Look for Lyme Park, SE of Manchester on edge of Peak District. Local places include Disley, Whaley Bridge, Rainow, Kettleshulme and the Goyt Valley.
I think the more we chat about it the more I think this is the case and explains why it happens so it would appear to be reasonable. We can read the writing on the jets passing to the north quite easily and obviously a helicopter and 747 hitting is going to make a very big dent on my land.
But as you said before flying this route at night cannot possibly not fun. We really are talking about a hundred feet from the top of the hill mentioned.
That would fit well. Convenient for the Cheshire stockbroker/footballer belt. I would say they are flying in that direction.
That's alright. It's been most helpful discussing this. I think I now understand as well why helicopters sometimes appear to circle around a couple of times. Up to now I've assumed they were being nosey but it now seems likely they've been told to wait in our valley by Manchester airport. Many thanks.
OK, got it! The nearby spot height shows 1345 feet AMSL. The nearest SVFR corridor shows max height 1250 feet AMSL, so about 100 feet below that hilltop along a valley. I don't have the charts with the additional helicopter routes, & there must also be an approach path into Woodford that I don't have available right now and is not shown on the large scale chart.
Quite likely. The usual instruction to VFR traffic when they need to be delayed is to "Orbit XXX until advised". Where XXX will be a clearly identifyable ground feature. Road intersection, lake or dam etc. You maybe can think of something in the area in question. A minimum or maximum height is commonly also given.
No, thanks to you for being so willing to see the other POV. You were obviously very ticked off with the pilots at the start of the thread, and it's far more usual to have a fixed attitude than to keep an open mind. I must admit having stereotyped you at the start, and I apologise for my aggressive attitude during some of this this discussion. Although there are a *very* few rogue pilots, for the most part even the hobby pilots are extremely disciplined and don't act like airbourne boy racers. Flying is a very serious hobby/sport that is approached responsibly by the overwhelming majority of pilots, even when the main objective of the flight is simply to have fun.
Most upsets are caused, as in this case, by a misunderstanding about what is taking place. I suppose similar to how some motorists get infuriated at being stuck behind a slow tractor and think that the farmer is *deliberately* causing them hardship, or has decided to go on the road when he didn't need to.
We also have absolutely no desire to cause any significant disturbance to anyone on the ground, although the nature of the activity makes some annoyance inevitable, especially in low corridors & near airports.
Personally, I enjoy aerobatics and low flying, but do so only in areas where it is safe and highly unlikely to cause upset, also not staying above one area for longer than 10 or 15 minutes when practising routines, even though my normal practise height should not result in a lot of noise on the ground.
If I were to learn that any avoidable activity I had done had caused damage to livestock, I would most certainly want to reimburse the farmer at the very least. Unfortunately I have come across quite a few totally unreasonable people who are unprepared to accept *any* aircraft in sight of their back yard, and so I tend to get very defensive!
That would still be an illegal (i.e. criminal) offence - I think it's called "disturbing the nest of a protected species of bird on the at-risk list" or something like that. I could check it accurately if you want. There is a 'no go' zone around all the nests of such breeds - if you're inside the court will assume you were up to no good. Public paths can even be re-routed if the nest is near to them.
The photographer in question wasn't that near though. My guess is he'd noticed one of the parents - they hover for ages then dive down to catch a vole or even young rabbit for tea - and was snooping around. Once he got a picture of the adult bird landing in a tree he would have a record of which tree to climb.
It took a long while to get the law right but there are now special police contact officers always on call and it does appear to be working well. In the past one had to wait until these idiots had at least touched the eggs after which the parent will usually abandon the nest and eggs for ever.
This all happened a couple of years ago. Two eggs hatched and they eventually all flew off. I did see one hunting or possibly reconnoitering the area earlier this spring but I assume (hope) they've moved somewhere more remote.
My house !!!!!! Or more exactly the huge green asbestos roof of one of my out-buildings which I expect is visible for miles from up there. Explains everything :-)
When they're circling low enough to almost touch them you do wonder what they are looking for. Now I realise they've been told to do it and they would much sooner get on their way it's much more acceptable.
Sounds quite familiar :-) Tractors did use to be faster but now have speed limiters. Also people who seem to assume we deliberately let sheep out on the roads for them to hit. You try keeping an animal that can scale a 1 in 1 hill or clamber over a 1 metre high barb wire fence (highest we're allowed) with ease penned in all the time. "Grass on the verges is so much tastier and there are things with lights so you can see it in the dark."
Except of course, you've already told us that you failed to inform the RSPB.... So if you're keeping their existence secret, how can a no-go area be established?....If there isn't a no-go area, how can a court decide that this gentleman has infringed it?.... I put it to you that you had no right whatsoever to demand that this man destroy his own property....I feel you were simply exercising typical land-owner bully-boy tactics....
No, you understand it very well. The fact is that it usually *doesn't matter* whether the altimeter is showing the correct altitude or not. The only important thing is that all the aircraft close by have altimeters that are calibrated the same. So if I hear an aircraft call to report 2500 feet near my location, and my altimeter is reading
3000 feet, I know that I'll fly safely above him. If my altimeter is also reading 2500 feet, I know I need to do something. When reporting an altitude, the pilot should also give the pressure-setting of the altimeter so that there is no misunderstanding. e.g. "Crossing Midhurst Westbound at 2500 feet on 1021 millibars".
When flying relatively low (below about 5000 feet) it is also important to have a reasonable idea of your actual height above the ground so you know whether you are lower than any ground obsticles. So we have 4 different pressure settings, depending where we are flying, how high we are, and the phase of flight.
QFE, QNH, regional QHN, and standard pressure (1013mb)
There are also 3 different ways of reporting your height. Height, altitude and flight level. Height is distance above the ground in feet, and is obviously up & down like a fiddler's elbow over land, but usually refers to distance above a particular point, such as an airport. Altitude is height above a notional sea level in feet, and flight level is referenced to a fixed pressure setting of 1013mb.
Starting off, we dial in the airport QNH which we get from the radio. This is the pressure of the air as it would be at sea level at that time and location. It is continuously updated by the airport. Thus our altimeter reads the accurate altitude above mean sea level, and gives us the most accurate data in relation to surrounding hills etc. which have their heights marked on the map to that reference (sea level) as we commence our climb-out.
After leaving the airport zone, we get via radio the "regional QNH" for the area we are in. This is a general pressure setting to be used over a fixed demarcated area of the country, and represents the lowest forcast pressure anywhere in the region for a fixed period of time. This means that our altimeter is almost certainly under-reading because the actual pressure is higher than the regional pressure most of the time. But that's OK because it will just give a bigger safety margin from the ground, and because all other low-level aircraft are using the same setting, we know what altitude we are relative to them for collision avoidance. When flying from one pressure-setting region to another, the pilot should get the new pressure setting by radio, and a new setting is broadcast at the start of each new validity period.
Each part of the country has what is known as a "transition altitude" When climbing past that altitude, all pilots will set their altimeter to a setting of 1013 millibars, which is the standard pressure setting. From then on, you do not give your altitude in feet, but in terms of a "flight level" Flight levels go in increments of 100 feet, so flight level 65 would be 6500 feet relative to a fictitious datum.
In the above two cases, it means that an aircraft flying across the isobars into a different pressure will be following the pressure rather than an altitude, and so will actually be climbing or descending while the altimeter shows a fixed reading. But that's OK, because all the aircraft will be doing the same, so there's no confusion.
When approaching your destination airport, you can either switch to the airport QNH like at takeoff so that your altimeter is again giving you an accurate height above sea level, or in many cases you would get "QFE". This is the setting that will cause your altimeter to read zero on the runway of the airport - IOW it is the barometric pressure at the runway. It gives the pilot an easier way to see his height above the runwayd at that particular location as he is making his approach, and makes it easier to fly the circuit, which is usually given as a height above the airport rather than a height above sea level.
Hope that all makes sense!
And yes, I know it's off-topic for all groups - just ignore me if you're not interested :-)
I think you may have hit the nail on the head here. All the weasels that want a share of the cost are pushing up the price of everything connected with any govmint. Lets do a 'Great Escape' and line the lot up and drop down the side of an artic and just gun them all down. That way, they might not want to put their snouts anywhere near the trough :-) It might even encourage them to get a proper job :-)
I used to work for an organization that required the very highest security clearance and I don't remember it costing me a penny. It must have been paid by taxes, but that would have spread the costs around the population. Why can't the ID cards be done the same way?
Take council tax. As a percentage of my income, it comes to very large amount of what I get every month. Now consider a family that has four wage earners all bringing in, at a conservative guess, £30,000 each per year. The tax is just a tiny percentage of total income. Back to ID cards and you can see where I am coming from. As a percentage of income, it hits me a lot harder than someone on an average wage.
If the guvmint wants ID cards, then they pay for them. I have no objection to them. As I said earlier, I had to have security clearance and get vetted my the guvmint and wear the bloody pass they issued whenever I was on works premises
By the way, I was unaware that this thread was being networked to other news groups.
Like the birth, death and marriage certificates that were brought in in
1837. They are regularly used to fake an ID.
How long before these ID cards are forged?
Don't forget, the forgers are only a short step behind modern technology.
AKA B Liar, Flunket and Press cot. Control freaks do not come any more earnest.
Then take a look at most of the legislation that comes from the EU. The latest laugh is to prevent anyone from working more than 48 hours a week. If that had been in force since we joined this circus, I would never have been able to retire at the age of 53 (1999). I used to regularly work 60, 70 and 80 hours a week. I enjoyed my work, so it was not as if I was forced into these hours.
Dave
(I just hope my pension pot keeps paying out. I'm a bit worried as to what Flunket might do)
So all Belgians, Spaniards, Swiss, etc. are all property are they?
Sorry but this is just an idiotic "argument" that can do nothing whatsoever to advance your anti-card stance, and will only serve to cast doubt on any rational arguments you may have.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.