There is a campaign group running at the moment opposing a planning application by Bentwaters Parks as it lists ‘960 flights per year and seven new aerobatic aircraft’, but these aircraft are already in place and have been for quite a while and the planning application is just to tick the boxes. But the chap who is running the campaign is saying that its one step away from being a full blown airport !!, the fact is he sails his yacht out of Woodbridge and thinks that the peaceful Suffolk countryside is going to be shattered by constant noise from these ‘new’ aerobatic aircraft. These aircraft are owned/looked after by the Grace family,including the Spitfire ML407 and the work done by their engineering side on other aircraft helps keep the Spitfire in the air.
If you live in Suffolk (i don’t think you can have a say from other counties ?) please help SCDC planners judge public reaction by supporting the planning application by writing to: Mr B Woolnough, Case Officer, SCDC, Melton Hill, Woodbridge IP12 1AU, (quoting Ref. No. C10/3239).
or Email him on [email]d.c.admin@suffolkcoastal.gov.uk[/email]
The campaign group had a comments page once, but there where about 40 comments supporting the application and not one against it ,so they shut the page down !! http://www.bentwaterscampaigngroup.org/
Related newspaper articles –
http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/woodbridge_owners_of_bentwaters_military_base_insist_it_will_not_be_used_as_civil_airport_1_3625760
So please support keeping aviation alive at Bentwaters.
Thanks – Graham
By: mike currill - 21st November 2014 at 16:33
Legend has it that our local MP was asked what he would do about low flying jets out of Conningsby. His response was “think yourself lucky they dont have red stars on them…”
That is absolutely brilliant. I agree with him.
By: tomward - 21st November 2014 at 14:36
And flying has re-commenced – it’s been noticeably quiet around here in recent weeks and months, which wasn’t surprising.
L-4 Stinson buzzing around on Wednesday and one of the Trig Aero Pitts Specials this morning. I assume ML407 is still at Duxford?
No photos I’m afraid. The view from my office window across the base doesn’t really allow worthwhile photography
By: Moggy C - 16th November 2014 at 23:30
The objectors site is here
http://www.bentwaterscampaigngroup.org/
Full of half truths, exaggerations and general, all-round stupidity.
Moggy
By: John Green - 16th November 2014 at 20:50
Perhaps someone needs to forcibly point out to the NIMBY’s that it wouldn’t take much publicity for a developer with an eye for an opportunity to apply for planning consent to provide around two thousand residential dwellings plus sundry commercial buildings.
It probably won’t be necessary for anyone to explain that under current planning guidelines a sizeable element of social housing has to be provided ! I’m sure the NIMBY’s will approve.
What would they sooner have ? An airfield with the accent on ‘field’ or, a medium sized town on their doorstep with all that that means for the value of their homes.
By: SADSACK - 16th November 2014 at 20:13
Legend has it that our local MP was asked what he would do about low flying jets out of Conningsby. His response was “think yourself lucky they dont have red stars on them…”
By: Bar Side - 16th November 2014 at 18:36
Certainly sounds like good news – anyone able to confirm it is all they wanted?
Unanimous vote too doesn’t leave a lot of room for doubt. I think they said that this simply formalised their current arrangements, so hopefully things can now move on.
By: AlanR - 16th November 2014 at 12:36
Looks like good news.
As said, I wonder how many of those in the locality lived there when the Phantoms
were operating from the base ?
By: Bob - 16th November 2014 at 11:58
Update from ML407 forum…
By: Bob - 19th June 2014 at 14:49
The NIMBY crew are happy that it should be allowed to operate from Bentwaters under the 28 day rule….
…but not fly over a local village fete?
Sounds to me they are opposed to ANYTHING flying from Bentwaters, as their website strapline, “Opposed to flying from Bentwaters since 1997”, declares so prominently…
By: Adrian Barrell - 19th June 2014 at 14:43
The NIMBY crew are happy that it should be allowed to operate from Bentwaters under the 28 day rule.
Moggy
Or so they say…. I understand at least one of the main protagonists would gladly see the back of the Spitfire too. However, that would be an even more unpopular stance so I suspect that line is not being pushed.
By: Trolly Aux - 19th June 2014 at 14:43
That is so PANTS, its not as if there would be more than a dozen or so flights a day.
By: Moggy C - 19th June 2014 at 14:13
The issue is not the Spitfire. The NIMBY crew are happy that it should be allowed to operate from Bentwaters under the 28 day rule.
But the Grace’s company, Air Leasing Ltd., service “wooden, metal and vintage aircraft.” and need for their customers to be able to fly-in and out. This would be impossible under 28-day rule provisions.
If Air Leasing can’t make a decent income it will damage the financing of ML407
Moggy
By: Bob - 19th June 2014 at 12:03
Unfortunately a couple of NIMBYs have stopped Carolyn Grace displaying her Spitfire at a local village Fete next weekend, its the same sad people that are running the Bentwaters Campaign group to stop any flying from there.
They state on the front page of their website “It’s not about the Spitfire! Our critics have mischievously suggested we are opposed to flying the Spitfire from Bentwaters…“
So they complain about the Spitfire displaying at a village fete – hmmmm, sounds very much like they are opposed to that after all….
By: Trolly Aux - 19th June 2014 at 10:36
I spoke to a friend last evening, he was saying its new locals who have moved into the area complaining, they should of been there when the USAF was in, they would not of been able to complain as their teeth would of been aching from the noise, I loved it of course.
By: Sideslip - 19th June 2014 at 05:57
Just a warning to everyone. I tried to access the Bentwaters Campaign Group website. My Bullguard anti virus blocked it as an unsafe site.
By: mike currill - 19th June 2014 at 00:34
Such people need it pointed out that if you don’t like the smell of s**t it is not sensible to buy a house next to a farm and the same applies here, if you don’t like aircraft noise don’t buy a house next to an active airfield. A chap I once worked with was moaning about the noise of aircraft in the Kidlington circuit. I asked if he was aware that his house was under the circuit when he bought it and he said yes, didn’t like it when I told him it was his own fault for making a stupid choice.
By: J Boyle - 18th June 2014 at 04:35
And the base liasion officer made a big song and dance about it to all and sundry.
And the problem is?
When was that?
Are you referring to the RAF liaison or the MOD Community Relations advisor?
By: Rogier - 18th June 2014 at 00:33
Perhaps during the VooDoo and Phantom days, not many complaints during the A-10 era.
The base did make allowances for when concerts were being held at Snape Maltings.
And the base liasion officer made a big song and dance about it to all and sundry.
By: J Boyle - 17th June 2014 at 12:32
Its just a shame that the NIMBYS didn’t live in the area when the Americans were flying from those airfields they would really have had something to complain about then !!!
Perhaps during the VooDoo and Phantom days, not many complaints during the A-10 era.
The base did make allowances for when concerts were being held at Snape Maltings.
By: Steve 964 - 17th June 2014 at 12:24
Just sent my letter of support to keep aviation alive at Bentwaters.
I wonder how old the NIMBYS are ? Both Bentwaters and Woodbridge have been there over seventy years, my guess is that the NIMBYS are not that old that they were living there before the airfields were built, and that they have moved into the area. Its just a shame that the NIMBYS didn’t live in the area when the Americans were flying from those airfields they would really have had something to complain about then !!!
Sign In
June 8, 2014 at 10:45 am