TAG airspace Grab

[C Rule]

The following was posted on another site but is worth posting here
Colin

I was chatting to a few people at Lasham recently and some commented that TAG's recent airspace consultation (see reminder e-mail below) was not even worth replying to! Nothing could be further from the truth.

This recent "sub-consultation" forms a new but integral part of the on-going consultation that started in around 2012 that intends to hedge in Lasham with controlled airspace. This is still a very serious situation and the airspace team is expending a huge amount of effort - in fact, working our socks off - to save LGS from this immensely critical threat.

The sub-consultation is about one route. It does not change the rest of the proposal, which LGS believes is unsafe, disproportionate and unjustified. It represents a very serious threat to the future viability of Lasham. The sub-consultation makes it even worse.

YOUR RESPONSE WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. You should email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> with the subject 'Airspace Consultation', giving your name, address and contact details, then explain your concerns. There is more information on how to respond on page 16 of the Consultation Document (attached). DO NOT copy the points below word for word or your response may be disregarded. The Consultation period is very short and it closes at 7pm on Wednesday 5th October 2016. Send also a copy to Gavin Spink for our records.

You should also write to your Council and MP too. Search the web for the name of your Parish Councillors and or Parish Clerk and ask your Parish Council to send in a response. You might remind them TAG did not consult them previously. We sent you the proposal on 26 August as an attachment. If you no longer have this, the new proposal can be found at:
<https://www.consultation.tagfarnborough ... tation.pdf>

There are many issues with the new proposal, However, keeping it simple:

- It lowers the airspace from 4500 to 3500 ft above sea level by Liss-Liphook adjacent to the Oakhangar HIRTA, making flights to and from the South Downs much more difficult. Look at CTA 7 in Map 02 attached. Check the map!

- It reinforces the choke point for gliders and GA traffic to the South of Lasham.

- Figure 1 in the Consultation Document shows the 'area of consultation'. However, this does not include all the communities under the extended lower CTA7 airspace such as Liss, over which the airspace will be lowered from 4500 to 3500 feet above sea level. The South Downs National Park is affected too.

- There are no 'Noise Contour Charts' to explain to communities what noise impacts can be expected.

- TAG have now claimed in the latest consultation that the proposal will be 'even safer' but safer than what or for whom? No safety case has been provided nor any supporting data. In particular, in making the claim that their proposal is safer, where is the evidence that the reinforcement of the choke point will make it safer for other aviation users in the area? We believe the overall proposal will be significantly more dangerous for gliding and GA.

- TAG are showing that some aircraft will be at 5-6000 ft at the same place that they have lowered the base of controlled airspace to 3,500 ft. The two claims are incompatible. No one can be sure where the aircraft will fly without aviation 'Plates' which formally define precise routes and altitudes, which have been provided in other Airspace Change Proposals but that TAG have never provided.

To assist you, the attached map1.pdf shows an overview of newly lowered airspace in red, the communities being consulted in blue, and the altitudes and swathes of aircraft movements as provided in the Consultation. Map02.pdf shows the change in detail: the first page shows the new airspace altitudes south of Oakhanger compared with TAG's first proposals and the second page shows the affected parishes.

In sending in a response, you do not have to generate a massive reply nor have to fill in reams of forms. An email stating your concerns is sufficient.

Finally, if you still have any questions please contact me or any member of the ACP Team via the office.

Please, do not be complacent. That would be a huge mistake.

[James Chan]

One slight concern I have is if Farnborough gets even a small part of its requested airspace (because of objections from several directions), will that airspace become more intensively utilised such that a transit becomes even more difficult?

Just wondering!