Page 4 of 4

Re: Barton Airfield - MOR spree

PostPosted:Fri Jul 19, 2019 10:24 am
by rdfb
...the noise about Barton indicates an issue.


What noise? As I said, the only "noise" presented here is one statistic in one single post, with no confirmation, not even from a single person affected. Everything else is speculation. The Bristol thread is different, as multiple people have come forward there to confirm that they have been refused transit, with details.

I’ve no problem with a unit having a particular policy so long as it is made clear to all users.


There is no evidence that Barton has any particular policy that differs from any other unit. That it might have a policy came entirely out of speculation, again with no facts to ground it in reality.

Re: Barton Airfield - MOR spree

PostPosted:Fri Jul 19, 2019 11:55 am
by CloudHound
Noise as in what Barton based pilots are telling me.

I was Secretary, Chairman and Vice President of LAC a member for 32 years too. People let me know what’s going on.

Re: Barton Airfield - MOR spree

PostPosted:Fri Jul 19, 2019 12:48 pm
by Sooty25
defcribed wrote:
CloudHound wrote:Although at Shoreham on Saturday the QNH/QFE was the same.


As it will be every day, because the aerodrome elevation is 7 feet. :D


that's a bit scary, there's +/-8ft of tide at shoreham on springs!

Re: Barton Airfield - MOR spree

PostPosted:Fri Jul 19, 2019 12:50 pm
by defcribed
Sooty25 wrote:
defcribed wrote:
CloudHound wrote:Although at Shoreham on Saturday the QNH/QFE was the same.


As it will be every day, because the aerodrome elevation is 7 feet. :D


that's a bit scary, there's +/-8ft of tide at shoreham on springs!


Ah well you see there's this little bit of land between the sea and the airfield that is a bit higher. Clever, huh?

Re: Barton Airfield - MOR spree

PostPosted:Mon Jul 22, 2019 5:33 pm
by SpeedBrake
I've not flown to / from Barton so I don't have personal experience of the OP's comments.

The CAA General Aviation Report shows the MORs for June 2019:
- 2 runway incursions (reported by Barton). 1 aircraft rollover.

- 4 infringements of the Manchester CTR. From reading, all look like they've been reported by ATC at Manchester, not from Barton FISOs.

I can't say I agree with the OP's comments. Infringements must be reported. By having more data from which to work, better procedures can be developed, patterns can emerge. As one of June's MORs suggested, a lower join height might help reduce infringements.

In my experience the CAA don't suspend licenses by default. There must be more to it. Repeat offences, or some set of circumstances that demonstrated the pilot to be negligent etc.