Introduction
1. What is your name?
Name
(Required)
Adrian Whitmarsh
2. Are you responding as an individual or do you represent an organisation?
Please select one item
(Required)
Radio button:
Unticked
I am responding as an individual
Radio button:
Ticked
I represent an organisation
Organisation
British Microlight Aircraft Association (BMAA)
3. What is your email address?
Email
Redacted text
4. What best describes your association with this airspace change proposal?
Please select one item
(Required)
Radio button:
Unticked
Local community stakeholder
Radio button:
Ticked
Aviation stakeholder
Radio button:
Unticked
NATMAC organisation
Airspace Design Options
5. Which airspace design option do you prefer?
Please select one item
(Required)
Radio button:
Unticked
Option 2 (simple) - Design 1
Radio button:
Unticked
Option 2 (simple) - Design 2
Radio button:
Unticked
Option 3 (multi-sector) - Design 1
Radio button:
Ticked
Option 3 (multi-sector) - Design 2
6. Please rank the airspace designs options in order (from 1 being the preferred to 4 being the least preferred):
Please rank these from 1 to 4
(Required)
Option 2 - Design 1
2
Option 2 - Design 2
3
Option 3 - Design 1
4
Option 3 - Design 2
1
7. Are there any other airspace design options you think the MOD should consider?
Please select one item
(Required)
Radio button:
Ticked
Yes (please specify)
Radio button:
Unticked
No
Airspace Design
Reconsider height reduction to 2000ft AGL
8. Whilst ensuring that essential military activity can be achieved, the MOD is keen to reduce the impact of its operations on other airspace users. Are there any design amendments or potential mitigations that could be used to achieve this?
Design amendments and mitigations
Having had the opportunity to attend the virtual meeting and presentation by yourselves on 21 July 2022 I would like to make the following response:
1. I felt that the local airspace use trend in the consultation presentation was inadequate in that (a) it covered far too short a period for a permanent DA ACP; (b) the data was limited to FLARM and ADS-B signals. I would strongly recommend that the sponsor contact SkyDemon (tel 01373-470452 / www.skydemon.aero) and requests a ‘heat map’ of all SkyDemon user tracks for the region over 2019 (being the last typical full year of flying) and to compare this data.
2. After careful consideration of the sponsor’s needs and the information discussed during the consultation the BMAA would want to see the following conditions for any approval of this ACP:
a. Preferred airspace structure would be either Option 3 Design 2 or Option 2 Design 1.
b. We would recommend reconsideration of the height for the DA; 3,500ft AGL seems excessive for the RPAS requirement to transit to/from the SPTA.
c. A fully resourced DACS available at all times.
d. A dedicated ATIS providing real-time information on the activity status of the DA and any other activity at Keevil airfield so that, in the event of the DA being inactive, GA traffic could transit Keevil without the need for any further approval.
e. NOTAM information of all contact frequencies, ATIS and telephone.
1. I felt that the local airspace use trend in the consultation presentation was inadequate in that (a) it covered far too short a period for a permanent DA ACP; (b) the data was limited to FLARM and ADS-B signals. I would strongly recommend that the sponsor contact SkyDemon (tel 01373-470452 / www.skydemon.aero) and requests a ‘heat map’ of all SkyDemon user tracks for the region over 2019 (being the last typical full year of flying) and to compare this data.
2. After careful consideration of the sponsor’s needs and the information discussed during the consultation the BMAA would want to see the following conditions for any approval of this ACP:
a. Preferred airspace structure would be either Option 3 Design 2 or Option 2 Design 1.
b. We would recommend reconsideration of the height for the DA; 3,500ft AGL seems excessive for the RPAS requirement to transit to/from the SPTA.
c. A fully resourced DACS available at all times.
d. A dedicated ATIS providing real-time information on the activity status of the DA and any other activity at Keevil airfield so that, in the event of the DA being inactive, GA traffic could transit Keevil without the need for any further approval.
e. NOTAM information of all contact frequencies, ATIS and telephone.
9. Are there any other general considerations that you would like the MOD to factor in to mitigate against the impact on local communities?
General feedback
Having had the opportunity to attend the virtual meeting and presentation by yourselves on 21 July 2022 I would like to make the following response:
1. I felt that the local airspace use trend in the consultation presentation was inadequate in that (a) it covered far too short a period for a permanent DA ACP; (b) the data was limited to FLARM and ADS-B signals. I would strongly recommend that the sponsor contact SkyDemon (tel 01373-470452 / www.skydemon.aero) and requests a ‘heat map’ of all SkyDemon user tracks for the region over 2019 (being the last typical full year of flying) and to compare this data.
2. After careful consideration of the sponsor’s needs and the information discussed during the consultation the BMAA would want to see the following conditions for any approval of this ACP:
a. Preferred airspace structure would be either Option 3 Design 2 or Option 2 Design 1.
b. We would recommend reconsideration of the height for the DA; 3,500ft AGL seems excessive for the RPAS requirement to transit to/from the SPTA.
c. A fully resourced DACS available at all times.
d. A dedicated ATIS providing real-time information on the activity status of the DA and any other activity at Keevil airfield so that, in the event of the DA being inactive, GA traffic could transit Keevil without the need for any further approval.
e. NOTAM information of all contact frequencies, ATIS and telephone.
1. I felt that the local airspace use trend in the consultation presentation was inadequate in that (a) it covered far too short a period for a permanent DA ACP; (b) the data was limited to FLARM and ADS-B signals. I would strongly recommend that the sponsor contact SkyDemon (tel 01373-470452 / www.skydemon.aero) and requests a ‘heat map’ of all SkyDemon user tracks for the region over 2019 (being the last typical full year of flying) and to compare this data.
2. After careful consideration of the sponsor’s needs and the information discussed during the consultation the BMAA would want to see the following conditions for any approval of this ACP:
a. Preferred airspace structure would be either Option 3 Design 2 or Option 2 Design 1.
b. We would recommend reconsideration of the height for the DA; 3,500ft AGL seems excessive for the RPAS requirement to transit to/from the SPTA.
c. A fully resourced DACS available at all times.
d. A dedicated ATIS providing real-time information on the activity status of the DA and any other activity at Keevil airfield so that, in the event of the DA being inactive, GA traffic could transit Keevil without the need for any further approval.
e. NOTAM information of all contact frequencies, ATIS and telephone.
Summary
10. The MOD would like your permission to publish your consultation response. Please indicate your preference:
Please select one item
(Required)
Radio button:
Ticked
Publish response
Radio button:
Unticked
Publish response anonymously (this will remove personal identifiers such as name and organisation)