While we of course knew that a number of airports would seek temporary controlled airspace to handle additional movements, this proposal seems particularly excessive.
Combined with the Home Office restricted zone, this would effectively close the 'Abingdon gap' and prevent any Class G airspace movements to the East of the Cotswolds.
As the operator of a vintage type with a non-approved radio installation, it would effectively ground me for the duration. Nor would I be able to glide from Hinton, Weston on the Green or Bicester.
If Oxford is planning on using 01/19 for anticipated Olympic traffic, I cannot see any justification for their requirement for controlled airspace to the East of the M40 or South of Oxford, to the East of the A34.
Both of these would give easy definition for VFR navigation, although the latter will further narrow the heavily-trafficked bottleneck at the edge of the Benson zone.
I also am concerned given Oxford’s recent keen-ness to take over airspace control from Lyneham, that this ‘temporary’ zone will be used in future to create a dangerous precedent.
If you, like me are concerned and wish to respond, the person who sent this letter to local airfields as part of their compulsory consultation process is Alison Evans, manager ATS at Oxford airport. [email protected] aybe you would like to also copy in NATS too.
