Well I have just been reading this thread and thought I would share my views on the subject.
First of all I would like to say that I am a supporter of Kemble and the great developments and activities there.
Now don’t shoot me but I can see exactly what exmpa is saying reference the way that complaints and objections should be handled, I think they call it professionally. I have no doubt that the lawyers and operators of the airfield are handling the objections in a better way than some of the comments made on this thread. I also understand the knee jerk reactions posted by some people here, I myself have been guilty of them in the past. This of course all stems from what I can see as the main problem which is a lack of tolerance.
There are many things I’m sure that each of us would choose to change should we ever be in a position to. The simple fact is that most of us wouldn’t because we respect the rights of the individual to indulge in there preferences as long as these things are hurting nobody or being anti-social to the point of ‘real’ discomfort. I for one would ban petrol lawnmowers (especially on a Sunday morning!) or people being drunk in the street at night (unless it was me!), but I show tolerance and don’t comment on either. The lack of tolerance shown by these Nimby’s must not be matched by a similar lack of tolerance on our behalf. Hopefully Kemble can prove that it not only has the support of the public but that it is the more tolerant and professional in any argument that is presented.
Now to add my 5 pence to a couple of points raised.
‘The argument is over the licensed use of the airfield’
This may of course be the reason given for the complaint but in reality it has nothing what so ever to do with the problem. The problem is that for some reason the operators on the airfield have upset the Nimby’s and this is the only loophole they can find to try and get the airfield closed. I very much doubt any of them thought ‘oh, there’s an airfield over there, lets see what it’s licensed for before we buy our house’. I doubt the opposition have really thought there argument through though as if the local operators were to close and force the airfield owners to concentrate on maintenance I’m sure they would find a significant increase in noise levels as engine testing on aircraft is very noisy and would effect a far greater area. I wonder if anybody has thought to take along the comparable sound footprint of a Hunter taking of and perhaps a practice display compared to a 747 going through the full envelope of engine testing? I know having lived near a maintenance operation which I would prefer.
‘Kemble does not provide a public service’
Yes this is true using the accepted definitions of the term. However what Kemble does provide is a public venue for various events. It also has gone out of its way (in my opinion) to make the general public welcome and informed. The events held there every year bring joy and pleasure to many tens of thousands of people. Lets also not forget the inspiration that organisations like Delta Jets and Extreme Team can bring to people, I’m sure that the thought of owning a Hunter or flying for Extreme has been a driving force behind at least some people’s desire to build a business or help expand a company all of which helps put money into the economy and thus allows the Countries current good economic climate to continue and people to be able to buy the houses they want to protect.
At the end of the day nearly everyone in this country is involved in a minority interest and most create noise pollution or other activities that some people will not like. We must all be tolerant and not succumb to selfish endeavours.
Sign In
