the proposed development fails local planning policy. Frankly,
every planning application has some NIMBY's and they get ignored if all
they do is moan. But substantial matters of relevance in the local
development plan are important and MUST be considered by the planning
officer.
4 - lobbying of the local councillors on the matter IS effective IF it
is done POLITELY. Planning officers discourage it but there is no law
against it. The key is to be polite, reasonable, brief and to the point.
5 - get the representations in QUICKLY. The law now limits the
opportunity for representation so objections must normally be lodged
within 3 weeks of the application being made valid. Local councils do
have discretion but we in Aberdeenshire hsve recently tightened up on that.
Ideally we should find someone in the locality who already knows the
Fife local development plan and can draft a quick brief for others to
read so hat they can base their letters of the plan.
advice on this matter:
1 - the objectors need to write in to the planning service for Fife with
their objections. Objections from users of the airfield should be
considered valid so make sure you note you are a user of the airfield.
2 - individual letters are a lot more effective than copying a widely
circulated letter. So do write your own letter.
3 - letters to planning officers need to address substantive issues that
relate to the local development plan. This is what makes the major
difference. Lots of objectors say they are against it but fail to say
why the proposed development fails local planning policy. Frankly,
every planning application has some NIMBY's and they get ignored if all
they do is moan. But substantial matters of relevance in the local
development plan are important and MUST be considered by the planning
officer.
4 - lobbying of the local councillors on the matter IS effective IF it
is done POLITELY. Planning officers discourage it but there is no law
against it. The key is to be polite, reasonable, brief and to the point.
5 - get the representations in QUICKLY. The law now limits the
opportunity for representation so objections must normally be lodged
within 3 weeks of the application being made valid. Local councils do
have discretion but we in Aberdeenshire hsve recently tightened up on that.
Ideally we should find someone in the locality who already knows the
Fife local development plan and can draft a quick brief for others to
read so hat they can base their letters of the plan.
If anyone would like to be put in touch with him for advice/discussion, drop me a PM and I'll facilitate it - not sure if he's on here directly.
Cheers,
S.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Jockistan
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fife - help needed again !
Many thanks to everyone who responded to our previous appeal for support – over 100 objections have now been lodged with the Planning Authorities.
Unfortunately we need to reach out and ask for you support again as an second planning application has been submitted, this time to erect a 120m Wind Turbine at the Bosch Rexroth factory in Glenrothes. This lies pretty much directly under the dogleg final approach to runway 25. If successful then it is highly unlikely that Fife Airport could continue to exist.
Fife Flying Club has submitted a detailed objection to the proposal. This can be viewed at http://www.fifeflyingclub.co.uk/committee/FFCObjection_Bosch%20Final.pdf
We have too few good airfields as it is these days therefore please take a few minutes to help stop this ludicrous plan which if successful will not only risk the closure of a great asset, but also be a huge intrusion to many people living in the proximity of the factory.
Should you feel inclined then letters of objection or support can be submitted online at http://planning.fife.gov.uk/online/applicationComments.do?action=showComments&caseNo=10/00144/FULL
Many thanks
140KIAS on behalf of Fife Flying Club
Unfortunately we need to reach out and ask for you support again as an second planning application has been submitted, this time to erect a 120m Wind Turbine at the Bosch Rexroth factory in Glenrothes. This lies pretty much directly under the dogleg final approach to runway 25. If successful then it is highly unlikely that Fife Airport could continue to exist.
Fife Flying Club has submitted a detailed objection to the proposal. This can be viewed at http://www.fifeflyingclub.co.uk/committee/FFCObjection_Bosch%20Final.pdf
We have too few good airfields as it is these days therefore please take a few minutes to help stop this ludicrous plan which if successful will not only risk the closure of a great asset, but also be a huge intrusion to many people living in the proximity of the factory.
Should you feel inclined then letters of objection or support can be submitted online at http://planning.fife.gov.uk/online/applicationComments.do?action=showComments&caseNo=10/00144/FULL
Many thanks
140KIAS on behalf of Fife Flying Club
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did anyone actually proof read that document before they sent it? It is full of spelling errors and has few references! How can Tayside Aviation be neutral?!
That said, I hope the residents are being vocal. Only 100 objections seems terribly small, considering everyone in Glenrothes is going to hear the noise from the proposed turbine. Local petition?
That said, I hope the residents are being vocal. Only 100 objections seems terribly small, considering everyone in Glenrothes is going to hear the noise from the proposed turbine. Local petition?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Strathaven Airfield
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, let's look at this.
Fife is the first of our airfields to be threatened with oblivion by wind turbines; it will not be the last.
The Royal Aero Club held a seminar to discuss the threats. I think about five airfields were directly represented. Three were Scottish: Prestwick International, Fife and Strathaven.
Scotland is the windiest country in Europe, so at the forefront of the threat to UK GA.
If we don't fight now, we set a precedent.
Note, we have an international airport, a GA field and a mainly microlight airfield all feeling under threat here.
Unfortunately, we are not planners. We are not all ex-journalists, like me. We may not all be computer literate. So, yes, it is unfortunate that no-one seems to have proof-read Fife's submission. But a spelling mistake - while maybe making the message look less professional - does not alter the facts.
At Strathaven, we have proposals in the pipeline for 121m high tubines next to the airfield; See here for the developer's map: http://www.strathavenairfield.co.uk/CarnduffFarm.jpg
Now we have the support of the council for our airfield, although the ultimate decision could be made by the Scottish Government since wind energy is a national priority.
Fife Council have a problem. They feel Bosch might go away from Glenrothes if they don't get a turbine approved. And there are more people work for Bosch than for the airport.
Bosch only want the turbine on their factory for "positive" "green" PR reasons. If they wanted to really generate electricity, they would build a turbine on one of the offshore fields.
So: should we, as aviators, start a "Boycott Bosch" campaign so the company realises PR works both ways?
Fife is the first of our airfields to be threatened with oblivion by wind turbines; it will not be the last.
The Royal Aero Club held a seminar to discuss the threats. I think about five airfields were directly represented. Three were Scottish: Prestwick International, Fife and Strathaven.
Scotland is the windiest country in Europe, so at the forefront of the threat to UK GA.
If we don't fight now, we set a precedent.
Note, we have an international airport, a GA field and a mainly microlight airfield all feeling under threat here.
Unfortunately, we are not planners. We are not all ex-journalists, like me. We may not all be computer literate. So, yes, it is unfortunate that no-one seems to have proof-read Fife's submission. But a spelling mistake - while maybe making the message look less professional - does not alter the facts.
At Strathaven, we have proposals in the pipeline for 121m high tubines next to the airfield; See here for the developer's map: http://www.strathavenairfield.co.uk/CarnduffFarm.jpg
Now we have the support of the council for our airfield, although the ultimate decision could be made by the Scottish Government since wind energy is a national priority.
Fife Council have a problem. They feel Bosch might go away from Glenrothes if they don't get a turbine approved. And there are more people work for Bosch than for the airport.
Bosch only want the turbine on their factory for "positive" "green" PR reasons. If they wanted to really generate electricity, they would build a turbine on one of the offshore fields.
So: should we, as aviators, start a "Boycott Bosch" campaign so the company realises PR works both ways?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Jockistan
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did anyone actually proof read that document before they sent it? It is full of spelling errors and has few references!
The objection was primarily pulled together by one individual who has a full time job and plenty of other things to keep him busy. So lets not be too harsh please.
How can Tayside Aviation be neutral?!
"We can confirm that as owner and operator of Fife Airport we have carefully considered the proposal and have no objections to this proposal being implemented. This follows our own analysis of the current CAA rules for the establishment of wind turbines in close proximity to an airfield.
Chances are that statement was made by a certain representative who admits to knowing 4/5th of SFA about aviation. Another representative of Tayside subsequenty wrote a fairly soft letter to Fife Council. The letter didnt specifically state object or support so Fife Council categorised it as neutral comment. That letter has since been removed from the Council's Planning portal.The company wanting to construct the turbine is in the wind farm business and as xrayalpha says would appear to want to do this for green pr marketing purposes. They employ about 400 people in Glenrothes and it has been suggested that they will close and relocate any factories which have the turbine turned down. I suspect that Tayside dont want to be blamed for the loss of 400 jobs.
That said, I hope the residents are being vocal. Only 100 objections seems terribly small, considering everyone in Glenrothes is going to hear the noise from the proposed turbine. Local petition?
This latest development is only a few hunderd meters from residential areas. There have been some objections but nothing to reflect the impact to the area,
Have a look at the last page of this document, I cant imagine anyone living in these houses being supportive. http://planning.fife.gov.uk/online/f...ent-590822.pdf
Information campaign is on the agenda to ensure the local residents are fully aware. An initial straw poll suggests that perhaps they are not.
Proof read once, apologies if I cause any offence for any spelling or grammatical errors
Guest
Posts: n/a
Check if Fife is on the DfT list of Officially Safeguarded aerodromes as this might help. If not, then an objection on aviation safety grounds could still result in intervention from above, if the LPA are minded to approve despite the objections.
The key is penetration (no, not that!) but an turbine that's above the obstacle surface. A classic is the Inner Horizontal which is 45m above the runway. (Simplistic explanation)
It's all in that CAP168 so worth a look.
Of course if the aerodrome decides to relinquish it's licence under the latest proposals........
Sir George Cayley
The key is penetration (no, not that!) but an turbine that's above the obstacle surface. A classic is the Inner Horizontal which is 45m above the runway. (Simplistic explanation)
It's all in that CAP168 so worth a look.
Of course if the aerodrome decides to relinquish it's licence under the latest proposals........
Sir George Cayley
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Jockistan
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fife is not officially safeguarded however the proposed turbine breaches the inner horizontal surface by 58m. Due to noise abatement procedures it also lies directly beneath the non standard approach/climb out.
Thats the basis of the objection.
Thats the basis of the objection.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Scotland
Age: 84
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How can the noise abatement issue be considered valid if it is acceptable to site a wind turbine in the noise sensitive area? Or is the Bosch version going to be silent?
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have all got it wrong.
Its not actually going to be a wind turbine as such.
Its just a camo job for a sisemic attached towing post so they can get a datum point for the center of pressure.
There is a top secret plan for a huge number of powered up driving turbines through out Fife.
Once they are installed the Nukes are getting replace in Storness and Hunterston.
Then a huge North South ditch is going to get dug from the Tay to the Forth and then turbines powered up using the power from the nukes and big extension leads from Grotty ferry to the Kingdom and also from Lieth.
Eventually Fife will hopefully be floated off the rest of Scotland and into the North Sea. Where its going to go after that nobody knows cause no bugger else wants it either. Personally I think they will get it as far out as possible then give it to the Argentinians so they stop moaning about the Falklands.
Its not actually going to be a wind turbine as such.
Its just a camo job for a sisemic attached towing post so they can get a datum point for the center of pressure.
There is a top secret plan for a huge number of powered up driving turbines through out Fife.
Once they are installed the Nukes are getting replace in Storness and Hunterston.
Then a huge North South ditch is going to get dug from the Tay to the Forth and then turbines powered up using the power from the nukes and big extension leads from Grotty ferry to the Kingdom and also from Lieth.
Eventually Fife will hopefully be floated off the rest of Scotland and into the North Sea. Where its going to go after that nobody knows cause no bugger else wants it either. Personally I think they will get it as far out as possible then give it to the Argentinians so they stop moaning about the Falklands.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .
Age: 36
Posts: 649
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair points MJ, as long as we get to cut out the chunk of land that the airfield sits on so we can keep it where it is, albeit as a nice little island 
Can we get rid of Weegieshire using the same method as well? As a "reward" they can take the Scottish Executi... oops I mean Government with them.
Smithy
Can we get rid of Weegieshire using the same method as well? As a "reward" they can take the Scottish Executi... oops I mean Government with them.
Smithy
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Jockistan
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crash One - Ive never been close enough to a wind turbine to hear how much noise it makes but I think my IO540 could be just a tad noisier when 200' above your house on full power climb out.
Mad Jock - sounds like a plan, but until such time as you can realise it an wee objection would be much appreciate
Mad Jock - sounds like a plan, but until such time as you can realise it an wee objection would be much appreciate
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Scotland
Age: 84
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
140kias I have been close to wind turbines & I can assure you that as the noise is continuous it is like some medieval torture. Your IO540 would only take a few seconds before it was out of earshot. Flying over the "farm" at Great Orton in a gyroplane with an iffy engine was also unfunny!
Given the choice I'll go for the IO540 at 200ft.
Given the choice I'll go for the IO540 at 200ft.