Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 11
#1746598
SpeedBrake wrote:It's all a bit of a mess, but personally, I don't mind wearing the stuff. It's the airports rules, we all have to play with them.

Well, it's really our airport. We made it our home. That's why there is resistance. If your partner makes rules inside your home that you don't like because they don't make practical sense do you just accept it, or do you push back? I'm not saying its the same thing, but the feeling is similar.

It won't be long before the H&S nuts make wearing hi-vis mandatory outside of your own home.

If I wanted to wear hi-vis I would have become a fork-lift driver. <- I think that's gonna be my signature.
Flyin'Dutch', Iceman, flybymike and 1 others liked this
#1746677
For many years Staverton was run by an air-minded team, led by a pilot and air-trafficker. It was the number one airport in the UK several times and I'm pretty sure no pedestrian was ever mown down by a prop or a tug. I've been there for 25 years, don't wear hi-vis and haven't come close to being run over on a taxiway or ramp.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
G-BLEW, kanga, Shoestring Flyer and 24 others liked this
#1747078
I met with the new Ops Director late last week at his request. He was aware of the various Staverton threads running. He is an, albeit not current, PPL holder and a former AFISO, so does have experience relevant to general aviation. He brought me up to speed on the runway situation and, reading between the lines, the political machinations that were the bane of my professional life still appear evident, but progress is being made toward financing the repair works .

We agreed to disagree on hi vis, although I very much got the impression it won't be rigourously enforced and is being encouraged as 'best practice'. I told him openly that I thought communications with the Airport's clientele had broken down, but he assured me that the long-term commitment to GA is still very much at the heart of the business.
#1747080
flybymike wrote:I always think that the “clear prop” call will invariably result in someone who didn’t quite hear what you said, ambling up to the aeroplane, cupping his ear to say “pardon?” just in time to walk into the prop on start up.

I always brief new passengers along the lines of "If you hear someone shout and you're not sure what they said, stand still".

Andy
flybymike liked this
#1747081
is being encouraged as 'best practice'.


Probably needs to be encouraged as "bad practice", as making something unnecessary "best practice" is a step away from making it mandatory or rigorous enforcement.

Non-commercial pilots have really sleepwalked themselves into this. Even if they were trying to look a bit more "professional", they've actually ended up looking a bit industrial or silly.

Imagine all customers in the Tesco car park having to or being encouraged to wear hi-vis.
JulietTango, Iceman liked this
#1747089
adhawkins wrote:
flybymike wrote:I always think that the “clear prop” call will invariably result in someone who didn’t quite hear what you said, ambling up to the aeroplane, cupping his ear to say “pardon?” just in time to walk into the prop on start up.

I always brief new passengers along the lines of "If you hear someone shout and you're not sure what they said, stand still".

Andy

Depends where they’re standing I suppose. :wink:
#1747097
Nice to hear he's talking to you and at least aware that his customers aren't happy, but:

matspart3 wrote:...he assured me that the long-term commitment to GA is still very much at the heart of the business.


Well, that sounds like management-speak to me.

I've often found that how committed a business says it is to X, Y and Z tends to inversely correlate with its actions in that area.

Did you discuss PPR and the apparently-essential 'quality briefing'?
#1747107
defcribed wrote:
matspart3 wrote:...he assured me that the long-term commitment to GA is still very much at the heart of the business.


Well, that sounds like management-speak to me.


I also find it worrying that an airfield feels it necessary to provide unsolicited assurances that it intends to continue in business as an airfield, when so far as I’m aware, there has not as yet been any suggestion that it does not.
#1747110
matspart3 wrote:I met with the new Ops Director late last week at his request. He was aware of the various Staverton threads running. He is an, albeit not current, PPL holder and a former AFISO, so does have experience relevant to general aviation. He brought me up to speed on the runway situation and, reading between the lines, the political machinations that were the bane of my professional life still appear evident, but progress is being made toward financing the repair works .

We agreed to disagree on hi vis, although I very much got the impression it won't be rigourously enforced and is being encouraged as 'best practice'. I told him openly that I thought communications with the Airport's clientele had broken down, but he assured me that the long-term commitment to GA is still very much at the heart of the business.


Thanks for the briefing MP3.

A chink of light in that he asked to talk to you. Does he really have the will or vision to accept that his own actions are, largely, the problem? I would like to hope that he has moved his finger off the PTT.

However, I qestion the judgement of a man who promulgates the wearing of hi-vis as offering any genuine safety benefit as opposed to parroting the 'safety' herd nonsense - if you could have a herd of parrots!

The microcosm of the macrocosm.

The 'word on the street' from people who've seen him in action in previous aerodrome roles is consistent with his output at Staverton, sadly.

So, dear Staverton Ops Fuhrer, if you do read these forums - recognise the rapid damage you are doing to the aerodrome's reputation and sort yourself out . Actions speak louder than words.
#1747121
Kemble Pitts wrote:So, dear Staverton Ops Fuhrer, if you do read these forums - recognise the rapid damage you are doing to the aerodrome's reputation and sort yourself out . Actions speak louder than words.


Unfortunately, if my experience of this type of manager is anything to go by, they actually think that they're really, really good at what they do.

They might be aware there is a problem, but the idea that it could be them wouldn't enter their thinking.
Kemble Pitts liked this
#1747176
it's really our airport. We made it our home


:thumright: And I'm glad attitudes are changing.

About 10 years ago if I posted this, I would get some strongly worded answers along the lines of:

"An aerodrome is a business only answerable to its owners/shareholders and perfectly entitled to have only the users it wants, and shut down its core operations or sell it off for other uses if it doesn't pay out "enough" dividends...."

And a lot of GA "accepted" the status-quo and was shunted left right and centre until there was nowhere left to be shunted to. And then gave up flying.

This is why core infrastructure (i.e. designated aerodrome runways and ramps) need to have proper protection/legislation such that they are never closed unreasonably. Any permanent closure needs to go through a process, for e.g. an impact assessment to regional transport.
kanga, JulietTango, rdfb liked this
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 11