Fri Aug 14, 2015 7:16 pm
#1395957
This is a request / warning from a fellow LAA flyer and CRI. It appears that he is being punished for doing the right thing, when the pragmatic solution would be to fly away as soon as the weather improved.
From the Strasser thread, this is the incident mentioned, which has now become a major problem for the pilot involved.
A Jodel was en route home, but unforecast weather left very few options, so landed at Plymouth, a usable runway seeming to be the most sensible place for a diversion. The insurance company is happy that everything was ok and is happy to cover all the liabilities and agree that the most sensible recovery would be by air.
Initially, what was presumed to be the security supervisor was reasonably amenable to the aeroplane being flown out the next day but one, with regards to forecast weather (after an aborted attempt to send him off into 200' cloudbase). Since then, the owners and their legal eagles have been involved and the situation has changed. Conditions placed on the removal now include no publicity and that the aircraft must be dismantled and removed by road. Concrete blocks have been placed around the it. The landowners' costs are escalating, with the legal team (!) involved and discussions have been difficult: it is all but impossible to talk to a decision maker.
Politics may be at play, as the pilot concerned suspects the landowners think he is something to do with the campaign to re-open the airfield.
Any advice would be appreciated, especially from anyone in the area who is familiar with the set-up there.
Many thanks.
WKW
From the Strasser thread, this is the incident mentioned, which has now become a major problem for the pilot involved.
A Jodel was en route home, but unforecast weather left very few options, so landed at Plymouth, a usable runway seeming to be the most sensible place for a diversion. The insurance company is happy that everything was ok and is happy to cover all the liabilities and agree that the most sensible recovery would be by air.
Initially, what was presumed to be the security supervisor was reasonably amenable to the aeroplane being flown out the next day but one, with regards to forecast weather (after an aborted attempt to send him off into 200' cloudbase). Since then, the owners and their legal eagles have been involved and the situation has changed. Conditions placed on the removal now include no publicity and that the aircraft must be dismantled and removed by road. Concrete blocks have been placed around the it. The landowners' costs are escalating, with the legal team (!) involved and discussions have been difficult: it is all but impossible to talk to a decision maker.
Politics may be at play, as the pilot concerned suspects the landowners think he is something to do with the campaign to re-open the airfield.
Any advice would be appreciated, especially from anyone in the area who is familiar with the set-up there.
Many thanks.
WKW