FLYER Forums

I seem to remember that even at 19/6 in the pound, The Beatles still rolled around in Phantom Vs and Espadas.

[Thread drift]
Perhaps because back then company cars and similar perks weren’t taxed?

I remember another wheeze in which someone got their company to pay them in legal tender gold sovereigns so they could declare the face value for tax whilst getting the benefit of the true gold value. I’m not sure if they actually got away with it or not though!
[\Thread drift]

The point I'm trying to make is it is not beyond the realms of possibility to form a group and start buying airfields as they come on the market.

These have been discussed before, but there are two issues:

1. The money representative organisations hold is about 4-5 figures (low end). One airfield alone costs 6-7 figures depending on location. So a completely different order of magnitude.
2. Buying it from someone else just transfers ownership/power and interests from one person or group to another. If they get bored, have other grand interests, or want to sell it on, they can do that, or run it into the ground or ban movements for any reason or no reason at all.

The key to resolve all this is to pass sufficient legislation such that aerodromes of all sizes that are open to the public have a duty to reliably remain accessible to all users and FBOs within reason.

Without protection laws, GA will just be hung off the strings of a few dozen landowners or investment companies who can shut it all down depending which side of the bed they wake up....

Not will, James - is.

When was the last purpose built airport/field with a hard runway constructed?

Sheffield City Airport in the late 80s..... which, surprise surprise, has now closed and been built on.

Airfield retention policy in this country is laughable and most existing airfields are from the last war or before.. Nobody in UK Government is really interested in us hobby flyers..

JodelDavo wrote:Airfield retention policy in this country is laughable and most existing airfields are from the last war or before.. Nobody in UK Government is really interested in us hobby flyers..

Probably 100% true.

Surely they are interested in the business GA (which is one reason they built Sheffield City, remember that originally they banned single engine aircraft from using the airport). If the APPG report is anything to go by, UK plc needs a network of airfields for all the business people visiting the UK after Brexit ( ). So what we really need are some grass fields and access for hobby flyers to regional airports?

flybymike wrote:

What did Wellsbourne sell for in the end?

Has Wellesbourne actually been sold or compulsorily purchased? Is the saga still ongoing, tenants displaced etc?

Legal process still ongoing.....meanwhile flying continues..

EG

Decent bit of coverage on BBC South tonight regarding the closure and an interview with a representative from GoSkyDive who seemed to be totally in the dark about their future too, even though they had a very popular business at OS.

I have in front of me a leaflet dated 1994 and is titled “General Aviation in the United Kingdom is facing a growing crisis”.

Below a photo of what was Burnaston aerodrome in Derby, It’s opening line says “If we do nothing, more and more aerodromes will follow this pattern”.

25 years on and its the same story, just far fewer airfields to worry about.

The leaflet is produced by the General Aviation Awareness Council of 50a Cambridge Street, London.

General aviation in this country is dying.

GAAC are still in there pitching https://www.gaac.org.uk

The future will be mainly microlight aircraft and farm/ private strips. Can’t see anything else in leisure aviation surviving beyond 10 years.

Nobody ... is really interested in us hobby flyers

I suspect just calling or using it as a hobby is going to put the cause at the bottom of anyone's list. But flying is also a mode of transport for so many personal and business reasons - I can't get to islands and cross the sea quickly and conveniently enough without it.

Similarly, road infrastructure is built for transport, business and connectivity. Not just for "hobby car drivers" - which wouldn't be a sufficient reason alone to build a road or a car park.

For this to stop a few key matters need to be sorted:

1. Airfields need stop being brownfield on which housing/industrial estate development is shockingly easy.
2. Users need to pay their way - that will be more than a fiver in the honesty box then and means either paying considerably more or change the political climate which sees airport infrastructure as a national asset just as ports/roads/railroads are
3. GA needs to convert to a more environmentally positive contribution

Anything else is not going to bring a sustainable model.

There is no longer a sustainable leisure flying model. The value of land has broken it for good. No private airfield in the UK can consider itself more than a generation away from closure. Farmers are selling up for development land. Who can blame them.

I suspect just calling or using it as a hobby is going to put the cause at the bottom of anyone's list

There are one or two individuals here who do like to use the phrase "hobby" pilots, stamp collecting , & pressing wild flowers is a "hobby" but even given the "amatuer" status of many who fly, we all share the same sky albeit CAT, or "G" and have the same set of rules to abide by that applies to CPL's/ATPL's.

There is no doubt that the persona of people who fly "little planes" is perceived to be of the idle rich who are just "Hobby" pilots and while that exists there is little hope of any Government bothering with these little grass strips/ex war airfields that might just as well house the masses and get votes.

I mostly agree with FD's reasoning but the main driver here is the absurd land values "expected" for house building. The fix is entirely in the lap of the government and requires a total overhaul of planning so that housing is built to satisfy the current requirement - which will then drive prices down (not too fast, one hopes). The high cost of homes and business premises makes everything else cost more than it should.........
They can also define the airfield land as "infrastructure" and make it clear that no change will happen without a very good reason - much as currently happens with agricultural land; which benefits from strict "zoning" and "agricultural ties" for buildings on that land. There is a vast difference in price of land for agriculture and house building.
Nobody expects motorways to be closed and houses built on the land - so why the expectation of an airfield?