Hucknall New Town

That people require houses before GA requires airfields, is perhaps not too much in dispute. There is too much airfield supply chasing too little GA demand. My concern, which should be the concern of all the supporters of GA is the survival of GA in its present form. The whole point of my contributions is to discuss and get support for the proposal contained in #1.

It is the only way that I can see that GA will get something back for giving something away ! If we, collectively, do not make some active protest, then we will be ignored and gradually the screw will be tightened upon what is seen by MANY as a non essential, environmentally intrusive, rich boy’s pastime.

I forecast, a long time ago, that the future of GA will increasingly be restricted to the use of farm strips. With each passing month that appears to be the shape of the future. Please don’t ‘muddy the waters’, by ignoring the central message of this subject. Please assist by writing or lobbying the contact groups i’ve mentioned.

As I pointed out on another thread, the first rule of journalism is to not let the facts get in the way of a good story. I think another is to publish a story that will get people angry about something they can’t change.

With respect, the facts came from the Office of National Statistics, a department within the Civil Service, not from either newspaper. Both newspapers, and the broadcast media, treated the story with a good respect for the truth.

As I pointed out on another thread, the first rule of journalism is to not let the facts get in the way of a good story. I think another is to publish a story that will get people angry about something they can’t change.

So you believe a Labour mouthpiece like the Guardian?

OK, try this from the Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11251624/Where-are-the-immigrants-This-map-will-tell-you.html

As you can see it’s basically the same story!

So you believe a Labour mouthpiece like the Guardian?

This particular development has been on the cards since Rolls-Royce stopped engine testing at Hucknall in 2008 – referenced in here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-19575641

Encouraged by JP’s 2006 legislation proposals – Ref: PPG3 – The definition of ‘Brownfield’ in PPS3 Housing, Annex A [DRAFT]

…

If the last Labour government hadn’t declared open house and let all the world and his dog in we wouldn’t need a quarter of the new housing the government keeps saying we need.

Hang on a mo, have you seen the most recent news re immigration and the Tories? This is an example, there are others http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/06/englands-migrant-population-increased-by-565000-in-three-years-study

Regards

Bearing in mind that running an airfield isn’t cheap (what is where aviation is concerned?) I’m not surprised so many airfields are under threat when the owners see the regulations making it more difficult to keep the business afloat. What does surprise me is that there are not more airfields threatened by development plans.
If the last Labour government hadn’t declared open house and let all the world and his dog in we wouldn’t need a quarter of the new housing the government keeps saying we need.

People need homes more than they need airfields! Tatenhill is underused at present, the influx of aircraft from Hucknall will go some way to bring it up to ‘establishment’. Personally I’d far rather see fewer fully used airfields than many more underused ones. Apart from anything else it will be far easier to defend the fully used survivors particularly if they make good and lasting relationships with the surrounding community.

Perhaps it’s a pity that Hucknall was the one to go, but tough, it is never going to be possible to preserve everything.

Regards

A new comment on the demise of Hucknall Airfield has appeared on Historic. Yet another broken promise from Mr. Cameron, means that Hucknall’s fate as a brownfield site, earmarked for housing development, is almost certainly guaranteed to include yet more historic airfields as continuing levels of immigration stimulates the demand for more accomodation.

Yet, among the General Aviation community, apathy seems to be the order of the day. My last paragraph above in #4 made an offer which elicited not a single response of which I’m aware. Unless we are prepared to demonstrably take action to protect our sport/hobby/pastime, the number of ‘Hucknall’s’ disappearing under concrete will increase.

I note that our forum members can be very active and vociferous on some occasions: ‘Duxford Diary’ attracted 935 comments and mearly 100,000 visits. ‘Favourite Control Column’ attracted 840 comments and 122,000 visits. ‘Now For Something Completely Different’, 1700 plus comments and 164,000 visits.

I know that not all who subscribe to Historic are also supporters of General Aviation but, I think it fair to describe both activities as two sides of the same coin. My point is that if enthusiasts can be roused to express their support for their particular interest, then it shouldn’t be too difficult to extend that support towards something like historic airfield preservation and what needs to be done in furtherence.

If we don’t get off our collective backsides and make some effort – in considerable numbers – to demonstrate our views to the Dept. of the Environment, our MPs, the CAA, the LAA and anyone else material to the situation then, we will deserve to lose our much loved activity and find ourselves, because of our apathy, in possession of a mere rump of a once thriving and important part of the aviation world.

I’m really at a loss to understand why it is that the central part of my comment about Hucknall appears to have been missed by the supporters of General Aviation. I’ve alluded to this subject on previous occasions as well as writing to Grant Shapps with the original suggestion.

Am I being given a subliminal message that GA cares not if it has a long term future ? Most of us know about and acknowledge the airfields that are under threat but, we do not seem prepared to do much – if anything at all, about it.

I would ask as many as may be possible, to write to Shapps, endorsing the idea contained in #1. If you PM me with an e-mail address I’ll send you a letter template on Word. If nothing else, if we can get some numbers committed, it shows concern and determination to ensure a future for General Aviation.

I understand that some of the flying club members may be relocating to Tatenhill in Staffordshire.

The threat to Hucknall was flagged up last March http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?129313 and I think that it’s been mentioned in a couple of other places as well.

I’ve just checked my off-board communications and I believe that in the end the Merlin Flying Club managed a couple of events last year and that many have alternative locations to operate from.