Latest map of stables & paddocks.

@burroughs

I'm always open to learning new things so would like to know exactly which airborne predators attack horses. If they can bring down an animal three to four times my size I may need to reassess my own personal security.

Hello burroughs,

No idea why anyone puts the cork back in a sherry bottle, it mucks up the recycling.

Ref the horses - just different experiences I suppose. They don't seem to be bothered by aircraft in my experience - both here and now I recall in NZ where there was a stable alongside the airfield I used. But I wish to make no arguement with you, my post was only to say what I did - the horse thing did not help the case.

As for lead - I made my comment earlier.

I'm not local, so probably shouldn't be chipping in.

Full disclosure - I fly a light aircraft, and I might benefit from the airfield if it were to be created - I have a relative who lives nearby.

I'm no expert in equine husbandry either, but I've seen enough horses down these narrow country lanes to know that they don't like loud noises, things that are out of their sight line and lead pumping airbourne surprises!

As for no airbourne predators. You might want to put the cork back in the sherry bottle.

oh - I know some are concerned about the lead issue. The majority of light aircraft these days either use the same unleaded petrol you use for your car, or an unleaded aviation petrol. Not all, but many. Also need to to consider the flight phase - not much fuel used to land - but take off does for a short period. That report sighted on lead near airports is interesting reading - anyone read it all yet ?

I'm no expert in equine husbandry, but a friend established an airstrip on his land under the 28 day rule for his own aircraft's use - and some objectors (there were a few, not everyone was in favour of "Heathrow Mk 2") tried to use the "it'll scare the horses" line. That failed because horses have no natural airbourne preditors - and so were just not bothered by the occasional aircraft movement. Ended up as a mute point because it was another non truth. I'm a bit confused by the heights given in this drawing too..... I don't think whom ever drew it has even flown into a 750M strip... they seem unrealistically low to me - no need to be that low - apart from the final part when on approach to the runway of course ! Where for most aircraft that can use this short length of runway will be at engine idle or darn near it in that flight phase. As for the take off part - when of course it will be at full throttle, but there are always applicable noise abatement routes to avoid homes and businesses which are noise sensitive - it's just part and parcel with Light and Commercial aviation these days - what ever the size - and everyone sticks to them because it makes sense to.

I'd also like to echo others in that a grass strip airfield is an absolute haven for all sorts of wildlife - flora and forna - even avian - who get along fine with their man made mimics.

I can understand the feelings of those local, of course. But it is still best for everyone to use real and not supposed facts though.

A couple more paddocks added near Burgess Green and Hacklinge.