Airside access at Sywell fly-in

Bill McCarthy · Post by **Bill McCarthy** » Sat Jul 18, 2009 10:08 pm

Steve, I must be reading the "Strut History" section wrongly then. My interpretation of it is that it was formed BY LAA members For LAA members - in a way, to enhance membership of the association.
On a lighter note - are you saying that the East Grinstead Ladies Needlework and Basketry Group - who knit registrations say, on woolie pullies, can be affiliated also.

steveneale · Post by **steveneale** » Sat Jul 18, 2009 10:34 pm

Bill, EC wish NC to represent as many aspects of our membership as possible. IMHO representation on NC of the single greatest sector of membership next to permit holders has been long overdue and MKAS fit that role nicely.

Massive thread drift here now chaps.

macconnacher · Post by **macconnacher** » Sat Jul 18, 2009 11:41 pm

Bill
The document you need to read on affiliation is the Strut Handbook which adds to the rules of the association.
MKAS asked to be affiliated as anyone can and the EC can agree or not and add any condition on that membership. Affiliation of an organisation does not give it automatic entry to the NC and whilst there some notional rules over having 50 members in the UK the EC make the decision on whether the affiliation is in LAAs interest and also whether having given that affiliation they believe that making a place available to sit on the NC is also in LAAs interest.

With the recent transfer of Austers onto the LAA Permit Scheme I am sure that all will endorse the International Auster Clubs affiliation and membership of the NC. It was this type of body that affiliation was created for and possibly if the Stampes come onto Permit then we will possibly offer affiliation to them. The East Grinstead ....... seem only to have a tenuous reason to be affiiated wheras the MKAS have an interest in our type of aviation and have assisted us at recent events at Sywell where the local strut was unable to provide sufficient manpower.

I take issue with Steve that now as a part of the NC they have a vote. I believe that the NC does not hold votes since it is a consensus body and whilst we do have the occasional show of hands to judge the level of feeling on a topic; a situation where affiliated organisations could outvote the Struts is not possible because of the numbers of Stuts which have an automatic right to sit on the EC and that any sustained objection by a group of NC members would be reported to the EC who are the body that takes decisions.

We seem to be suffering "Thread Creep" since this has little to do with Airside Access at Sywell.

Bill McCarthy · Post by **Bill McCarthy** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 12:30 am

I guess I've gotten hot under the collar over a couple of things - the apparent abandonment by our association of what promised to be (after much trumpeting as "The LAA International Rally" - "showcase event" etc, etc) a great get-together - where / how did it all go so horribly wrong after the "EC is so enthusiastic about the return of our national rally". The barring of free access to LAA members by the MKAS was the last straw (for me at least) - as I said, I would want to spend time with airside aircraft which grabs my interest. If the MKAS are affiliated to our association, they surely must have realised that there would be howls of protest over a basic requirement to "get in".
I have to take a regular "chill pill" to get the pulse rate down over this and look at the Devon Strut website to see how IT SHOULD BE DONE.
As the other fella said "Include me out"

Mike Cross · Post by **Mike Cross** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 6:34 am

Poor Steve, some of you guys are like rottweilers.

The NC is there to offer advice to the EC. It has no executive powers.
Struts are not part of the LAA, they are affiliated organisations. The same applies to the Type Clubs.

It follows that LAA does not control affilliated organisations and therefore cannot dictate their membership criteria (much as the more right-wing control freaks might wish it could)

It is of course entirely a matter for LAA whether or not they choose to affiliate with someone. However I believe the Association would be much the poorer if affilliation was done away with.

The Sywell Rally is not an LAA event. End of story.

Brian Hope · Post by **Brian Hope** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 8:11 am

Bill, you're normally such a reasonable bloke, I can only imagine that you've got the wrong end of the stick over this.
As an association, we have had type clubs and Struts associated with us for decades. These clubs and Struts are the grass roots of recreational flying, to have them feeding their enthusiasm, problems and opinions into the association has to be a good thing. NC is their forum, their direct link into the hub, thus ensuring that the Executive is kept aware of what is happening around the country.
For years we have known that 50% of our membership have no direct requirement to be members of the association, they do not own a permit aircraft, they do not have a build project, and they quite probably do not fly; they are enthusiasts who love aviation as much as those who actively participate and who want to support the association. Is it not right that we recognise those members and give them a voice? Are they not just as important as the members of the Jodel Club or the Mid Kent Strut?
MKAS is a Strut sized group of enthusiasts who are active as marshallers at fly-ins and have been involved with a number of Young Aviator events. Some, but not all, are LAA members, just as is the case in many Struts. Surely by embracing this type of group, we are spreading the message that we as an association, appreciate the support they give recreational aviation and welcome them as existing and future members.
Fact is that without MKAS' assistance, there would be no airside access at all at Sywell this year. They have arranged the airside tours after discussion with Sywell, and because of their long time links with the airfield, and their track record of running a tight ship, they have been given the green light. As a member, I am grateful to them for arranging that - cup half full guys, better than no bloody cup at all!
In the longer term, we hope that MKAS' active role at NC will show enthusiasts around the country that the LAA does cater for their interests. I have been told many times that enthusiast members have turned up at airfields and the mere fact that they have been LAA members and shown their card, has met with a helpful attitude and they have been allowed to look around. Establishing a full blown Rally is another opportunity to give enthusiasts as well as pilots and builders, a reason to support us. Until or unless we start to actively welcome all participants and enthusiasts for aviation into the fold, and offer them real benefits in exchange for their membership fee, we cannot say that we are truly more than a just a builders' organisation, and like it or not there is no future in LAA remaining just a builders' association.
Andre's article is being considered for publication.

Bill McCarthy · Post by **Bill McCarthy** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 9:07 am

Brian, I hold my hands up - since 1976 (when I joined the PFA) I have believed that Strut members were full members of the PFA /LAA - wrong end of the stick indeed. I was/am an enthusiast and the last thing I want is to appear unreasonable. I belong to the biggest strut (in area) and my round trip for meetings is about 300 miles - for those in Shetland it's in the order of 600 miles - now that's enthusiasm for you !
No, what peeved and incensed me (I don't normally get so wound up) was the notion that an outside body - a strut in all but name, albeit dedicated enthusiasts and connected to the LAA, seemed to question our safety awareness and prohibit free access. That's the nub of it - and I'm a toothless Rottweiler really !

Nigel Ramsay · Post by **Nigel Ramsay** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:01 am

No, what peeved and incensed me (I don't normally get so wound up) was the notion that an outside body - a strut in all but name, albeit dedicated enthusiasts and connected to the LAA, seemed to question our safety awareness and prohibit free access. That's the nub of it - and I'm a toothless Rottweiler really !

Bill, it's not about LAA members being discriminated against. As a Sywell event it does not provide any LAA membership advantage. The Airside Access issue is one being dealt with by Sywell. Under THEIR H&S assessment. MKAS have done stuff for them before, it meets their criteria, so they continue. We have no influence over Sywell airside Policy, full stop.

The issues arising out of this now very long thread are mainly about the perceived fitness of LAA members to go airside. Actually I stick to my guns here because I still believe that beyond the passions on here, the actuality is that members vary enormously in their concept of 'what is safe'. I've been flying for over twenty years, nearly all PFA type operations. I'm absolutely sure you too have seen pilots and aircraft owners behaving stupidly, let alone newbies to our activity.

Like it or not, the risk averse culture is here to stay - I don't condone the culture anymore than many on here, especially when it gets as far as kids not being allowed to play conkers etc. The truth isn't that anyone wants to stop them playing, it's that they don't want some ambulance chasing lawyer suing them for it, plain and simple.

Over zealous application of any rule is bad and we must fight against it. If you don't like the 70mph limit there's little you can do other than disobey it at your peril (most of us do!) as it's law. But due diligence IS a defence in law against liability. If you can prove you have looked at the risk and made sure people are aware (and that means documentary evidence) then you stand a very good chance of beating the ambulance chasers. (harping back to an earlier post regarding my staff at the hotel, I had to provide a 5 minute talk on safe use of the hoover (!!!) and most importantly have documentary evidence of having done it. In this case a signed sheet saying they had received instruction - ergo 'not my fault'!

You reckon safety training for 8000 members is daft..... well a simple on-line course, with multiple choice answers and printable 'certificate' for members is actually quite doable in my opinion, and pain though it might be, stupid it may well sound, but if that stops the association and it's officers being sued, and more importantly allows decent airside access for LAA members without all this fuss, then why not?

I think I'm all BB'd out now, so unless it requires it I'll not post again on this thread!

Brian Hope · Post by **Brian Hope** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:11 am

The inference that Sywell is being underhand in some way in running the Sywell Revival event is obtuse in the extreme. Sywell offered LAA the opportunity for a joint venture, an option that I personally felt was wholly appropriate to our desire for a return to an annual rally without exposing the association to financial risk. LAA decided not to proceed with that partnership for 2009, the rights and wrongs of which we could argue till the cows come home, so Sywell chose to continue with a solo event. In order to run such an event there will be significant expenses for Sywell, not least of which will be additional toilet facilities, staff to run ATC, fencing, tentage etc. To charge a £10 landing fee to cover everybody in the aircraft for weekend admission can only be considered as a very reasonable offer. Likewise £5 for visitors by road, and no charge for camping - hardly excessive!
There will be a number of exhibitors, there will be an LAA presence, there will be a 'beer tent', albeit in the hangar, and hopefully there will be some evening entertainment. Personally I believe this event has the makings of a very pleasant and interesting weekend.
I really do hope that the Sywell management do not take the unreasonable moans, accusations and negativity of posters on this board as indicative of LAA members as a whole. I am sure there are very many of us who will attend the event, be grateful to Sywell for putting it on, and will have a great weekend. Nobody is holding a gun to anyone's head here, if the event is not what you want to go to, then dont go. Simple. Alternatively of course, Ron could organise one of his 'rave fly-ins' and no doubt realise that it is a totally unworkable idea as far as trying to get a major event on the map is concerned.

Bill McCarthy · Post by **Bill McCarthy** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 1:57 pm

Perhaps it was the fact that is was a bit late in the day (to my mind) for the LAA to pull stumps on the event after all the publicity it received together with my hopes / excitement (yes excitement) of a thoroughly good look around, that got me fazed. Consequently, my flak, if you like, is not directed at Sywell at all and I am happy to yield on the safety issues - or the cost implications of them. I would be quite happy to fork out £30, say, for my arrival by road - if I did not have to maybe queue up to get escorted round. If they would let me stop by to have a chat with the owner / pilot of an interesting aircraft - and then tag along with another follow on group, I could live with that. Perhaps that could be considered by the escorts. £10 landing fee for visiting aircraft is very reasonable too. Anyway I would hope to be in the running for the longest distance by road !!
I'll have to stew it over to see what becomes of the run-up to the do

J.C. · Post by **J.C.** » Wed Jul 22, 2009 9:17 am

Two observations.. just back from Tannkosh..bus loads of Brit spotters, ALL said they will not go to Sywell, Most said they will not renew their LAA membership.
Has anyone been to La Ferte-Alais? Seen how the public access works?

Ian L · Post by **Ian L** » Wed Jul 22, 2009 2:17 pm

I read Andre's contribution with interest, I have been Marshall 2 (callsign) at every Rally for the past twelve years and part of the operations team working with the CAA on the pre-rally airfield inspection, thererfore I feel qualified to comment on the airside situation. We have never had a serious incident of someone walking into a prop and our experienced marshallers keep a eye out for people wandering around without looking. Of course you will get the situation Andre described but the pilot would be aware and so would the marshallers who are on the lookout specifically for this prior to start up. I do not understand why the experienced Rally team were not asked fro their opinion on this earlier and perhaps we could have come to a compromise such as handing out a short safety leaflet with the do's and don'ts of airside.
If there is a big turnout of aircraft I believe that clearing the runway will be a bigger problem that chopping up the general public.
I am still deciding whether to come as I feel I should support the LAA. It has been suggested that I could be one of these escorts, however I feel this does not make best use of my experience and it is a long way to drive from Aberdeen to not be as involved as I have been in the past.

At Wick a couple of years ago only three of us (including Bill MaCarthy who had other duties) looked after the aircraft. When the airfield authorities saw we knew what we were doing they allowed airside access, which members of the public said made it an even more enjoyable weekend.

Bill McCarthy · Post by **Bill McCarthy** » Wed Jul 22, 2009 4:49 pm

I can confirm Ian's input to the Wick fly-in. The major worry for the Wick ATCO was aircraft arriving in a swarm. There were two volunteer marshals at the fly-in. The ATCO was very surprised at the high level of airmanship displayed by visiting pilots and just as much with the expertise of the marshals. As I said, Wick has never had five aircraft on final before and as as soon as they were on the ground and dispersed to the parking area the marshals had them parked up in in no time at all . All in all a very slick operation by pilots and marshals.
The airport manageress had wanted a 50 limit, but 65 turned up. And by the way, they wanted slots, but then asked who's coming. At the post event "wash-up" they reckoned that they could handle a couple of hundred ! So...............