Busy Maypole

@andy Oh, for a moment there, I thought you might treat us all to a pithy haiku. How disappointing.

@burroughs

Plane flies super low

In the dim light set between

Earth and falling night

@andy How disappointing.

@Tony Wells You seem to think that Heathrow is being built next door. It isn't. What is proposed is a very small light aircraft airfield.

It won't be in use day in, day out either, unlike a large commercial airfield.

The weather plays a great part in light aviation and many days aren't flyable at all, especially in the winter in the UK.

Unlike roads, which are in use all the time.

@Andy I'm so enjoying this conversation but I must be getting on, so this will be my last post of the day.

Firstly, I agree, I exaggerated the statement about "day in day out, every day of the year" (I must stop doing that).

But a couple of points.....

Given the few light aircraft we get in a typical day at the moment opening this airfield will be like having Heathrow next door to us.

The days that they will be able to fly will be the days when we want to be outside, so the noise from these planes will be more of a nuisance.

@andy you are correct Andy, weather does play a part.

Unfortunately when the weather is good, that's when the residents want want to be outside enjoying the peace of the countryside. This will coincide with pilots ruining that enjoyment whilst they play with their noisy poluting toys. And of course the number of flights predicted will be concentrated into those fine days. These planes serve no purpose other than for the enjoyment of 20 plane owners hobbies. Not carrying goods or transporting many people from a to b. Just pilots out on a jolly.

Ref the quieter aircraft that you mention, how many of these are there in the 20 planes that are planned for Mongeham?

It certainly won't be all of them, aswe understand that many of the planes from Maypole (you will be familiar with it from your visits there) will be coming to Mongeham. There are some nice photos in the papers of them with their angry owners. Some were vintage planes, much noisier than the plane that you quote. I didn't see any photos of that plane.

I can understand their anger, being given a month's notice to vacate the way of life that they had experienced for up to 20 years.

So hopefully you will understand the anger of many more residents who can see their way of life being disrupted by this proposal.

All wholly avoidable, if the CAA recommendation to engage with the community had been followed. But no,....no engagement, trying to avoid full environmental scrutiny, and starts work without planning permission.

No respect, no consideration all so 20 pilots can have a jolly, and the landowner can turn a profit. As you are not a resident here, you won't be affected, so probably don't care.

Considering the above......how else would you expect the local community to react?

@Jelly tots Perception cannot be totally "correct" for everyone as such, it belongs to the individual. In that sense, perception is always correct.... for the individual.

Your question isn't about perception, it's about opinion.

Some people base opinions on verifiable facts of the time, and as knowledge increases, their position may change. A Scientific approach, if you will.

Contrast this with opinions based on hearsay, or emotion, or irrational or uninformed data. People with opinions formed this way tend to be fixed and no amount of factual data will sway them. Religious fanaticism falls into this category.

Which camp do you think I fall into?

@andy we would only be guessing........so are you in favour of or against the new airstrip?

@Paul Osborne guess away.