Weston Aerodrome Flight Paths

Seth Brundle

Does anyone know if there are rules in place by the IAA or whoever about the flight heights and paths used by planes from Weston? I browsed through IAA.ie but couldn't find anything.
The amount of low (<~150m) planes flying over my estate/leixlip village is a cause for concern.

Victor

Moved from Commuting & Transport.

therecklessone

SI 72/2004 Rules of the Air

Relevant section:

3. Minimum heights


(1) except as permitted by the appropriate authority or as hereinafter provided aircraft shall not be flown:


(a) over congested areas of cities, towns or settlements or over an assembly of persons, at less than:


(i) a height of 450 metres (1,500 ft) above the ground or water, or


(ii) a height of 300 metres (1,000 ft) above the highest obstacle within a radius of 600 metres from the aircraft, or


(iii) such other height as would permit, in the event of the failure of a power unit, a safe forced landing to be made,


whichever height is the greatest.


(b) elsewhere:


(i) closer than 150 metres, (500 ft) to any person, vehicle, vessel or structure, or


(ii) at a height less than 150 metres (500 ft) above the ground or water,


(c) over or in the immediate vicinity of any place within the State, where a large number of persons is assembled in the open air in connection with any event of public interest or entertainment, save when:


(i) such flights are made with the written consent of the Authority and of the organisers, if any, of the event and are in accordance with any conditions or limitations specified by the Authority, or


(ii) the aircraft is passing by in the normal course of navigation and flying at a height in compliance with subparagraph (a) of this paragraph.


(2) Subject to subparagraph (b) of this paragraph and subparagraph 6(2)(a) of Rule 6 of these Rules, paragraph (1)(a) of this Rule shall not apply to a Performance Class 1 or Class 2 helicopter which is being flown without undue hazard to persons or property, except with the permission of the appropriate authority and in accordance with any conditions specified therein, a helicopter shall not be flown:


(a) over congested areas of cities, towns or settlements at less than:


(i) such height as would enable it, in the event of the failure of a power unit, to make a safe forced landing;


(ii) a height of 300m (1,000 feet) above the ground or water,


whichever height is the greater;


(b) The Authority may, in the interest of safety, prescribe areas, routes, heights and flight visibility's for helicopter flights and a helicopter shall conform thereto.


(3) Paragraph (1)(b) of this Rule shall not apply to:


(a) an aircraft while it is landing or taking-off in accordance with normal aviation practice at an aerodrome or heliport;


(b) an aircraft when it is in use for aerial application or aerial work with the permission of the Authority and is operated in accordance with any conditions or limitations specified with such a permission;


(c) a helicopter conducting training for life-saving operations or demonstrations of such operations;


(d) a glider while it is hill soaring;


(e) an aircraft flying with the permission of the Authority for the purpose of picking up or dropping tow ropes, banners or similar articles at an aerodrome.


(4) Paragraph (1)(b)(ii) of this Rule shall not apply to aircraft practising approaches to landing at an aerodrome or heliport, or to gliders or balloons, if such flights are being conducted without causing undue hazard to persons or property.


(5) Nothing in this Rule shall prohibit an aircraft from:


(a) (i) taking-off, landing or practising approaches to landing, or


(ii) flying for the purpose of checking navigational aids or procedures,


in accordance with normal aviation practice at an aerodrome or heliport within the State, or at an aerodrome or heliport in any other state, and without causing undue hazard to persons or property;


(b) flying in such a manner as may be necessary for the purpose of saving life or as permitted by paragraph (3) of Rule 6 of this Order.


(6) In the case of an aircraft practising approaches to landing at an aerodrome or heliport as mentioned in paragraph (4) of this Rule, such approaches shall be confined to the airspace customarily used by aircraft when landing or taking-off in accordance with normal aviation practice at that location.

Weston Flight Information

Arrival Route from Maynooth

Route North of Maynooth towards Leixlip at 1450ft QNH. When abeam the industrial complex, make a right turn towards the airfield to arrive overhead at 1450ft QNH. Report overhead at 1450ft QNH and join the circuit giving way to circuit traffic.

Runway 25 Left Circuit

* After take-off and established in a positive climb begin a gentle RIGHT turn to over fly the reservoir climbing to 800ft QFE
* On reaching 800ft QFE turn left onto the crosswind leg, and continue the turn onto the downwind leg making sure you are north of the railway line at all times.
* Turn left onto base when abeam the Spa Hotel remaining clear of Lucan village.
* Establish finals no lower than 500ft QFE

Visual Approach Chart

You have to expect low-flying aircraft that close to the airfield, they have to get up/down somehow.

Seth Brundle

The low flying aircraft are I suspect part of the flying school and they just do circles at heights definitley lower than those set out in 3.1.a.i and 3.1.a.ii.
I don't believe that the planes are flying in on approach to the runway each time but are just doing circles, as the flight line wouldn't line up with the runway.

Victor

They are probably doing 'touch and gos' - practice landings. The relevant bits would be.

(5) Nothing in this Rule shall prohibit an aircraft from:
(a) (i) taking-off, landing or practising approaches to landing, or

(6) In the case of an aircraft practising approaches to landing at an aerodrome or heliport as mentioned in paragraph (4) of this Rule, such approaches shall be confined to the airspace customarily used by aircraft when landing or taking-off in accordance with normal aviation practice at that location.

jmayo

kbannon wrote:

The low flying aircraft are I suspect part of the flying school and they just do circles at heights definitley lower than those set out in 3.1.a.i and 3.1.a.ii.
I don't believe that the planes are flying in on approach to the runway each time but are just doing circles, as the flight line wouldn't line up with the runway.

Usually it is only gliders you find doing circles

Check out Pooleys Ireland Flight Guide approx €24.00.
It gives details of operations at at all non-private Irish airports/airfields.

There are rules concerning flighting West into/out of Weston, you use the motorway as divider between incoming and outgoing traffic.

Also you can not traverse Baldonnell's airspace to the South without authorisation, they get upset since it is a military installation and military airspace.
I don't have exact flight levels, ceilings etc to hand.

Also you have to remeber that you have to contact Dublin airport regarding routing over Dublin.
Weston is now controlled, it is not like in old days where you blankly made a radio call and went.

civdef

OP, are you sure you have the flight altitudes correct? It's not that easy to measure from the ground.

RoundyMooney

Agreed, but 1000ft is a fair height (particularly when viewed from above!)

On the other hand 500 feet is markedly low.

I'd be inclined to try and take a photograph/shoot a short video, with ground objects in the frame in order to give an idea of context. This will not be easy of course...

It would make interesting viewing, bearing in mind that all anybody here can do is take an educated guess.

jmayo

kbannon wrote:

Does anyone know if there are rules in place by the IAA or whoever about the flight heights and paths used by planes from Weston? I browsed through IAA.ie but couldn't find anything.
The amount of low (<~150m) planes flying over my estate/leixlip village is a cause for concern.

And this is how it starts :mad:
Next thing they are just scraping the rooftops and doing suicidal loops and what not.

The more I look at this post the more I see it as somebody trawling for information for the next residents committee meeting.
Has OP ever posted in this forum before or am I imagining things ?

BTW It would be very doubtful that somebody will be flying at 150m i.e approx 500ft over Leixlip, since you would only be less than 400 odd feet above airfield elevation.
No way you would or should be that low over Leixlip.

Davidth88

Living in the Celbridge area I see a lot of traffic in/out of Weston ( my daughter loves the seeing them )

I have never seen deliberate low flying , there are constantly 1-2 aircraft doing circuit bashing which is normal at any training airfield ( I can visualise the trainee pilots working hard , having been there myself at an airfield in the UK many times )

I too agree you wouldn't see any one at 500 ft, that is really low. I have NEVER seen anyone doing anything that I would regard as poor airmanship ( and I do know a little about flying having a reasonable number of hours as PIC .. all be it a few years ago )

The only time I have EVER wanted to complain is when a biz departed at 06:00 one morning , that really pi**ed me off .

jmayo

Davidth88 wrote:

Living in the Celbridge area I see a lot of traffic in/out of Weston ( my daughter loves the seeing them )

I have never seen deliberate low flying , there are constantly 1-2 aircraft doing circuit bashing which is normal at any training airfield ( I can visualise the trainee pilots working hard , having been there myself at an airfield in the UK many times )

I too agree you wouldn't see any one at 500 ft, that is really low. I have NEVER seen anyone doing anything that I would regard as poor airmanship ( and I do know a little about flying having a reasonable number of hours as PIC .. all be it a few years ago )

The only time I have EVER wanted to complain is when a biz departed at 06:00 one morning , that really pi**ed me off .

Weston has had lots of trouble with people living in estates in the area.
AFAIK at one stage some bright spark decided to release balloons.
"Yes I am afraid of aircraft flying over my area because they might crash, so guess what I will release balloons into their possible flight path."
And that aids good and safe airmanship how???
What interests me is, was the airfield there before the housing estate?

BTW I am not a fan of Mr Mansfield and his views on planning permission, but this appears to be usual scare mongering that then leads to some tosspot reporter, who has no idea what they are talking about but knows scary report sells, to do a piece that causes a few co councillors to clammer for a clamp down on flying.

Also do not agree with rich eejits being flown low and noisy especially at odd hours. It doesn't do the rest of us any favours.

pclancy

I had this debate before with someone who lived in Leixlip and I noticed how much circuits were going on from when i lived as far away as maynooth. Youve got to remember too things though, theyre not going be below at least 1000ft unless landing etc and all the time in the back of the pilots head is what to do if the power dies and they have to put down somewhere. 1000ft gives you plenty of room to get her down in a green field somewhere.

I can understand the worry of having them be above your town or village but the rules and pilot training are there for a reason. In all the years of GA in Ireland when has a plane ever crashed into a populated area? Any ones that have gone down have been into greenfields or other areas, sadly often with the loss of those onboard but safety of people on the ground is always taken into consideration with GA flying.

Seth Brundle

civdef wrote:

OP, are you sure you have the flight altitudes correct? It's not that easy to measure from the ground.

Im quite sure. The majority of planes flying over are several hundred metres but it is not uncommon for planes to fly over our estate and other estates up Captains Hill at very low altitude. I posted my first post after watching one fly over the house here!

jmayo wrote:

The more I look at this post the more I see it as somebody trawling for information for the next residents committee meeting.
Has OP ever posted in this forum before or am I imagining things ?

I am not a member of a residents committee nor do I plan on joining one.
I have never posted in here and in fact I originally posted in Commuting & Transport. (thanks for moving it Victor!) What has that got to do with anything?

jmayo wrote:

BTW It would be very doubtful that somebody will be flying at 150m i.e approx 500ft over Leixlip, since you would only be less than 400 odd feet above airfield elevation.
No way you would or should be that low over Leixlip.

I agree. However planes *do* fly that low as they pass my house and then continue along over the village. You are more than welcome to come over and hang around and watch for yourself!

Time Magazine

Kbannon is being, if not exact, fairly accurate in his reports of the heights of the planes. They fly very low.

RoundyMooney

kbannon wrote:

I have never posted in here and in fact I originally posted in Commuting & Transport. (thanks for moving it Victor!) What has that got to do with anything?

Not a thing.

Ibid wrote:

Kbannon is being, if not exact, fairly accurate in his reports of the heights of the planes. They fly very low.

As I say, a photo or summat would be useful in a contextual sense. 400-500 feet is hard to imagine, unless the OP lives at the foot of the runway, which doesn't appear to be the case.

This is not a case of "pics or it didn't happen" btw, I'm genuinely curious about this, as I'm sure are others. The last thing GA needs is a poor rep with Joe and Josephine Soap.

Gablin

I'm with RoundyMooney on this. There is a very active resident's association who would be happier to see Weston as a home for rabbits. I'd like to see photos too. Maybe even take them if I'm in the general area in question.

Time Magazine

RoundyMooney wrote:

As I say, a photo or summat would be useful in a contextual sense. 400-500 feet is hard to imagine, unless the OP lives at the foot of the runway, which doesn't appear to be the case.

Planes are flying overhead a few times every hour at peak times, so much so that I've become immune to them. Every now and then, maybe once a fortnight or a month or so, I notice a plane being far louder than normal. This is evidenced somewhat by the simple fact that I notice the noise, whereas I'm immune to the normal noise (if that makes sense). So if I notice it every fortnight (I'm a little further from Weston than kbannon who seems to be near the town/Captain's Hill), there's almost no chance of getting a photo. I'm not going to be standing in the kitchen with the camera.

Before it's suggested, I don't think it's a matter that the planes are simply directly overhead rather than a few houses away.

I think Weston is a great amenity to have. Although I've never been there or have any great desire to take up recreational flying, it's good to have for those who want it. I'm not a Residents' Committee, and at 20 I don't think I can be called a moaning old hag. The concern is just from things that I've noticed.

Victor

jmayo wrote:

Has OP ever posted in this forum before or am I imagining things ?

I think thats grossly unfair. Just because someone is new does not mean they are wrong. kbannon is merely enquiring as to what the situation is, based on his observations.

No way you would or should be that low over Leixlip.

Perhaps individual flights are. Its not as if Weston is a Utopia of aviation on a number of fronts.

Are small aircraft required to have transponders?

Preset No.3

Im a former student at Weston and it really pisses me off the way people moan about the airport. If you own a house there, you knew what was there when you bought it!! Why buy, move in and then start complaining about aircraft in the area. You will be complaining when there are no pilots in Ireland because all the flight schools have closed down because everyone objects!

I also was a near victim of the balloon release, mainly by residents to the left of the r/w at Weston. During one of my first solos I came close to a balloon with a nice long string. If that got around the prop good night me!! ****ing ejits, if you dont like the aircraft flying over your house move the **** out of the neighbourhood!

Seth Brundle

There seems to be a huge amount of defensive posts here accusing me of over reacting or being mistaken or whatever.
I have no problem with weston and have brought my son there several times to view the planes. I dislike the Mr. Mansfields planning approaches but that has nothing to do with this thread.
What I do dislike with regard to weston is planes which fly low. Not all planes do and as I previously mentioned its not that often. However, when a plane is flying low and inline with the roof of my terrace I do get concerned. However, as Ibid mentioned, its not very practical to stand around waiting for one.
I got the answer to my questions and thanks to those. For those of you who doubt me firstly ask yourself whetheer it is totally impossible for it to happen (that they fly so low) and if you still think they can't then come up to Leixlip and stand around St. Marys, Avondale, Newtown, or Glendale and take a look for yourself.

therecklessone

Victor wrote:

Are small aircraft required to have transponders?

Weston's Area Of Responsibility is class C airspace (part of the Dublin Control Zone) , all aircraft using the airspace require a flight plan and a functioning Mode C transponder.

AIP Ireland Weston section

jmayo

Victor, maybe I am being unfair to OP but I did try to give some explanation as to some of the flight procedures pertaining to Weston in my first post.
But to quote a late polictican, on mature reflection, the original post did look like a post by someone trawling for information that could be used by the anti-aviation people that do live in the Leixlip area.
Sorry kbannnon if my comments about residents committees offended.

As I stated I do not agree with Mr Mansfield's modus operandi re planning permission. I also do not agree with pilots flying at 500 odd ft over houses unless they are on approach to runways. I find it unlikely that they are flying over Leixlip at same height, unless they are in a helicopter.
You are below circuit height and you cut your chances of reaching open ground in case of engine failure.
Even at 1000 ft you do not have many options if in Cessna or Piper.
Yes maybe there are the odd one that does decide to scrap over the rooftops. Take their number, if you can, and inform Weston. They would not be impressed and neither would the flight school concerned.


Maybe the reason I and other pilots are very defensive is that GA is given hard time in this part of world, i.e. Ireland and UK. In the UK there are people clammering to close local airfeilds and aerodromes because they are supposedly attracting al queda type attacks.
Here it is the usualy nimbeys attitude, aircraft are seen as dangerous and the pilots are seen as kamikaze want-a-bes.
Most pilots just like being in the air, going for a spin and then talking about flying over a few beers.

On a lighter note...
A German resident angrily phoned a British base complaining about low flying Lynx helicopter. The soldier asked what height they were, to which the German matter of factly replied "18 metres or under".
The soldier asked how he could be so sure of this.
The German replied "because they knocked down my TV aerial".

cp251

I think you have made a very fair comment and there was no need for the tone of some replies.
I fly out of Weston regularly and I would with the greatest of respect suggest that you are mistaken with reference to the altitude you have estimated. There are VERY strict rules appertaining at Weston right now. Some are ludicrous. Any pilot not flying to those standards could and some have found themselves subject to an investigation.

I would suggest that if you see the aircraft in question flying low then you would take note of it's number and phone the control tower at Weston. You can be assured your complaint will be take seriously. In fact I would suggest that you contact them anyway and arrange a visit. Bring your son, you will get an insight as to the procedures in place.

As things stand the basic rules are runway 25 (westerly) with a right circuit, (which is the one which overflies Leixlip), is to take of with an immediate noise abatement right turn over the reservoir, avoiding overflying Hewlett Packard. Then turn right climbing to 1000 feet. Then downwind at 1000 feet until past Leixlip, followed by a power reduction and right turn descending to not below 500 feet as you turn on finals to the runway.

For a left circuit, you must make the same right turn over the reservoir, climb to 500 feet, then turn left climbing to 1000 feet. You don't overfly the railway because that is military airspace. Then left at 1000 feet, avoiding the golf course. As you descend on the base leg, you don't go below 500 feet over Weston park, where most of the moaners live. Weston park was built a few years ago. You would think they would have noticed and active airfield in their backyard? The airfield has been there and active since 1931.

For runway 07 (easterly), right circuit you avoid overflying the stud farm and private residence near the end of the runway. Then make an immediate absurd LEFT turn towards the sewage farm, (Whys is there always sewage farms at airfields:) ) up to 1000 feet followed by a 180 degree turn to the right. You avoid over-flying the golf course again and the rest is the reverse of the opposing circuit.

For a left circuit it's toward the sewage farm and turn downwind, over Leixlip at 1000 feet, etc.

When arriving at the airport, aircraft join overhead at 1500 feet and then descend to 1000' over the field. When departing to the west aircraft must fly at 1000 feet to the left of the motorway until past Kilcock without overflying Maynooth or Kilcock. You can in theory fly over them at 1500 feet but people there complain if you do even though it's legal and high. Oddly enough, airline pilots are big complainers.

Pilots fail to follow these procedures at peril to their licences and their use of Weston. I for one would lose my livelihood if I transgressed these rules.

After laboriously writing out the above. I went to the Westonairport.com website and found much the same. I would emphasise that these rules are not simply for the benefit of PR but must be followed by pilots. Any pilot who flies at or below 500 feet over a built up area deserves to lose his licence. I will say that it is difficult to estimate heights. I have been flying for over 20 years and still have difficulty. The fact that you can read the numbers is not proof. I can easily read the registration at 1500 feet, mostly. Also, are you sure the aircraft in question were not Air Corps? They tend to fly as if the rules don't apply to them.

I don't work for Weston but I don't want to lose my right to fly out of there. There are many people out there doing their best to close Weston as an airport. If they win, many people would be out of work and we would have the absurd situation of a supposedly modern capital city of a million people with one airport. Most cities the size of Dublin have several Weston type airports serving them. We have one! Hope that helps.

Seth Brundle

Several points there but I have made my points and am sticking to them.
As for your last paragraph, thats not necessary as I have already declared my position on that.

cp251

Fair enough, if aeroplanes are flying low over Leixlip village then please report them. Their pilots deserve what's coming to them. The last think Weston needs is a few cowboys ruining it for everyone. Not to mention the fact that it is exceedingly dangerous to low fly over a village or town.

BostonB

There was a time when circuits at Weston were 300ft! Much stricter regulations now though. If your bothered by noise and/or concerned about low flying aircraft living in the vicinity of an airfield, and in the flight path seems an odd choice.

kbannon wrote:

....The amount of low (<~150m) planes flying over my estate/leixlip village is a cause for concern.

That would suggest you think it happens regularly.

cp251

We meet again Boston Actually it was 250 feet, but I actually used to fly at 300 feet because I felt it was 'safer'. Old Darby was a crazy man.

You just barged into the circuit, cut off the guy on finals, practise forced landings down to the ground, buzzed the bus at the bus stop. Then there was the famous time he ordered that we fly circuits on 25 but full stop on 07 to save taxying time. This led to the fun situation of aircraft on finals at each end of the runway.

Those were the days

Don't worry Mr Bannon, that was a long time ago.:o

BostonB

Very few houses round there then.

Seth Brundle

BostonB wrote:

There was a time when circuits at Weston were 300ft! Much stricter regulations now though. If your bothered by noise and/or concerned about low flying aircraft living in the vicinity of an airfield, and in the flight path seems an odd choice.

I live in Dublin's suburbs. I have laid out my oibjections to some the height of planes and the path they take when they do fly low. I am not bothered by all the other planes - in fact I think its nice having them nearby

BostonB wrote:

That would suggest you think it happens regularly.

I don't recall saying that. One plane flying low and parallel to the ridge of my terrace is cause for concern.

RoundyMooney

If you do get feedback from the powahs that be, it would be nice to hear if matters are resolved to your satisfaction. General aviation doesn't need to make an enemy of the public, and for the benefit of others, and given what I know of the OP online, I doubt very very much that this is a spurious complaint.

pclancy

Kbannon I think you're right to be concerned and should certainly both note aircraft reg's that you feel are very low and visit the tower to voice your concerns. I love flying and am really looking forward to learning myself in Weston over the coming years but safety of people both in the air and on the ground MUST take precedence if GA is to be accepted by local communities. Im sure Weston and the GA community feel the very same, so as cp251 said, go to them and ask!

Let us know about the outcome.

Seth Brundle

There won't be an outcome. I only wanted the info. I haven't time to stand around waiting on one to come and then pursue a complaint.

therecklessone

kbannon wrote:

]The amount of low (<~150m) planes flying over my estate/leixlip village is a cause for concern.

Not concerned enough to do anything about it though...

kbannon wrote:

There won't be an outcome. I only wanted the info. I haven't time to stand around waiting on one to come and then pursue a complaint.

Seth Brundle

Well given the crap thrown at me since I started the thread, would you blame me? Should I put my life on hold as I stand outside with a camera to take sufficient pics to convince the unbelievers?

RoundyMooney

I was the one who suggested the pictures, purely in the context of this forum, and solely to try and get a handle on precisely the nature of the problem you and your neighbours are experiencing. As you may have gathered, this is somewhat of a contentious issue, on both sides of the divide. I have no connection with the folk at Weston, and have no idea as to whether they would seek photographic submissions, or whether times/dates/aircraft registration would be sufficient for them to enquire further.

kb wrote:

...given the crap thrown at me...

Aside from one such post, (noted by me-among others, and apologised for subsequently by its author), what I'm reading from this thread isn't "crap" at all, but in the main a desire to quantify what's going on, which can only be of benefit to all parties concerned. If you feel otherwise, I always welcome feedback, good bad or indifferent-from anybody

What it breaks down to is this; what you're describing, if the heights etc., stand up to scrutiny is not only a nuisance, but a safety hazard. If people can't observe height restrictions, that is to say the least a problem.

On the other hand, if aircraft are flying within the limits, it may serve to allay the concerns of residents in the area if this can be confirmed by the powers that be.

RoundyMooney

For the record anyway;

Don't make it personal folks, there really is no need...

jmayo

RoundyMooney wrote:

Aside from one such post, (noted by me-among others, and apologised for subsequently by its author), what I'm reading from this thread isn't "crap" at all, but in the main a desire to quantify what's going on, which can only be of benefit to all parties concerned. If you feel otherwise, I always welcome feedback, good bad or indifferent-from anybody ...

Excuse me, I take issue with reference to my post as cr**.
Is it because I questioned, why suddenly someone who never posts in this forum wants to know all about flight procedures at a contentious airfield that people in his area want to see shut down, so we can have yet another bloody shopping centre or some such eyesore ?

I apologised to the author about my insinuations that he was part of the very vocal group that want to see no aviation carried out at Weston.
I agree if he is has concerns and examples of low flying aircraft, do get some more information/evidence and the guilty can be haulted over the coals.
And before I am chastised again, I say I do not condone flying low over built up areas since it is not safe and only adds fuel to the fire in this instance.

But on the other side we all know that there are enough people in Leixlip claiming all sorts of things in order to close Weston down.
Personally I have only flown at Weston sporadically (too expensive and some right posing eejits hanging round to boot), but it is a principle I am fighting for in this case.
That airfield is the only GA airfield in the Dublin area and please do not state you can fly at Dublin airport.
That airfield has been in operation since 1930s and if it is shut what chance do any other airfields stand.
Yes, I am angry with some people in Leixlip area because it is yet another example of nimbeys sounding off and if they make enough noise, people bend over backwards and they eventually get their way.
Then we can all be on this forum blowing smoke out our as*** about flying flight sims and what our favourite aircarft is.

Once again OP it is not personal, but it gets my goat up when I hear some of your nieghbours who need to remember airfield was there first.

pclancy wrote:

Kbannon I think you're right to be concerned and should certainly both note aircraft reg's that you feel are very low and visit the tower to voice your concerns. I love flying and am really looking forward to learning myself in Weston over the coming years but safety of people both in the air and on the ground MUST take precedence if GA is to be accepted by local communities. Im sure Weston and the GA community feel the very same, so as cp251 said, go to them and ask!

Let us know about the outcome.

Sad to say some local communities and in particular some individuals will nver accept aviation in their area.
Airfields and operators can bend over backwards and in the end they get screwed over. More votes in looking after local residents.
BTW why not do the study and then take nice holiday for yourself/family and learn to fly in some nice sunny climate over a month rather than spending "years" learning at Weston ?

RoundyMooney

jmayo wrote:

Excuse me, I take issue with reference to my post as cr**.

Okay, I can play semantics with the best of 'em.

No one called the post itself crap. In the context of the post I quoted (inverted commas included) was the line "Has OP ever posted in this forum before or am I imagining things ?"
Now this forum is open to all, and the OP didn't even post here in the first place, which pretty much negates the second part of your quote (below)

jmayo wrote:

Is the fact that I questioned, why suddenly someone who never posts in this forum wants to know all about flight procedures at a contentious airfield that people in his area want to see shut down, so we can have yet another bloody shopping centre or some such eyesore ?

Aside from the fact that he didn't post here in the first place, he didn't look for flight procedures per se, but in fact enquired as to what the regulations in place were.

jmayo wrote:

I apologised to the author about my insinuations that he was part of the very vocal group that want to see no aviation carried out at Weston.

Yes you did, but not in the post I referred to. The apology was necessary, but no less appreciated for all that.

jmayo wrote:

I agree if he is has concerns and examples of low flying aircraft, do get some more information/evidence and the guilty can be haulted over the coals.
And before I am chastised again, I say I do not condone flying low over built up areas since it is not safe and only adds fuel to the fire in this instance.

I didn't chastise you in particular in the first place. I did post that your comment was out order for the forum in so many words, and the post in question was subsequently reported by another user.

On the one hand, we have someone claiming that they're getting a load of "crap" thrown at them, on the other, when a problematic (section of a) post is put forward by me impartially as the only such instance of hostility in the thread, I'm accused of chastisement.

As previously stated, we all (except the OP) seem to be in agreement that these incidents should be further scrutinised, so unless OP themselves has something more to add, I can't see this thread serving much more of a purpose than inflaming people...

<snip remainder for brevity>

BostonB

kbannon wrote:

...I don't recall saying that. One plane flying low and parallel to the ridge of my terrace is cause for concern.

Er I quoted you?

kbannon wrote:

....The amount of low (<~150m) planes flying over my estate/leixlip village is a cause for concern.

By "the amount..." did you mean rare and isolated incidents? I thought this gives the impression this is happening a lot, But then you say not so often that you can step out and take a photo or report the aircraft number. So I'm confused

pclancy wrote:

Kbannon ...safety of people both in the air and on the ground MUST take precedence if GA is to be accepted by local communities. I...

Accepted? Its been there over 70yrs. I thought safety did take precedence?

Seth Brundle

@BostonB - no need to be confused. As said before, it does happen and it happens regularly enough - but just not for me to be in a position to capture it. There are enough planes to cause a concern but in general between commuting, looking after kids, etc. I rarely get a chance to stand out in my back garden so taking pics is not really a viable option.
Furthermore, I have been involved in so many committees (clubs etc.) over the years that involved so much politics that I have absolutely no interest or motivation in pursuing this further. My 'leadership' days are over!
I began this thread (in commuting/transport) merely looking for info on what routes the planes were allowed fly and at what minimum heights. I asked more out of curiosity than out of any activism intentions.
I disliked the fact that an attitude by some posters presumed that I could be wrong, that I was a newbie to this particular forum, that I was part of a lobby group that wanted the place shut down, etc. Is that the general standard of the A&A forum? I would like to think not!
Anyhow, roundy - my qeuery has been answered - you can lock this now if you wish!

RoundyMooney

kbannon wrote:

I disliked the fact that an attitude by some posters presumed that I could be wrong, that I was a newbie to this particular forum, that I was part of a lobby group that wanted the place shut down, etc. Is that the general standard of the A&A forum? I would like to think not!

Stick around, you'll find that it isn't. What was under discussion here was and is probably the most contentious issue faced by GA folk at this time, so emotions running high is to be expected to a certain degree. That's not to say of course that someone has a less valid opinion because they may not be known to the forum regulars.

There has been some good discussion on this thread, and paradoxically maybe, a lot of consensus. If you guys feel that there is more to be said, then feel free to start a new discussion thread, I feel that this one has gotten bogged down in places, and so I'm going to hang a padlock on it