About you
1. What is your name?
Name
(Required)
James C M Johnston
3. Please enter your postcode (most relevant to your response home/ work/ organisation etc). UK only - if responding from outside the UK please complete the next question instead
Postcode
IV36 2QL
5. Who are you representing?
representing
Please select one item
(Required)
Radio button:
Unticked
I am responding as an individual
Radio button:
Ticked
I am responding on behalf of an organisation
6. Please note all responses will be published. Are you happy for your name to be included in the response publication?
Please select one item
(Required)
Radio button:
Ticked
Yes - I want my response to be published with my name
Radio button:
Unticked
No - I want my response to be published anonymously
Organisation Details
7. What is your organisation name?
Org Name
(Required)
Highlands & Islands Enterprise
8. What is your position/title?
Org Position
Interim Specialist Adviser
Your Feedback
9. Do you support the airspace changes in this proposal?
Support/object
Please select one item
(Required)
Radio button:
Ticked
SUPPORT - I support the proposed changes
Radio button:
Unticked
NO COMMENT - I neither support or object
Radio button:
Unticked
AMBIVALENT - I have mixed feelings
Radio button:
Unticked
OBJECT - I object to the proposed changes
10. Please rank your reaction to the individual aspects
| FRA Option 1. In which all ATS routes are removed. Strongly support Radio button: Not checked Strongly support | FRA Option 1. In which all ATS routes are removed. Support Radio button: Checked Support | FRA Option 1. In which all ATS routes are removed. Neutral Radio button: Not checked Neutral | FRA Option 1. In which all ATS routes are removed. Object Radio button: Not checked Object | FRA Option 1. In which all ATS routes are removed. Strongly object Radio button: Not checked Strongly object |
| FRA Option 2. In which the ATS route structure is partially maintained. Strongly support Radio button: Not checked Strongly support | FRA Option 2. In which the ATS route structure is partially maintained. Support Radio button: Not checked Support | FRA Option 2. In which the ATS route structure is partially maintained. Neutral Radio button: Checked Neutral | FRA Option 2. In which the ATS route structure is partially maintained. Object Radio button: Not checked Object | FRA Option 2. In which the ATS route structure is partially maintained. Strongly object Radio button: Not checked Strongly object |
| FRA Option 3. In which the ATS route structure is maintained, but aircraft are not constrained to flight plan the routes within the FRA. Strongly support Radio button: Not checked Strongly support | FRA Option 3. In which the ATS route structure is maintained, but aircraft are not constrained to flight plan the routes within the FRA. Support Radio button: Not checked Support | FRA Option 3. In which the ATS route structure is maintained, but aircraft are not constrained to flight plan the routes within the FRA. Neutral Radio button: Checked Neutral | FRA Option 3. In which the ATS route structure is maintained, but aircraft are not constrained to flight plan the routes within the FRA. Object Radio button: Not checked Object | FRA Option 3. In which the ATS route structure is maintained, but aircraft are not constrained to flight plan the routes within the FRA. Strongly object Radio button: Not checked Strongly object |
12. Please give your feedback comments on the overall proposal.
Overall comments
Highlands & Islands Enterprise welcome the opportunity to comment on the FRA Dep 1 Consultation. We recognise the critical need to harmonise Space Port operations with the extant and developing UK Airspace; key is the promulgation of the relevant flight planning data that negates no-notice planning change. This suggests the development of recognised communication channels and the a shared understanding of space and airspace operations.
Our driving focus is the need for the least amount of disruption to airspace whilst delivering optimal safety for all stakeholders. We acknowledge and understand the worth added through the introduction of the Flight-Plan Buffer Zone, recognising that it will add the necessary safety margin to complement the change in operating procedures as well as the available supporting technologies.
The cadence of operations from the Space Hub Sutherland has yet to be defined but it is likely, and particularly in the early years, to be limited and with each launch window being finite in duration. Consequently the nature of operations from Space Hub Sutherland (and other vertical launch sites in the Highlands & Islands Region) would best suit a process that employed temporary Special Use Airspace. Ultimately the aim remains to limit, through coordinated and synchronised activity with all relevant stakeholders, the optimal use of UK Airspace, and in both the National and Commercial interest of the UK.
Our driving focus is the need for the least amount of disruption to airspace whilst delivering optimal safety for all stakeholders. We acknowledge and understand the worth added through the introduction of the Flight-Plan Buffer Zone, recognising that it will add the necessary safety margin to complement the change in operating procedures as well as the available supporting technologies.
The cadence of operations from the Space Hub Sutherland has yet to be defined but it is likely, and particularly in the early years, to be limited and with each launch window being finite in duration. Consequently the nature of operations from Space Hub Sutherland (and other vertical launch sites in the Highlands & Islands Region) would best suit a process that employed temporary Special Use Airspace. Ultimately the aim remains to limit, through coordinated and synchronised activity with all relevant stakeholders, the optimal use of UK Airspace, and in both the National and Commercial interest of the UK.
13. Would you like to make more comments on any individual aspects?
Please select one item
(Required)
Radio button:
Unticked
Yes
Radio button:
Ticked
No