Old Sarum EGLS

[wrecker]

Old Sarum closed on the 31 October.
Interesting that the NOTAM shows it unavailable from today until late in January 2020.
The ATZ is not suspended or removed.
Does this hold a hope that this 100+ year old Aerodrome will re-open?

[Genghis the Engineer]

NOTAMs are only able to be issued for three months. Don't get your hopes up.

G

[pulse1]

I understand that the parachute operation are taking bookings for next year so there appears to be some hope.
It is particularly sad for me as I learned to fly there when it was RAF Old Sarum in the late 60's. I also served as a civilian instructor with 622 Gliding School.

This video stirs many happy memories. I never thought that is would stop flying before I did.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTco...FN986kYr3F_es0

[Genghis the Engineer]

I passed my first PPL at Old Sarum just before Christmas 1993, whilst working at Boscombe Down. It certainly was, a really great place to commit aviation.

G

[longer ron]

I was a member of the Dorset Gliding Club there for 4 years - a lovely airfield to fly from,very sad it has closed !

[chevvron]

Originally Posted by Genghis the Engineer

I passed my first PPL at Old Sarum just before Christmas 1993, whilst working at Boscombe Down. It certainly was, a really great place to commit aviation.

G

Was that with David Scouller as CFI? He was COEF Farnborough at one time.

[Slaine]

Such a shame, always enjoyed my visits and the few hours training with Raymond proost when I bought my first aircraft (a Shadow )
Hard to discuss this without getting political, but I think this whole housing shortage thing is being hugely overstated and its more to do with job creation and keeping the tax income flowing

[POBJOY]

Old Sarum

First visited (by Turbulent) in the earlŷ 70's when it was still RAF and home to an ATC Gliding School. Seem to recall passing close to the old rifle range on approach so as not to encroach on the gliding runs.
At the time it also housed a Beagle Pup of the Kestrel flying group. Later when the Tiger Club was looking for a new home I did suggest this would make an excellent base, but they wanted to stay in the s east so a lost opportunity.
Always a pleasant place to visit with its friendly cafe and country club atmosphere and yet another warning that part of being in the GA community should be ensuring such places stay in GA and not go to developers. Another historic location needlessly ruined. Would also have made a great HQ for the PFA (as was).

[Genghis the Engineer]

Originally Posted by chevvron

Was that with David Scouller as CFI? He was COEF Farnborough at one time.

David was indeed CFI at the time, and I knew him (and still know him, I did an instructor revalidation seminar with him in High Wycombe 4ish years ago), but I've never actually flown with him.

My PPL examiner was Fiona Luckhurst, also a very able pilot it's still my privilege to know.

Originally Posted by Slaine

Such a shame, always enjoyed my visits and the few hours training with Raymond proost when I bought my first aircraft (a Shadow )
Hard to discuss this without getting political, but I think this whole housing shortage thing is being hugely overstated and its more to do with job creation and keeping the tax income flowing

I don't think that the housing shortage is overstated, just the need to build on airfields.

G

[excrab]

Sadly, in this case the reality is not that the airfield has shut, and jobs and the facilities lost, because a plan to build houses on it has been approved, but because following local protests it has been rejected. The landowner claimed, probably correctly, that he had lost huge amounts of money over the years and couldn’t afford to keep doing so. As can be seen from the outline planning application below, keeping the airfield active and developing its facilities was an integral part of the plan, and due to it's being turned by the Wiltshire County Council the land owners stopped flying on the site.
If you ask Google for details of “Old Sarum planning application” you’ll find the brief précis I’ve posted below, plus all the detail. It’s obviously devastating for everyone who worked there, and a massive loss to the GA community.

“Outline application with all matters reserved, except from the means of access to the site for the demolition, modification and renovation of existing buildings, structures and site development. Provision of approximately 18.6ha (gross) of residential land accommodating approximately 462 residential dwellings. Provision for a mixture of employment, commercial/leisure, and aviation uses on 3.1ha of land at Area B, including a "flying hub" comprising a control tower, heritage centre, visitor centre, café/restaurant, parachute centre, aviation archives and aircraft hangars. Provision of associated access, including the construction of new points of vehicles access to the surrounding highways network, car parking and connections to the surrounding footpath and cycle networks. Green infrastructure provision, including open space, play space, recreational footpaths, cycle paths and landscape enhancement areas; the provision of above and below ground utilities, including a sustainable urban drainage system. Associated vegetation removal, ground modification and engineering works”

[Dave Gittins]

As a life long cynic I have to ask how well that plan would have worked. It'd soon develop into 462 householders vs. aviation.

"These noisy aeroplanes stop me sitting in my garden on a sunny Sunday and don't let me lie in until 10.00 on a Saturday so they have to be stopped".

[BehindBlueEyes]

Originally Posted by Dave Gittins

As a life long cynic I have to ask how well that plan would have worked. It'd soon develop into 462 householders vs. aviation.

"These noisy aeroplanes stop me sitting in my garden on a sunny Sunday and don't let me lie in until 10.00 on a Saturday so they have to be stopped".

Exactly. I think you’ll find that the opponents to the housing were anti development, not anti flying. They could see that this was a cynical ploy to use the deliberate policy of winding down of operations as an excuse to slap in a planning application. There was supposed to have been a gentleman’s agreement between the old Salisbury District Council in the early 2000s that some building would be approved ( that’s how long they’ve been trying to develop it) This was never confirmed in writing, so not worth the paper it wasn’t written on.

[Jan Olieslagers]

If one sees the volume of (farm) strips remaining fairly constant, and quite above the European average, I would not state that "private flying in the UK is on its death bed". What does seem to be in steep decline, though, is "common sense in the UK" - without generalisation, Mr. @Patowalker

[Dave Gittins]

There isn't an airfield I've been based at that hasn't had problems, my first lessons were at Ringway, then I flew at Chester, then Barton, then Luton, Fairoaks, Lee-on Solent and now Redhill.

I don't think private flying is on it's deathbed at all, it just has ebbs and flows and lots of issues and it's expensive. If the government could be persuaded to give up the paltry amount of overall tax it takes from 100 LL we could all be flying a lot more and the whole industry saved. Grant Shapps .. how about it ?

[jez d]

Originally Posted by Dave Gittins

There isn't an airfield I've been based at that hasn't had problems, my first lessons were at Ringway, then I flew at Chester, then Barton, then Luton, Fairoaks, Lee-on Solent and now Redhill.

I don't think private flying is on it's deathbed at all, it just has ebbs and flows and lots of issues and it's expensive. If the government could be persuaded to give up the paltry amount of overall tax it takes from 100 LL we could all be flying a lot more and the whole industry saved. Grant Shapps .. how about it ?

Funny you should mention that as that is precisely what the Transport Secretary is looking to do. Tax revenue from AVGAS is roughly £10m per year. There is no way Treasury is going to zero-rate it and it is not in the Transport Secretary's gift to change that. What he is asking, however, is exactly what you have suggested - to have that £10m tax revenue re-invested into GA. The GA Unit at the DfT (as opposed to the CAA's GA Unit), used to have one fulltime person and one part time. Following Grant's appointment the department now numbers more than 25 people. If he's still in place following the G.E. then expect to see further developments for GA. Whatever your politics are, Grant is certainly the first TS I've come across who a) recognises the issues that GA faces in the UK (including a shrinking airfield infrastructure), and b) is prepared to do something about it.

[patowalker]

Originally Posted by Jan Olieslagers

If one sees the volume of (farm) strips remaining fairly constant, and quite above the European average, I would not state that "private flying in the UK is on its death bed". What does seem to be in steep decline, though, is "common sense in the UK" - without generalisation, Mr. @Patowalker

I'm based at an airfield where common sense prevails. We have new hangars, a new pavilion, a new rescue vehicle and an active flying school. Some of the resident pilots seem to be getting more decrepit by the day, but that doesn't stop us from flying across the Channel to enjoy euro hospitality at every opportunity. It is a shame you refuse to visit us, as I'm sure you find most of us do not lack common sense.

[Jan Olieslagers]

@PW: broad smile! But please do not think that I am actively refusing to visit the UK, flying; only it is a low priority, given the plethora of countries at least as exotic as a destination yet more compatible with my preferences: Germany above all, France a close second; and beyond, all of the former socialist countries, Poland and Czechia foremost. Less expensive, at least, for fuel and for landing fees and for food and for lodging. And their aerodromes tend to be more stable, generally.

I feel curious about which your nice homefield may be, but since you didn't name it I'll not insist and ask. Good on you to be so well hosted! I can't help wondering about the cost, though, but that would be an even more indiscrete question.

As for common sense prevailing among aviators: yes of course we are, by our nature, superior to the masses. Perhaps also by the amount of tuition we took, and the exams we successfully passed. In fact I am beginning to wonder if the UK population could be in course of splitting up, with a rather sharp distinction between the clever and the less so. Leading of course to a parallel distinction between the wealthy and the less so, even if "wealthy" is not absolutely defined. But that is quite off-topic here.