|
|
Post by flyinkiwi on Oct 29, 2021 14:38:35 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Oct 29, 2021 15:57:57 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Oct 29, 2021 15:58:48 GMT 12
I'd say sadly the airfield is a goner. This time next year it will be houses.  |
|
|
|
Post by markrogers on Oct 29, 2021 16:57:40 GMT 12
That is a shame :-(
|
|
|
|
Post by camtech on Oct 29, 2021 17:58:49 GMT 12
It appears that although the Raglan Community Board put an option up to close the airfield, council seems to be pushing ahead with the fence. Having worked for this council for some years, and having been the airfield manager for several years, I used to see both sides of the argument. The NIMBYs lobbied because of the noise (aircraft flying overhead) and safety (potential for a crash on take off). Raglanites have for years been too lazy to walk around the field, instead treading a well worn path over the airfield, even while aircraft operations are underway. When doing runway checks (looking for rabbit holes), often had to dodge locals wandering in front of me. As very few locals are flyers or have no interest in aviation, local support is limited. I certainly hope the council sees sense and puts the fence up.
|
|
|
|
Post by oj on Oct 29, 2021 19:32:37 GMT 12
Strategically, the area should remain clear ground, though I cannot readily justify it in today's climate of electronic warfare.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnnyfalcon on Oct 29, 2021 20:22:57 GMT 12
We just keep getting walked over...from all points of the compass. I'm completely disillusioned with what NZ has become
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Dec 28, 2021 11:08:08 GMT 12
Look at these morons sitting on the fenced off runway while it is in use!
|
|
|
|
Post by lesterpk on Dec 28, 2021 13:27:33 GMT 12
CAA would be right along to fine them for obstructing a runway.......yeah right.
|
|
|
|
Post by markrogers on Dec 28, 2021 19:53:13 GMT 12
Stupid idiots, do they not know it's an aerodrome.
|
|
|
|
Post by oj on Dec 28, 2021 21:17:27 GMT 12
As a friend opined two days ago:
The District Council who installed the obstruction fence might get a fright when the first aircraft owner who may be forced (for whatever reason) to collide with it sues the council for damages to their aircraft.
On a secondary point, has anybody looked into the normally-accepted "safety" dimensions regarding allowances for runway departures (for whatever reason) on airfields of this nature?
|
|
|
|
Post by flyinkiwi on Jan 5, 2022 12:02:31 GMT 12
CAA would be right along to fine them for obstructing a runway.......yeah right. After all, it IS the law: I'm sure the lawyers among the protesters are just waiting to argue what a "reasonable excuse" means... |
|
|
|
Post by 30sqnatc on Jan 5, 2022 12:53:49 GMT 12
Though the white lines were a pedestrian crossing
|
|
|
|
Post by simonlowther on Jan 5, 2022 13:14:03 GMT 12
As a friend opined two days ago: The District Council who installed the obstruction fence might get a fright when the first aircraft owner who may be forced (for whatever reason) to collide with it sues the council for damages to their aircraft. On a secondary point, has anybody looked into the normally-accepted "safety" dimensions regarding allowances for runway departures (for whatever reason) on airfields of this nature? The fence is promulgated in the AIP so their is no risk to the council, further pilots use the airfield at there own risk (Waikato DC terms and conditions).
On the second point the fence is well below the critical obstacle gradient (being 1:20) the critical obstacles being the hill at one end and a rather large Norfolk Pine at the other.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mustang51 on Jan 5, 2022 16:48:31 GMT 12
Who were those dickwads on the runway......should be identified and charged.
|
|
|
|
Post by camtech on Jan 5, 2022 20:06:02 GMT 12
Who were those dickwads on the runway......should be identified and charged. Probably locals asserting their "rights". |
|
|
|
Post by Mustang51 on Jan 6, 2022 2:43:40 GMT 12
They have the right to be struck and killed by an aircraft. Darwin proven right again...........and, would they be charged with murder/attempted murder if their actions, in deliberately occupying an active runway, caused the crash of an aircraft and the death/serious injury of its occupant/s ?
|
|
|
|
Post by oj on Jan 6, 2022 20:49:27 GMT 12
Thanks Simon for explaining the liability and dimensions.
|
|
|
|
Post by flyinkiwi on Jan 7, 2022 8:55:53 GMT 12
...........and, would they be charged with murder/attempted murder if their actions, in deliberately occupying an active runway, caused the crash of an aircraft and the death/serious injury of its occupant/s ? This part of the Aviation Crimes Act 1972 would appear to apply: |
|
|
|
Post by thebrads on Jan 17, 2022 19:24:33 GMT 12
I just spent a few days at the Raglan Camping Ground. The runway is fenced off, with the runway now only taking about half the grassed area's width. I do hold some concern that the wooden posts at times (like the peak of summer!) will blend into the brown grass, and of course the wire net being all but invisible from the air.  I completely messed up my photos of it, but there is a small encampment behind the fence (i.e. not on the runway) half way along. This is all i could salvage from the pics.  So the current protesters are not blocking the runway (although you could argue the council may have done that by erecting the fence). I wandered over for a chat with one of the kaumatua onsite, and he had some interesting points about things. I left with the impression that more discussion between the council, the locals (including iwi) and the users might have resulted in a different outcome; and that things might deteriorate further yet. |
|
