I'm pleased to say it was published in last weeks Farnborough News & Mail. You never know unless you try.
May I through the courtesy of your newspaper have my little say in response to your recent article.
“You can sue the airport now”; proved very interesting but somewhat biased reading so perhaps we could hear the other side of the story for a change.
What would the Nimbys rather have, noisy military research aircraft able to fly in and out at all times without any restrictions or much quieter business aircraft restricted to arrivals and departures between the allotted flying hours?
I wonder how long the majority of these have NIMBYs lived near the airfield?
I’ve lived at Church Crookham for a couple of years now, almost under the flightpath and the noise, what little there is, never bothers me. My house certainly hasn’t decreased in value.
The question I would ask to all these complainants is I wonder when you’re taking off on your holidays or returning at 03.30 in the morning whether you give any thought for the people underneath you are disturbing.
Albeit you wouldn’t be using Farnborough for a holiday charter flight, but its neither here nor there. I very much doubt you would give it a thought.
Let me just throw this into the equation; if Farnborough had closed as an airfield, the site would have been offered to other government agencies and for a long time, the Home Office has been looking for a site for a high security prison to replace Reading; would the NIMBYs rather have that?
If the NIMBYs poo poo the last paragraph about prisons, we need only point them in the direction of Bovingdon, Stradishall, Lindholme, Full Sutton all of which now have prisons on the former airfields.