Monday, July 15, 2013

Superjumbo Lumbers Into Manston

video

Just a taster there of what we can expect this summer over Ramsgate. Yes, fellow millionaires, it's the brand new, just-out-of-the-box, British Airways Airbus A380 that's going to be doing training circuits over the town every day except Sundays for the next few weeks! (Thanks to reader Samantha for the vid.)

To be fair (Why? - Ed.) it's supposed to be ever so environmentally friendly. And I've been assured that the Rolls-Royce engines only explode every now and then, which is a great comfort.

Once that's gone, we've got the new BA Boeing 787 Dreamliners to look forward to. They only burst into flames about, ooh let me see, once a week.

Still, it'll give the planespotters something to jiggle their joysticks to, I suppose!

Update: Reader Steve writes 'Here are a few more shots of the A380 circuiting over the Channel this afternoon. I'm afraid they're a bit grainy, they were taken on a long lens from Ramsgate. Enjoy!'

Enjoy? What am I now, bloody planespotters' corner? Kuh!


BA A380 dive bombs fart farm


BA A380 dive bombs Deal


BA A380 dive bombs some clouds


BA A380 being followed by a little red thing


Er, not sure that's a plane - Ed.

55 comments:

Anonymous said...

The local drone already has a picture of it on his blog and is no doubt jiggling his joystick furiously as we speak.

Anonymous said...

The San Francisco crash was a trainee pilot landing over water.

Anonymous said...

Utter BS from Buchanan again...

“We welcomed Prime Minister David Cameron when he officially opened the London Array wind farm and Manston’s potential did not go unnoticed."

...As a derelict airport with safety and pollution problems from Charles.

Anonymous said...

The A380 is 10% more enviro-friendly apparently. Not much really.

Anonymous said...

Yes San Francisco, 3 dead and luckily not vastly more, 180 injured, has the penny still not dropped as to the importance of these take-off and landing training flights? We have seen what the lack of training brings.

Anonymous said...

As usual, the great and the good miss the real significance of these training flights. Far from demonstrating that Manston is a real airport, these training flights actually illustrate how deserted it is. The whole reason they come down here to train is that they can't just tootle around at low altitude anywhere else in the country because: a) the aviation authorities would clamp down if they found they were skimming the rooftops and ignoring the proscribed flights paths and, b) proper airports have flights coming in and out that pay proper money.

If you read the rules of the air (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/7/EIS%2002a.pdf) you'll see that aircraft aren't supposed to be below 1000feet over a congested area (like Thanet). So, how come these lumbering crates are permitted to thunder around over the town at heights much lower than this?

The last time I asked this question, I was told that they have to descend below 100ft to land and take-off. I was told that whilst doing circuits the aircraft was defined as being in the process of landing or taking off so, the normal rules don't apply.

Well, the rule is there for safety purposes. It isn't deemed to be safe for the aircraft to be lower than 1000ft. That just shows you how much contempt they have for the people of Thanet. Our safety isn't as important as everyone else's. We're expected to put up with crates circling above our heads below the safe limit and we're expected to be grateful for the jobs they are creating.

Anonymous said...

So tell me,how do you go from 1000 feet to landing without dropping below "safe flying heights" idiot

Anonymous said...

I'm not sure why the training can't take place at heathrow. It's surely better to risk a crash landing in shitty hounslow than it is in beautiful Ramsgate.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps BA could offer a free training flight to thanet residents for putting up with the noise?

Anonymous said...

I wonder if the already frequent wing tip vortices ripping tiles off roofs will increase?

Anonymous said...

I was almost decked by a Thanetian once when he said the airport was good for jobs and I argued back that Tesco had created more jobs in Thanet than the airport ever would. His rationale seemed to be that despite being unemployed for eight months he was too good for a job at Tesco. He was clutching a can of Stella at the time - ideal pilot material.

Then again, don't get me started on pissed pilots.

Anonymous said...

What a great idea. Manstons enviable position at the arse end of Kent comes into its own once every decade when a new plane is launched and pilots need to be trained.

Anonymous said...

"Derelict airport gets excited when plane lands"

Should Port Ramsgate send out a press release when a boat passes through the English Channel?

Anonymous said...

The CAA 1,000 foot Regs are irrelevant, they specifically do not apply to takeoff and landing and practising approaches.

Secondly, what is the self defeating argument that on the one hand these flights do not demonstrate Manston is a real airport, I cannot imagine that BA is at all concerned with what their presence demonstrates, it is just business, then you say the whole reason they are here is that by your own admission the airport is so quiet. If it is so quiet what do you have to complain about?

Anonymous said...

Good idea Anon 5.28. I believe the 380 can hold up to 853 passengers. 20 trips and all of Ramsgate's affected residents could have a freebie and then they would have no grounds to moan about jumbos ever again.

1 o'clock Rob said...

It won't be doing circuits, it's here for plane/crew work ups and to do that it will be heading off probably down to the Bay of Biscay for long periods.

If you are lucky/unlucky you may see it depart/arrive once a day.

Peter Checksfield said...

How long before someone from Yorkshire starts a protest group against them?

Anonymous said...

You aren't making a landing approach if you're banking around over the houses; not a safe one anyway.

What you have to realise is that kerosene heads are arrogant nutters who have total belief in their own ability and a total disregard for what anyone else thinks. That's why you have to have the CAA and the AAIB, who regularly have to carpet the arrogant twits who have ignored rules and caused accidents. My advice to anyone who sees Biggles doing aerobatics over the town is to take photos or video footage and send it directly to the CAA. Don't waste your time complaining to the airport - they won't do anything about it. Don't waste your time complaining to the council - they will pass it to the airport. No, go directly to the CAA and copy to your MP.

P.S. For the arrogant petrol head who questioned how you land without descending below 1000ft. don't be so thick. Of course you have to descend below 1000ft but you have to do that safely. You aren't doing that if you're banking around to make an approach from less than three miles out and you aren't doing that if you're skimming the rooftops of Cliftonville.

Anonymous said...

So Buchanan's summer of training flights actually amounts to one take off a day? For a month or so? Awful for what's left of Thanet's tourism business but does sound like derelict airport grasping at straws.

That only leaves the empty KLM flights like Flybe no doubt cancelled after the Summer or sooner. And a Cargoliux cargo flight.

How much less could it be - although it's almost worth it to hear the pro-manston excusers. invariably pensioned-off RAF or the Manston Fire Brigade working overtime twiddling their thumbs.

Do they finish at 5pm? And was the Visit kent £100k to prop up jobs for the Summer?

Anonymous said...

This chap's always keen to hear about Manston pollution and how he's cleaning it up: andrew.davidson@environment-agency.gov.uk

If the Police or CAA can't regulate Manston then we need new police and the public should do it for them.

Allan Mallinson said...

Seems your blog has been hijacked by the anti-Manston Aquifer Man, Richard, with one comment after another by him on this topic. Reasoned debate he does not do, but he kills off attempts to do so by others.

Anonymous said...

When I googled "pictures of big ugly birds in Thanet" I was disappointed to find myself on this blog posting and not Peter Checksfields website

Anonymous said...

Does "Alan Mallinson" seriously believe that there is only one aquifer man. Sorry to disappoint you "Alan" but there are many thousands who are now fed up with hearing how Manston is going to provide economic salvation for Thanet at some (unspecified) time in the future. It's over 10 years since TDC predicted that there would be ten thousand jobs at the airport by now.

How wrong do you have to be before you admit that you've caused long-term damage to the region by persistently ignoring the reports which told you that there wasn't the demand to support an airport at Manston? It was you wasn't it?

1 o'clock Rob said...

and on again with the aquifer... so Manston shuts down to be replaced by what? an industrial estate? a housing estate? lots and lots of little roads, houses, gardens, people pouring chemicals on their lawns, flower beds, oil changes happening on drive ways, fuel stored in sheds... the list is endless. What is better for the aquifer then, all the above and more or a few planes every day? or do you just expect it to close and become a hill?

Anonymous said...

It would be the perfect location for an onshore wind farm plus we already have the technology and companies based in Ramsgate.

Anonymous said...

What about a prison? Thanet earth 2?

Anonymous said...

I reckon it would be ideal for fracking and then we could have the odd earthquake to add to the avalanches and tsunamis expected at the Pleasurama site. Had a good belly laugh at the many who are supposed to support the Aquifer weirdo.

Anonymous said...

Amazing the number of dunderheads out there who think it is 'weird' to be concerned about the environment and corporate transparency. I am not 'aquifer man' but I am concerned about the airport's lack of communication with the local community and Thanet Council's apparent collusion in this. If we are going to have an airport on our doorsteps, I am not against it, but I would prefer it to be a 'good neighbour'.

Anonymous said...

Yes Rob a Hill - or rather a field. Why is the assumption it will be built on when the water supply is under the airport?

I don't remember the construction industry having first choice of if or where to build.

Anonymous said...

How sweetly naïve you are 9:32. It is a brownfield site and, as such, would be certain to be redeveloped with the pressure on to build more housing. Then, even if by some miracle it was turned back to agricultural, do you consider chemical fertilizers and pesticides as non pollutants?

Anonymous said...

This from KM:

"The plane’s arrival at just after noon strengthens the role of east Kent’s international airport as a contender in the South East aviation debate.

Captain David Thomas, British Airways’ head of flight technical and training, said: "We’ve been made very welcome by everyone at the airport, and hope that the sight of the A380 in the skies over Ramsgate will be a pleasant surprise for local residents and visitors to the area."

Pleasant surprise? That just goes to show the overbearing, arrogant, egotistical nature of people who fly planes. Like we should all bow our heads in awe.

As for Manston being a contender, the plane is only here for training. It wouldn't be here if the airport was busy, so that rather aptly demonstrates Manston's irrelevance.

Anonymous said...

In and out twice a days on weekdays.. back by 7pm.. no local circuits..
Money made by using Manston's ground facilities by the BA training staff ..no real reason for Dim Bar Gut and co to get excited..

Anonymous said...

9:58 seems certain Manston would be developed as housing. but then says it might not. He hasn't a clue. Although I think we'd all agree it's not going to be an airport and very soon.

Anonymous said...

Capt Thomas is mentioned here in the crash landing of a jumbo jet at Heathrow: pilots praised as heroes then described as villains by BA in his secret report on the crash:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1032415/Hero-pilot-helped-save-152-lives-dramatic-Heathrow-crash-landing-flying-high-again.html

Anonymous said...

According to you, 10:32, Manston has not been going to be an airport for very long for at least six years now. Certainly taking it's time to close and, meantime, you just enjoy the planes.

Anonymous said...

Each year that passes as a loss making, empty airport while debates about runway capacity 100 miles away grumble on without manston getting a mention makes the case for closure even more inevitable, 12.11. Long may it continue

Anonymous said...

Yes, I will second the long may it continue bit although I am not sure we mean the same thing.

Don Wood said...

ECR you certainly get plenty of anons posting on your blog. Do you post the comments yourself? Manston is old news you keep dragging it back up.

Richard Eastcliff said...

Are you casting nasturtiums, Don old bean?

I positively encourage anonymous comments, as long as they don't descend into vituperation. It's important that people feel they can go somewhere and blow the whistle, or blow off steam!

And no, none of the anonymous comments are from me.

As for Manston being 'old news', there are plenty of people living in Ramsgate who would beg to differ, me included. So I'll continue to 'drag it up' as often as I want.

It's my blog, so na-na-na-naaa-naaa!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous comments? How dare they. Far better to invent an alias and post under that. What say you ECR?

Richard Eastcliff said...

I can't help but think you've failed to follow your own advice there.

Anonymous said...

should that be And no, none of the anonymous comments is from me

Richard Eastcliff said...

A common misconception, 11:09. However, to blithely label you a pedant might encourage the locals to chuck bricks through your windows, so I shall refrain!

Anonymous said...

As a counterpoint to the DFL's insult should we have TIB's? Thanet In Bred's?

Anonymous said...

Some TIB's enjoy the low flying planes so we all should.

Anonymous said...

Funny how the only time there are queues of cars seven miles long waiting to enter Thanet is when there is a promise of many low-flying planes isn't it, so they cannot be that objectionable can they.

Don Wood said...

Dickie I lived under the flight path and it never worried me. I feel the vast majority dont care its just the noisey minority that people hear about.

Anonymous said...

The A380 is a very impressive aircraft and comparatively quiet for its size. Although I don't live in Thanet, I do live on the flightpath a few miles along the coast. All looks good to me from here. Thanet people being negative for fear of being offered jobs, methinks?

Anonymous said...

Don't forget to breathe deeply 7:37

Anonymous said...

Standard rubbish from Don about the noisy minority. When was there ever an issue where the majority of the population got up in arms? On that basis, we could assume that the majority view is always the opposite of the views which are expressed.

However, that's not the way things work. When a councillor is elected with 10-15% of the vote, we don't say that he/she has no mandate because the majority didn't vote for him (or her).

When we conduct a consultation we don't make assumptions about the views of those who don't respond.

So, when several thousand people say they don't want night flights, you'd have to be some special kind of moron to assume that the majority view is the opposite.

I don't deny that there are those in Thanet who don't object to night flights. However, my experience of these people is that they have done little/no research to inform their view. They are just spouting some sort of gut feeling.

I'm not saying that Don falls into this category but the pro night-flight lobby includes two groups of dangerous, extremist loonies:

There are representatives of the loony left, who will approve any and all development on the grounds that it might create a few low-paid part-time jobs. These people believe any spurious figures produced by the developers because it suits their agenda to believe those figures however ridiculous they are. This is why we end up, constantly pursuing big ideas for the salvation of Thanet's economy, whilst simultaneously ignoring the small successful businesses which are keeping the place afloat.

There are representatives of the loony-right, who would approve storage of nuclear waste in the Ramsgate tunnels if they thought they could make a few bob from it. They don't really pay any attention to figures or details because they only look at the "big picture." This is why we end up with ludicrous loss-making projects such as the Turner Centre.

The bottom line is that we really have to eliminate both sets of loonies from Thanet if the place is to have a chance.

Anonymous said...

Janet writes "I live down the road from the bus depot, the constant noise of buses and diesel fumes are making my life a misery, can't it be closed down!"

John writes "I live a block away from two schools, the noise of the traffic every morning and afternoon is disturbing me, can't the the schools be shut down!"

Brian writes "I live opposite a taxi rank, all those damn smelly diesels rattling away into the night are driving me mad, can't it be shut down"

Tony writes "I live down the road from the tip, all those f'ing council trucks shaking my teeth out and fumes gassing me, can't the tip be closed down"

Jim writes "I live by the chinese restaurant and the stink of constant frying has waxed my head, can't it be shut down!"

Gary writes "I live on westwood road, and all the bloody traffic noise to westwood cross is too much, can't it be shut dowm"

Robert writes " I live opposite the ambulance station, all those sirens 24/7, can't it be shut down!"

Paul writes "I live by the 24 hour petrol station, with cars, vans, motorbikes roaring in and out all the time, can't it be shut down"

I could go on but what is the difference between all these people, who probably suffer more frequent and sustained noise and air pollution, and those complaining about Manston airport?

Anonymous said...

Oh please do go on ! You clearly have absolutely no idea what it's like to have your roof tiles falling off and being sprayed in aircraft fuel when one of these things goes over.. There is a very big difference between medium level ambient noise and deafening intermittent noise.. do your homework.

As for the A380.. what a "pleasant surprise" it is to be woken up by it three times this week so far.

Of course it's a noisy minority - nimbyism works both ways - the vast majority of people calling for night flights do so precisely because they DONT live directly under the flight path and further more don't give a damn for those that do.

>Funny how the only time there are queues of cars >seven miles long waiting to enter Thanet is when >there is a promise of many low-flying planes isn't >it, so they cannot be that objectionable can they.

Are you serious ???

>Although I don't live in Thanet, I do live on the >flightpath a few miles along the coast. All looks >good to me from here. Thanet people being >negative for fear of being offered jobs, methinks?

What a throughly unpleasant comment.



Anonymous said...

The key difference between all of the sources of disturbance listed above is that they have all been given planning permission. This means that the council has a responsibility (and the right) to regulate the levels of disturbance. In the case of Manston it has never been given planning permission and, because of this, the council has never had the opportunity to set acceptable limits. As a consequence, we are in this horrible Groundhog Day situation where the airport operators keep trying it on and local people have to keep protesting. The solution is simple - the airport operators need to apply for planning permission to have an airport at Manston. Once that permission is granted nobody will have any grounds to object, provided the airport operates within the parameters of the permission which has been granted. Unfortunately, we all know that the airport operators will do no such thing and Groundhog Day will continue until it shuts; which hopefully won't be too long.

Anonymous said...

I wish the bloody seagulls would apply for planning permission!

Anonymous said...

I live near to an airport where the required monitors have been removed by the owner and council.

And the specified flight paths are ignored.

What should I do?