APPROVED MINUTES of the 84th Meeting of the Elstree Aerodrome Consultative Committee
Meeting held on 11^th September 2001 at the Aerodrome restaurant

 PRESENT:  

Also present were Howard Guard and Cllr S Nagler.
Ian Southern chaired the meeting being next alphabetically. Chris Beney took the minutes in the absence of our minutes secretary.

1. E-MAIL
Those present were asked to give e-mail addresses if they were willing to have them used to receive papers etc.


2. APOLOGIES: Cllr Colne, H Connor, R Ferry, Capt Wood.

3. MINUTES
The minutes of the previous meeting were agreed unchanged.
 

4. COMPLAINTS
Mr Houlder reported that there had only been 15 complaints in August compared with 57 last year; and 28 in July compared with 147 last year. Some sound level tests in a garden had indicated a background of 35 to 40 dBA with aircraft typically taking it to 50 to 60 dBA. This effect was very similar to the level and duration of the current lower level overflying (east‑west and vv) commercial jets.
There were still some unlogged complaints.
Cllrs Payne and Nagler know of people who have given up complaining as nothing happens.
Henry Holland-Hibbert said one of the Colne Valley area's problems was transiting planes.
Cllr O'Brien saw some improvement in south west Bushey but they are still cutting the corner.
Mr Beney requested a thorough go at the next meeting at the details of the complaints recording.
Mike Browse said that he logged every complaint.
Cllr Turner asked about the answering machine proposals. Mr Houlder said they had got a lot of abuse on it, long messages. Mr Southern (chair) asked the aerodrome to try a long gap before it switched on in order to allow the controller to pick it up whenever operationally possible.

5. CIRCUITS

Mr Beney ran over the route history and tabled a sheet and four or five plans.

Mr Southern (chair) asked the meeting to discuss the 'Great Northern Route', further north than at present, as one of the circuits. Cons were students may lose sight of aerodrome, other (non-circuit) aircraft follow the M25, LSF felt it difficult to instruct on. Pros were aerodrome would accept it (it is legal even if outside ATZ), LSF would accept if no alternative, some others would accept but only on the 'one third of one half of the time' basis.

The Chairman suggested that combining practicability and disruption, there may be gains if they can go beyond the top of the three present routes.

A Mrs Palmer is listing planes over north Radlett.

The possibility of two Radlett circuits was touched on.

Mr Southern (chair) asked if clearer ground marks could be provided to give more accurate circuits e.g. a blob on a pole. The aerodrome doubted that and said that the Radlett conurbation currently provides the marker.

Cllr Payne [and Cllr Nagler] continued to object to 'scatter'. Mr Houlder felt the three circuits were not scatter. Mr Beney asked why the split circuits were unacceptable with complaints so low. Mr Jones agreed scatter was unacceptable in an ideal world, but complaints are minimal and a reversion to all day south Radlett circuits would affect large numbers of people adversely. He felt our committee should represent everyone, Hertsmere as a whole,.

Cllr Saunders made eight points, including that he represented everyone/all of Radlett via the County Council, that we should have consulted property owners when making changes, people who move in knew where the flight paths were, we should have kept the 1990 circuit map, scatter over Radlett is politically unacceptable, the committee [aerodrome?] acted despite the advice of all the elected council members.

Mrs Holland said she had lived in the area for 35 years and only the last 5 or so years have been a problem.

Mr Browse felt people should know they were buying houses in the ATZ and not expect flight paths to move.

Mr Jones referred to Cllr Saunders' comments. Many people had lived locally a very long time and could not have predicted the future and (according to Mr Houlder) aircraft flew over the whole of Radlett. Also during the 1990 circuit they flew quite widely. May 2000 wasn't the 1990 route.

Mr Beney mentioned that in our whole existence we have never consulted property owners specifically, he believed it would be wholly impractical to do so effectively.

Cllr O'Brien reminded the meeting that whatever we did in Radlett we mustn't come to make it worse in Bushey, particularly the non-crossing of the A41/M1.

The chairman in a summing up referred to the strong feelings against a single route, and the unacceptability of the three route way to some. Public attitudes in 2001 is what is now relevant and probably whatever is done has to spread the load. Perhaps the status quo, but John Houlder has to decide.

6. SILENCERS

Mr Southern (chair) asked what, in the light of the trial, is Cabair's view on fitting all aircraft with silencers. He requested a statement by the training organisations that they should be fitted. He asked Mr Houlder if he had the power to require such fitting [sec's note, no recorded answer on my notes]. He also asked would he talk to the trainers about this. Mr Houlder agreed to do so and will come back to the committee with the outcome. 

Cllr Saunders reminded people that it is politically expedient to do all in their power to quieten these aircraft. Mr Houlder has control through aircraft parking and so on hence the power to require silencing. By getting aircraft quieter all our problems will reduce considerably.

Mr Houlder is also looking to much quieter aircraft types.

Mr Beney mentioned that some years ago there was a study that showed that 5% increase or decrease in flights/noise resulted in nearly 50% increase or decrease in complaints.

Mr Jefferis felt that 5dBA is definitely worth while. In terms of silencer legislation we are definitely going to have to do it in the long term and we should do it now.

Mr Jones supported Cllr Saunders' position on silencers, the trial did not work very effectively, but the Cessna was certainly quieter. The Warrior (PA28) we do not have the facts yet. But can we please have substitution of quieter aircraft.

Mr Houlder reported that the CAA was now helpful, rather than unhelpful, on silencers.

The chairman urged Mr Houlder to use his best endeavours to get silencers fitted 'soonest'.

 
7. FLYTEAM Ltd

Mr Beney expressed grave concern about what appeared to be a third flying school despite firm promises by the aerodrome management that they would only permit one.

Flyteam's web site clearly implied they were training at Elstree.

It turned out that they actually have been doing circuits. Indeed a Cabair aircraft was once removed from the circuit because of Flyteam aircraft.

Mr Southern (chair) reminded Mr Houlder that he had said private pilots fly straight in, without circuits.

Mr Houlder agreed to instruct the control tower that neither Flyteam nor Skysport [another?] should do any circuits. [secs note: I think the rule now is that the closest to a circuit allowed is a local flight going some specified distance away from the aerodrome, and not involving in total more than two[straight-in] touch-and-goes and one landing for any individual pilot in any one day]

8. MATTERS RAISED BY MEMBERS
Mr Brugger expressed concern at the expansion implied in the extra organisations, Flyteam and Skysport.
Helicopters will be taken at the next meeting. Some maps will be circulated.

9. PLANS

Next Sunday is competitions day. They got permission from the CAA without seeking Mr Houlder's approval first.
Fuel tank. 15th May to Council. Waiting a reply. Double skinned. Half buried.

10.    DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING

The date of the next meeting will be Thursday 6th December. Cllr Turner, being next alphabetically, invited to chair.