Sywell Closed Down
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
From: don't know, I'll ask
Sywell Closed Down
No not by the NIMBYS but by the management!
Sywell was closed by the oprators the other day because the noise of aircraft was disturbing the presentations being made in a hangar they let out for corporate events. They even apparently turned away two QXC's in bound because the £10 they pay in landing fees was not worth up setting the company who had hired the Hangar as a conference centre (A new venture and clearly not sound proof!). I think that goes to show the priority of the management at Sywell! What the hell are they going to do with a hard runway if they don't like aircraft noise.
Sywell was closed by the oprators the other day because the noise of aircraft was disturbing the presentations being made in a hangar they let out for corporate events. They even apparently turned away two QXC's in bound because the £10 they pay in landing fees was not worth up setting the company who had hired the Hangar as a conference centre (A new venture and clearly not sound proof!). I think that goes to show the priority of the management at Sywell! What the hell are they going to do with a hard runway if they don't like aircraft noise.
Why do it if it's not fun?
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,782
Likes: 12
From: Bournemouth
Who the hell hires a conference centre at an airport and doesn't expect a bit of aircraft noise??? 
Sounds just like NIMBYs to me. Ok, so the NIMBYs are customers of the airport management, but they're still NIMBYs.
FFF
---------------
No not by the NIMBYS but by the management
FFF
---------------
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
From: Norfolk
I guess money talks and loud enough to drown out aircraft. This is a difficult debate. Of course we all want access to our airfields whenever we like but for the owner / operator there has to be a financial rationale. If using the airfield part time for non aviation activity keeps it open the rest of the time for our enjoyment then that is a good thing isn't it?. Bloody inconvenient if you happen to be on a XC and someone decides they can pay more for use of the field for half an hour. What next? Variable charging - he who pays the most can land offer up your price on the RT?
Why do it if it's not fun?
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,782
Likes: 12
From: Bournemouth
Just a thought...
We currently have 27 aircraft lined up for the Sywell fly-in in a couple of weeks' time. I wonder whether there would be anything to gain from changing the location? Sywell management have (I believe) already been told that we're flying in there - we would tell them that we will no longer be flying in, and make it clear why. Maybe they'd then compare 27 landing fees with the amount they got from renting their hangar out?
Ok, maybe not. It was just a thought...
FFF
------------
We currently have 27 aircraft lined up for the Sywell fly-in in a couple of weeks' time. I wonder whether there would be anything to gain from changing the location? Sywell management have (I believe) already been told that we're flying in there - we would tell them that we will no longer be flying in, and make it clear why. Maybe they'd then compare 27 landing fees with the amount they got from renting their hangar out?
Ok, maybe not. It was just a thought...
FFF
------------
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
From: Expat Kiwi living in London
ff is right - airfields need to make money to stay afloat unless they have generous financial backers who don't mind losing money....(if anyone knows of such people, please send them my way...
)
I would have suspected that the QXC would have found out about the non-availability of Sywell when they PPR-ed rather than mid-air...? In which case probably no real hardship.
If you want an "excellent" example of "other events" interfering with aviation, come to North Weald, where, amongst other things:
(i) the regular Saturday/bank holiday market prevents the cross wind runway being available, regardless of the wind direction;
(ii) regular drag racing closes the main runway about 4 times a year, always at the weekend and always in the summer time.
(iii) this year saw events on I think 3 consecutive weekends that closed the main runway one day each weekend in the height of summer, just after the rainy season had passed - drag racing, model flying plus something else.
The price we have to pay for the facility I suppose.
)I would have suspected that the QXC would have found out about the non-availability of Sywell when they PPR-ed rather than mid-air...? In which case probably no real hardship.
If you want an "excellent" example of "other events" interfering with aviation, come to North Weald, where, amongst other things:
(i) the regular Saturday/bank holiday market prevents the cross wind runway being available, regardless of the wind direction;
(ii) regular drag racing closes the main runway about 4 times a year, always at the weekend and always in the summer time.
(iii) this year saw events on I think 3 consecutive weekends that closed the main runway one day each weekend in the height of summer, just after the rainy season had passed - drag racing, model flying plus something else.
The price we have to pay for the facility I suppose.
Why do it if it's not fun?
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,782
Likes: 12
From: Bournemouth
ff/SC
I disagree. Sywell is, primarilly, an airfield. It's primary customers are pilots. It has a duty to provide a service, which its customers pay for - that service is the provision of a useable airfield during its published operating hours.
McDonalds are primarilly a fast-food outlet. They also run childrens' birthday parties, but they ensure that their fast-food customers are still able to buy food when parties are taking place. Tescos are primarilly a supermarket. They also sell clothes and electrical goods, but that doesn't prevent their customers from doing their weekly grocery shopping while clothes are on sale in a different part of their stores.
If Sywell aren't able to operate a conference centre without jeapordising the operation of the airfield, then they shouldn't, IMHO, operate a conference centre at all. Or, alternatively, they should re-market themselves as a conference centre which happens to have a runway on-site.
I'm not sure that comparisons with North Weald are valid, because - correct me if I'm wrong - I don't believe NW charge a landing fee. Therefore, the pilots who fly into NW are "users" of the airfield, but not "customers". (I have, from time to time, been known to offer IT training or consultancy to family and friends free of charge. My level of professional responsibility to family and friends is far lower than the level of responsibility I have towards my employer, or anyone else who pays for my services.)
FFF
--------------
I disagree. Sywell is, primarilly, an airfield. It's primary customers are pilots. It has a duty to provide a service, which its customers pay for - that service is the provision of a useable airfield during its published operating hours.
McDonalds are primarilly a fast-food outlet. They also run childrens' birthday parties, but they ensure that their fast-food customers are still able to buy food when parties are taking place. Tescos are primarilly a supermarket. They also sell clothes and electrical goods, but that doesn't prevent their customers from doing their weekly grocery shopping while clothes are on sale in a different part of their stores.
If Sywell aren't able to operate a conference centre without jeapordising the operation of the airfield, then they shouldn't, IMHO, operate a conference centre at all. Or, alternatively, they should re-market themselves as a conference centre which happens to have a runway on-site.
I'm not sure that comparisons with North Weald are valid, because - correct me if I'm wrong - I don't believe NW charge a landing fee. Therefore, the pilots who fly into NW are "users" of the airfield, but not "customers". (I have, from time to time, been known to offer IT training or consultancy to family and friends free of charge. My level of professional responsibility to family and friends is far lower than the level of responsibility I have towards my employer, or anyone else who pays for my services.)
FFF
--------------
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
From: don't know, I'll ask
SC agree that QXC's needed to PPR, but this closure was half way through the day on the MD's whim after getting a complaint from the conference delgates! Also, bit of a pisser if you are running an aviation business on an airfiled and the MD just decides to shut it without notice or compensation, thus putting your business at risk!
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
From: Spanish Riviera
Just a thought, does the Airfield Manager have the authority to close an airfield without proper notification/due cause? If the airfield is promulgated as open, he may well find himself on a sticky wicket.
See attached link, ANO Art 103 refers.
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP393__Jul02.pdf
See attached link, ANO Art 103 refers.
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP393__Jul02.pdf
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 306
Likes: 0
From: UK Work: London. Home: East Anglia
Sywell closure
Aviation businesses on the airfield were, to put it mildly, unhappy. I spoke to several of them on Thursday morning while I was standing around for 90 minutes after normal opening time awaiting permission to start my engine. The businesses concerned had a lot of paying customers standing around wanting to know why they couldn't fly, as the notice of temporary closure had come too late for businesses to warn customers through the normal channels of communication.
I am happy to stand corrected but I do not believe the closure was NOTAMed - certainly nothing showed up when I did my NOTAM search the night before (leaving home at 7 am to get the the airfield for an early start).
I am happy to stand corrected but I do not believe the closure was NOTAMed - certainly nothing showed up when I did my NOTAM search the night before (leaving home at 7 am to get the the airfield for an early start).
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
From: UK
Aerodrome Licence
WBS,
It depends on the Aerodrome Licence. If it is a Public Use licence then the aerodrome has to be available during its published opening hours (although there are exceptions.) If it has an Ordinary Licence, and I suspect Sywell has, then the licensee can more or less do as they like as the airfield is only licenced for use by the licencee 'and by persons specifically authorised by him.'
See Chapter one of CAP168, also available on the CAA web site.
If anyone is so inclined it might be worth a call to Aerodrome Standards at Gatwick.
It depends on the Aerodrome Licence. If it is a Public Use licence then the aerodrome has to be available during its published opening hours (although there are exceptions.) If it has an Ordinary Licence, and I suspect Sywell has, then the licensee can more or less do as they like as the airfield is only licenced for use by the licencee 'and by persons specifically authorised by him.'
See Chapter one of CAP168, also available on the CAA web site.
If anyone is so inclined it might be worth a call to Aerodrome Standards at Gatwick.
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
From: Spanish Riviera
Just to save people going to the CAA website, I have copied the relevant bit below.
TYPE OF LICENCE
3.1 An applicant may be granted a Public Use aerodrome licence or an Ordinary
aerodrome licence. In the case of the former the hours of availability of the
aerodrome must be notified in the United Kingdom Aeronautical Information
Publication (UK AIP) and the aerodrome must be available to all persons on equal
terms and conditions. An Ordinary licence relates only to use of the aerodrome
by the holder of the licence and persons specifically authorised by him. The
holder of an Ordinary licence is not obliged to notify the hours of availability in
the UK AIP but, if he does so, the aerodrome must remain open throughout the
notified hours irrespective of traffic requirements.If the hours are not notified
the availability of the aerodrome and its facilities can be shown in the UK AIP as
‘by arrangement’, but if this is the case then the protection of an Aerodrome
Traffic Zone (ATZ) may not be provided.
I believe that Sywell notifies its operating hours in the AIP (I will check later). If so, it has contravened the ANO and CAP 168.
TYPE OF LICENCE
3.1 An applicant may be granted a Public Use aerodrome licence or an Ordinary
aerodrome licence. In the case of the former the hours of availability of the
aerodrome must be notified in the United Kingdom Aeronautical Information
Publication (UK AIP) and the aerodrome must be available to all persons on equal
terms and conditions. An Ordinary licence relates only to use of the aerodrome
by the holder of the licence and persons specifically authorised by him. The
holder of an Ordinary licence is not obliged to notify the hours of availability in
the UK AIP but, if he does so, the aerodrome must remain open throughout the
notified hours irrespective of traffic requirements.If the hours are not notified
the availability of the aerodrome and its facilities can be shown in the UK AIP as
‘by arrangement’, but if this is the case then the protection of an Aerodrome
Traffic Zone (ATZ) may not be provided.
I believe that Sywell notifies its operating hours in the AIP (I will check later). If so, it has contravened the ANO and CAP 168.
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 357
Likes: 0
From: North Weald, UK
A conference in a hangar??
That sounds like having a phone call in a dustbin.
All the hangars I've ever been in have been cold, draughty and full of echoes. I would have thought that almost anywhere else would have been preferable to a hangar for holding a meeting.
If they are going to he hosting conferences, then a custom-built conferance centre with all the bells & whistles including soundproofing is the way to go.
That sounds like having a phone call in a dustbin.
All the hangars I've ever been in have been cold, draughty and full of echoes. I would have thought that almost anywhere else would have been preferable to a hangar for holding a meeting.
If they are going to he hosting conferences, then a custom-built conferance centre with all the bells & whistles including soundproofing is the way to go.
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
From: UK
Aerodrome Licence
That's the bit, WBS, even more stringent than I remembered. Memory's not what it was.
The hangar involved is the one next to the hotel, I believe they are looking to do more entertaining in it. Obviously, as some have said, it is no doubt a valuable source of income for the airfield, but at what 'cost'?
The hangar involved is the one next to the hotel, I believe they are looking to do more entertaining in it. Obviously, as some have said, it is no doubt a valuable source of income for the airfield, but at what 'cost'?
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
From: Chichester, UK
All the hangars I've ever been in have been cold, draughty and full of echoes. I would have thought that almost anywhere else would have been preferable to a hangar for holding a meeting.
Official PPRuNe Chaplain
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,498
Likes: 0
From: Witnesham, Suffolk
I checked the online UKAIP (YES, it was working!), and that shows Sywell as open
Summer (is this summer?)
- Mon - Fri 0800-1800 or SS
- Sat/Sun 0800-1700 or SS
- and by arrangement
Winter
0900-1700 or SS and by arrangement.
So it sounds as if it was closed while promulgated as open.
I bet nobody does anything about it.
See folks there on 5th Oct?
Summer (is this summer?)
- Mon - Fri 0800-1800 or SS
- Sat/Sun 0800-1700 or SS
- and by arrangement
Winter
0900-1700 or SS and by arrangement.
So it sounds as if it was closed while promulgated as open.
I bet nobody does anything about it.
See folks there on 5th Oct?
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
From: Norfolk
Whilst my earlier post in this thread made the point that money talks and those who have invested in the facility have the right to do what they wish (subject the ANO) we also have the right to take our custome elsewhere. This is how markets operate. So if we don't like it shouldnt we vote with our feet (wings) and seek to make our dislike obvious?
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,681
Likes: 10
From: Just South of the last ice sheet
formationfoto could be time to start a poll on the subject. Would suggest that it is split between the bods actually going and the rest of the punters though.
PS If you do change the venue, any chance of changing the date to the 12th October...........
PS If you do change the venue, any chance of changing the date to the 12th October...........
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
From: Horsham UK
I've been giving this a little thought (I don't do big thoughts) and a couple of points occur to me. Yep it probably did contravine the ANO to close. I can't help imagining the scenario.
Amalgamated widgets decide to book their conference at Sywell (perhaps because it's cheaper...budget control in these straightened times etc etc) The thought dosen't occur to MR D Rector that since the venue is at an airport there might be some...gasp...aircraft noise. Anyhow, the day dawns and the conference gets underway and...shock horror... there is aircraft noise interupting detailed discussions of widget sales trends and the new kevlar-cardbon widget under development. Mr D Rector can't believe and storms off to see the airport management stomps his feet and pounds the desk with his fist and wins the day.
Re the fly in there is little chance that Consolidated Widgets (a rival) will be holding their conference on a Saturday so the scenario is unlikley to repeat...of course unless the apple of Mr D Rector's eye, his daughter Petunia is getting married that day and he got the hangar for the reception as part of a package deal...
Nah I think it was just an error of judgement by the airport who are entering a new area of business and are still climbing the learning curve so it might be as well to cut them a little slack.
'course if they do it again.....
I'ver just read on another thread that it was closed for 2 1/2 days I'd thought we were talking a few hours. Hmmmmm think I've just reeled in a bit of that slack.
Amalgamated widgets decide to book their conference at Sywell (perhaps because it's cheaper...budget control in these straightened times etc etc) The thought dosen't occur to MR D Rector that since the venue is at an airport there might be some...gasp...aircraft noise. Anyhow, the day dawns and the conference gets underway and...shock horror... there is aircraft noise interupting detailed discussions of widget sales trends and the new kevlar-cardbon widget under development. Mr D Rector can't believe and storms off to see the airport management stomps his feet and pounds the desk with his fist and wins the day.
Re the fly in there is little chance that Consolidated Widgets (a rival) will be holding their conference on a Saturday so the scenario is unlikley to repeat...of course unless the apple of Mr D Rector's eye, his daughter Petunia is getting married that day and he got the hangar for the reception as part of a package deal...
Nah I think it was just an error of judgement by the airport who are entering a new area of business and are still climbing the learning curve so it might be as well to cut them a little slack.
'course if they do it again.....
I'ver just read on another thread that it was closed for 2 1/2 days I'd thought we were talking a few hours. Hmmmmm think I've just reeled in a bit of that slack.