Cub wrote:
> I am genuinely fascinated by the responses to this thread. Having spent
> many years honing down airspace applications to the minimum that is
> actually required to safely accomplish a task and endeavoring to reduce the
> impact of such tasks on other airspace users, I am quite surprised that
> people seem ambivalent about the fact that their particular activity is
> curtailed for 45 mins or an hour in the middle of the day when, in reality,
> they are never likely to be within several miles or many thousands of feet
> of a task participant.
>
> It certainly makes for easier workup of these sorts of tasks and far less
> complex airspace structures/ descriptors and ultimately a far greater
> safety margin in segregating operations. I do wonder if it may set a
> desirable precedent for other future segregated operations though?
Do you mean 'Ambivalent?'
Ambivalent is completely the right word for my response to these restrictions;
They've never affected me in the slightest and I don't give a terpenny ferk.................
On the very rare occasions I've phoned the supplied mobile number for more info on the (-military based-) Notams which frequently overlap our strip, I nine times out of ten get an erk who says " Nah mate, they've all gorn 'ome; finished for the week on toosdy."
The jury's still out on the Windsor to Sandringham helo corridors now Brenda's a bit less agile: I'm guessing they'll become a bit more frequent.