Airborne_Again wrote:
That makes absolutely no sense. But it’s of course good for Redhill that they don’t have the movement restriction during summer.
The restriction is to placate locals who have argued that the hard runway would enormously increase activity. There being no grounds to place a restriction on overall activity (since planning permission for the use of the grass is already in place), they have engineered a restriction on movements from the hard runway as a psuedo-restriction on overall movements.
My guess is that they won’t find the restriction too much of a problem if they are clever about it, which – given their solution is restrictions on circuits – I suspect they are not. Airport management in this country isn’t known for its intelligence. What they ought to do is devise some way to reserve use of the hard runway for those aircraft that really need it, i.e. retractables and other stuff that really doesn’t like grass. British GA pilots are notoriously cheap, so charging a bit more for the hard than for the grass ought to do it.
Silvaire wrote:
I’m wondering how you operate an airport with several flight schools when limited to 85 operations a day.
Between November and March I’m sure the weather will care of things. For those five months you are looking at maybe 30-40% of days having weather unsuitable for flying training, so you just sandbag your movement allowance. It might have helped if the rolling average was monthly or every two weeks rather than every week. It is rare for seven days in a row to be totally unflyable, but it can happen. I’m sure the schools will absolutely cane the circuits when the weather improves after a few bad days.
Mind bending fussiness in rule making 
I’m wondering how you operate an airport with several flight schools when limited to 85 operations a day.
Ibra wrote:
The “agreement” was that hard runway will be used to maintain “local activity” when grass are water logged but not to increase “visitor activity” during summer…they should have word it as such, unless it’s a tailwheel, why you want to land on grass if hard is available?
That makes absolutely no sense. But it’s of course good for Redhill that they don’t have the movement restriction during summer.
I will keep that in mind
Ibra wrote:
nless it’s a tailwheel, why you want to land on grass if hard is available?
Landing on grass reduces tyre and brake wear. Unless the grass is really rough, anything light and fixed gear will do better.
Why restrictions November-March only?
The “agreement” was that hard runway will be used to maintain “local activity” when grass are water logged but not to increase “visitor activity” during summer…they should have word it as such, unless it’s a tailwheel, why you want to land on grass if hard is available?
arj1 wrote:
Airborne_Again is the hard runway, all others are grass and I think that they are OK with those during the summer and have big problems only duting the winter time.
Surely the restriction is due to noise disturbances and not runway wear!?
Airborne_Again wrote:
Why restrictions November-March only? I thought that the summer period, when people spend more time outdoors, would be more critical for noise.
@Airborne_Again is the hard runway, all others are grass and I think that they are OK with those during the summer and have big problems only duting the winter time.
Why restrictions November-March only? I thought that the summer period, when people spend more time outdoors, would be more critical for noise.
