Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1775719
No idea on ATC, but for private flights not really required.


The airfield management apparently disagreed which is one of the reasons for the move elsewhere. As for pulling aircraft out of hangars, the opening days for based aircraft also applied to ones parked outside which didn't require it.
Last edited by Human Factor on Mon Jun 08, 2020 8:50 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
By lobstaboy
#1775727
User72 wrote:...open... ...the only days there are people to pull aircraft out of the hangars...


I can't get my head round this. Sorry, please can someone gently explain to me why on earth you'd base yourself at an aerodrome that required that?
#1775729
Why not?

At Turweston they have a similar rule so as to avoid the development of hangar rash. When I was flying from there it was never ever a problem to have the aeroplane out when I wanted to fly.
User avatar
By Marvin
#1775732
Hanger space in the area is at a premium and a managed hanger maximises the utilisation with minimum of tears due to hangar rash, arguments over space etc.

When ever I’ve wanted an aircraft out it was never a problem and if you did arrive back after hours the crew room had keys and put the aircraft away next morning.

There are some operational challenges at Wycombe which if you look at the airfield plate you may or may not get, that mean just leaving private pilots to get on with it have a level of risk that an ATC service mitigate.

As for the management, each will have their views but the current operation arose from the ashes of the previous Cabair and BA businesses demise and is based on a commercial training package for fixed and rotary wing. It may not be to the private hamburger hunting pilot taste but as others have said it seemed to be financially working.
User avatar
By lobstaboy
#1775775
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:Why not?

At Turweston they have a similar rule so as to avoid the development of hangar rash. When I was flying from there it was never ever a problem to have the aeroplane out when I wanted to fly.


How the other half live...
Rob P liked this
User avatar
By defcribed
#1775813
So if they don't let you move your aeroplane in and out of the hangar and insist they do it all themselves, do they assume responsibility for any hangar rash that appears?

I'd expect them to, but then this is aviation...

My own (relatively limited) experiences at Booker were quite unpleasant. Certainly the sort of management attitude that regarded customers as underlings to be bossed about.
Danny liked this
By LysanderV8
#1775870
When I used to have my aircraft hangared at Shoreham, the fire crew were the only ones allowed to move it into or out of the hangar. It suffered a bad dose of hangar rash at one point and the airport paid the repair costs very promptly and without argument.
User avatar
By Sooty25
#1775889
RisePilot wrote:Wycombe. When you call the tower, what do you say? Wycombe Tower (not Booker Tower).


it's an age thing, as a kid if you'd asked me where Doug Bianchi was based, I'd have said Booker with no idea where in the country that was, but I'd have know interesting stuff happened there!.

As a 50+ year old pilot, I can find Wycombe on a chart, but its only because I know it is one and the same, that I know it is one and the same!
By Maxthelion
#1778058
I have only a relatively small amount of experience of Booker. My father learned to fly there in the late '60s, before I was born, and used to tell me all about Doug Biachi's Spitfires and other warbirds. It sounded great to 10 year old me. When I eventually turned up there for a quick flip in a glider with an instructor mate, we (and about 10 students and instructors) had a BBQ and a p1ssup and then drove the glider launch control double decker bus around the peri track at midnight singing 'Summer Holiday' at the top of our voices. Great times.