Safeguarding and windfarms

[rogcal]

I've just received a request for my views from a consultancy working for EON, on a proposed 17 turbine wind farm to be located 3km north of my farm strip.

When you consider that another 6 turbine wind farm is also proposed on a location just 1km north of me (on Sempringham Fen farm strip to be precise), Im begining to wonder if living in "turbine alley" might just be a tad annoying from an aeronautical standpoint let alone living under the shadow of the 126.5m high "monsters.

My immediate concerns are:

the effect on radar returns from my non transponder equipped VP1 when flying in the vicinity of my strip, in airspace I share with Grobs, Fireflies, Harriers, Tornados and Typhoons, from the four RAF stations around me and potential turbulence problems when the wind is from the north.

I suppose from a navigational standpoint, if I'm routing to the north, I shall have to do a dog leg around the nearest windfarm, as with a ROC of 400-500ft a minute, I haven't a chance of clearing the nearest turbines 1km to the north by 500f ft (906 ft agl).

Do any of you "wiseheads" out there have any advice on how to draft a "sensible" response to the consultants showing how a windfarm may/shall affect my operations?

They obviously don't think there's going to be a problem when one considers the wording they use:

"the CAA has advised we consult you as aerodrome operator to confirm you have no safeguarding concern in respect of the proposed windfarm"

or are they using subliminal psychology to instill a belief in my mind that I shall have no safeguarding concerns by using that term in their letter?

Crafty buggers!

[Gary Carr]

hi,
Well i am in the middle of this subject and i am Anti windfarm and so are the residents here!! i have posted a link for you to see this will efect my flying with regards to a private strip which i was hoping for next year!
may be of some info to you! and i wish you all the best!

http://www.lochslewis.org/content/view/271/32/

Gary

well i should not have to go far for landing lights power

[rogcal]

Thanks for your response Gary.

I'm not against any form of renewable energy developments per se however the way this government has gone about "rearranging" the current planning legislation to favour wind farm developers is unforgivable, in what still purports to be a democratic nation (echoes of the third runway decision).

Add to that the undeniable fact that efficiency levels for wind turbines are poor, taxpayers (and electricity bill payers) cash is being doled out to developers in massive handfulls, makes me wonder what this (and later) governments responses will be when it becomes glaringly obvious that this particular form of energy production was far from the "let's save the planet" scheme they'd have all believe is the answer to our energy needs.

I'd be more than happy to have a biomass/clean coal burning/nuclear power plant as a neighbour, knowing full well it would provide local jobs and more importantly, energy when you need it.

Sorry for going ever so slightly off topic but on the subject of safeguarding my strip, I have already responded on the basis of "effects on radar returns and creating "pinch points" in a low level exercise area/transit corridor".

With 15 turbines already at Bicker to the north, eight more to the south at Deeping St Nick's, six next door to me at Sempringham Fen and another 16 planned on the Crown land next door to those, the landscape on the Fens will become a Telly Tubbies landscape of nightmare proportions which will be with us for a minimum of 25 years.

Perhaps the "navigating via wind farms" idea is not such a good idea after all, when one considers the potential for so many to be grouped closely together, in an area covering tens if not hundreds of square miles!

[Will Greenwood]

Hi Roger, without stating the obvious, if the wind farm is going to be a "danger to aircraft", i.e any aircraft based or visiting your airstrip, then you must inform the CAA and the consultants ASAP. I had a similar situation with power lines which were being re-routed, and in the end got them put under ground for the reason above. If they can not ensure saftey then they have to find a solution, and stick to your guns !! Have you consulted the CAA ?

Will.

[rogcal]

Will

The CAA and MOD will be consulted and will make their own individual responses.

As I said, I have made my response and shall await the outcome.

[Gary Carr]

Aviation
Half of all wind farm developments in the UK will face objections from aviation stakeholders on the grounds of radar interference, obstruction or impact to low flying. The BWEA is working with BERR, NATS En Route, the CAA and the MOD to address aviation concerns, and here you will find background and useful reference material as well as information on current activities.

This was taken from the site at BWEA !

16 June 2008 On Friday 13th June the BWEA, BERR, DfT, MOD, NATS and the CAA signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to demonstrate a shared commitment to remove aviation and radar barriers in wind farm development.

The MOU identifies the structure for how BERR, BWEA, the Department of Transport (DfT), NATS En Route, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and the MOD will work together in addressing these issues. Within the MOU there is an Aviation Plan that identifies individual work-streams that are needed to develop and implement workable solutions. Under the MOU, all parties commit to implement the Aviation Plan, which defines mitigation activities moving forward. The parties also accept that improvements to pre-planning and planning consultation processes are necessary.

gary

[rogcal]

Gary

To quote from the MOU:

"The parties also accept that improvements to pre-planning and planning consultation processes are necessary".

It's a credit to EON that they got the consultation process underway so quickly after announcing their proposals but Scottish Power/Iberdrola have still yet to consult with me despite the fact that my strip is 1000 metres from their proposed development and they submitted their planning application for six turbines last week (and subsequently had it handed back to them by the planning officer, due to many errors within the application).

So, it shall be interesting to see when or if at all they do contact me as a statutory consultee which they are advised to do by the CAA!

They probably don't even realise that two strips are within 4 kms of their proposed development which isn't surprising when one considers the way they have gone or more precisely haven't gone about consulting with the wider community, in the preceeding two years since they first announced the proposal.

[Gary Carr]

Hi Rog, to Quote

They probably don't even realise that two strips are within 4 kms of their proposed development which isn't surprising when one considers the way they have gone or more precisely haven't gone about consulting with the wider community, in the preceeding two years since they first announced the proposal.

The problem i had with the Scotish Hydro was i was not consulted when they decided that they was going to go through my house site which is a new building project (new house) i have planning permission for the new house and barn, when i confronted the S.Hydro they ased for a meeting on my site i was told that the house and barn was not mentioned on there plans all they was interested in was getting from A to B i cant understand why i got drawings from the scotish hydro with the cables comming through my property when planning permission was granted fromj the council so back to your Quote!! They probably don't even realise that two strips are within 4 kms of their proposed development ! i am even sure this is the case!!

[Will Greenwood]

Hi Roger, sorry if I did not make myself clear enough, but just to be on the safe side, voice your concerns directly to the CAA about the proximity of the wind farm to your RUNWAY. When it comes to the consoltation and they see that you objected on the grounds of air safety, compared to having the CAA objecting on the grounds of air saftey on your behalf is going to be a stronger case. Good luck with it all.
From what you are telling me the CAA have passed the buck?

Will.

[John Brady]

I wrote a substantial piece on windfarms for the magazine last month but it did not make the cut. I have a good relationship with the sqn ldr in DAP who deals with wind farm notifications - they get more than one a day and evaluate them in relation to known aerodromes. If the aerodrome is licenced, they will take a formal position and respond to a consultation. If the aerodrome or strip is marked on the VFR chart, they will endevour to let the owner or the LAA know so they can take action themselves. The CAA has no safeguarding responsibility for unlicenced aerodromes and strips and they will not theselves respond to a planning consultation.

The issue here, as I understand it, is a consultant has got in touch about the preparation of a planning application. This is good as many strip owners keep their head down and nobody knows they are there, least of all the planning department - so windfarm applications can go to planning approval without strip owners ever finding out. And consultants can write that "all local aerodromes have been consulted and have no objection" because they probably don't know about any strips and neither does the planning committee.

So what is to be done:

It would be reasonable to set out the proposed development on a large scale map and plot the consequences for your strip operation, both lateral and vertical. If you think it will be a problem, register your objection with the developer and tell them you wish to be consulted. I would not give the developer too much detail at this stage.

Next - you may be aware that any strip owner can apply to have their operation safeguarded but few do because it means drawing the attention of the local authority to your presence. However, if you are going to object to the proposed development they will know about you then. Why not consider pre-empting the developer by applying for safeguarding. You need to look at CAP 738 and CAP 428 both available for download from the CAA website.

More generally, the LAA needs people to help develop the knowledge on this subject so we can help strip owners who are under threat and perhaps have a database of knowledge and documents to help. If we have nowhere to land we won't be able to fly. If you think you can help develop this please send me a PM and we will try to organise a virtual centre of excellence on windfarms.

Personally I have had to put this aside as I am up to my armpits in controlled airspace issues so any help would be welcome!

John Brady

[rogcal]

Thanks for the tips John and you're quite right, I like many others do like to keep my head down and operate my strip under the 28 day rule (four times that amount of days in reality but no hassle from anyone for over 6 years) however, I did inform the CAA for charting purposes, as I knew I would become a statutory consultee when the proposals for a wind farm become more than just a proposal.

Although I have already submitted my response, I appear to have followed your line of approach and kept it succinct and factual.

I would be interested to read your article and would hope that the magazine's editor can find it some room in the next issue, as I'm sure there are plenty in the same boat as myself and if the government will persist in throwing our money away in the form of subsidies to wind farm developers, there will be many more strip owners affected in the coming years!

When the process is all over, whatever the outcome, I shall be more that happy to share my experiences with others.

I'm really looking forward to being a virtual centre of excellence.

It'll make a change from being called a lot of other things!

[John Brady]

Roger,

contact me off line and I will send a copy of my article - you may be able to improve it with some experience before it makes the mag.

John

[email protected]