Pre-paid landing fees for right-hand circuits, perhaps? Extra charge for lefties? ;)

It sounds rather like the Faulty Towers of airports.

I'll be giving this one a miss too.

Naughty
 

Steve

If you are following this thread:

Displaying NO LAC visual from overhead your airfield paints you in very poor light. LAC flying school at Barton has zero affiliation to LAC. Lancs aero club and you would gain greater respect in taking the time in your quotes to qualify which LAC you are referring to.

Students that don't even know the situation who may use your airfield as a land-mark could associate it with the flying school they are learning from which in my view a tad unfair.

No sides being taken here just pointing this out to you.

Brgds

Kestrel

It seems to me that there's something incredibly creepy about Ashcroft.
The colorful diagrams on the website says it all.

Best to stay clear of it.

Ashcroft and LAC, the club, or rather some members.
 

FLYER Forums ? View topic - Troubled times oop north might elucidate. Happy reading! :uhoh:

Ashcroft airfield
 

Look at his website now. Crazy.

There is an interesting postscript to this story, You will see from the website that Billington is very concerned about "high energy approaches" and features a number of pictures of the aircraft - a German registered Piaggio FW P.149D D-EARY. This was based at Barton and was flown into Ashcroft by the people with who he was having a legal dispute.

Last year - 2017 - the aircraft was sold and is now based over in Yorkshire and is very unlikely to be carrying out "high energy approaches" at Ashcroft ever again.

Even a glance at the website shows someone with a very loud bee in the bonnet..........

The result of the legal action will be interesting to say the least.

I've just spent 5 minutes there, and have NO idea what it's all about.

For good or for bad, I'm not going to spend any more time on it.

If someone is trying to achieve something, it's not working.

Many apologies for having resurrected this old thread about the strange chap and even stranger website.

I've just picked up on the latest twist to this very sorry tale in that the "NOLAC" website has been taken down today. If you were one
of the many people mentioned on it you might feel some satisfaction.

Still viewable on the Wayback Machine:

https://web.archive.org/web/20220808...roftair.co.uk/

Website now back again. Not publishing as much as previously but looks like Cheshire Flyers are now banned as well as Lancashire Aero Club
https://www.ashcroftair.co.uk/

I've flown in to Ashcroft numerous times over the past couple of years and found Steve to be a really love​​​ly, helpful guy. The only problem I ever had there was on final approach. l was shocked to see another light aircraft trainsiting directly across my approach path, slightly below Ashcroft circuit height. It certainly wasn't showing up on PAW. I mentioned it to Steve who suggested I completed and Airprox Report online. I did.

​​​​​​​What was the outcome?

Thanks for asking. I'm waiting to hear. They haven't yet responded. I will be chasing it up.

Read this which will throw a lot of light on the situation.
The LAC appears to be the villains.
http://www.lendf.co.uk/Concerns%20ab...20-%202011.pdf

Thanks, Mike, good journalism research. I cannot help feeling that the author of the mentioned pdfs has other concerns than those described. Sure enough aerodromes must satisfy certain safety rules, but I should expect the CAA to take care of those?? It is like that in Belgium, and those people are scrupulous enough. Then again, given the quantity of aerodromes in UK, including the very numerous farm strips, the UK CAA might lack the human resources to examine every field for every change in operating rules, let alone for periodical checks?

Hi Jan,
The UK CAA are only interested in aerodromes that are licenced by them. There used to be many more licenced aerodromes in the UK when it was a requirement for flying training for an ICAO-compliant licence to be conducted at such. When that regulation was removed about 10 years ago, a lot of smaller aerodromes in the UK chose to hand in their licences. Incidentally, there has never been a requirement for an aerodrome to be licenced for the conduct of training for a sub-ICAO licence, such as for flying microlights. Civil Aviation Publication 793 gives advice on some dimensions of aerodromes to be used for flying training and it is now the responsibility of the instructor to ensure the suitability of an aerodrome, rather than the regulator. Of course, apart for flying training, it is the responsibility of the pilot to ensure the suitability of a site to be used for the alighting or departure of the aircraft they are flying.

TOO

Mike Flynn

You do realise the document dates from 2011? It was ignored by the CAA thus leading to various unfortunate statements made by the author about their officers which were then published on the weird website. The airstrip has been in use now for over a decade and is about to open a second runway - no trains have been menaced during this time.

Yes I am aware of the date of that.However it’s about the most coherent synopsis of the situation I can find.Why on earth the LAC chose to set up shop there beats me. There must be plenty of other places they could have chosen. My understanding is they have no hangarage or permanent buildings so is it worth the hassle?

I’m intrigued to know how they have planning permission for change of use?