SANER - statistics for Neil -- Killay Have Your say

[ VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 11:09:47 07/01/03 Tue
Author: Joe Marshall
Subject:

SANER - statistics for Neil

Neil asks for some statistics. I have not analysed the full 1000+ signatures to the SANER petition, but can give this breakdown from 300 of the earlier signatures:

Killay: 123 (41%) - not surprising since this is where we are based!
Dunvant: 43 (14.3%)
Upper Killay: 22 (7.3%)
Gower etc. (Bishopston, Caswell, Crofty, Fairwood, Gowerton, Horton, Kittle, Langland, Llanrhidian, Loughor, Penclawdd, Pennard, Port Eynon, Reynoldston, Three Crosses): 46 (15.3%)

Total of the above: 234 (78%)

Perhaps he would now like to oblige with similar statistics for supporters of SANE?!

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Re: SANER - statistics for Neil -- Neil, 23:27:50 07/08/03 Tue

Okay, so the majority of people think it's a great idea. I just hope that everyone has the same opinion 2, 3 or 5 years down the line.

I would consider the present situation to be grudgingly acceptable but as we have not been shown any long term future plans this only allows the 'scaremongering and exageration' to continue. It is human nature if someone doesn't provide you with enough information you will fill in the blanks yourself. I for one am suspicious of the reasons why this information is not forthcoming.

No-one has answered my question yet about what level of expansion is acceptable to you. My last post was deliberately inflated so that you could use it as a marker and work back. Until I know this info I have no idea how far apart our views are and how mine differs from everyone else in the community.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> Re: SANER - statistics for Neil -- Joe Marshall, 09:32:50 07/10/03 Thu

I welcome the fact that Neil now appears to have accepted that the majority of local opinion was in favour of the proposal for additional hanger facilities at Fairwood airport. I similarly welcome the modifications to the SANE website, removing the claims relating to majority support (but not the fact that the trumped-up jumbo jet logo remains).

SANER was established simply to test the above claims, in relation to the SPECIFIC issue of the hanger proposal. It was never envisaged as a pressure group to support future airport plans, regardless of their impact.It has therefore now fulfilled it's immediate objective, and there are no further plans for the immediate future. However, we will continue to take an interest in future developments, and can be expected to react if further unjustified claims of public support for SANE's position emerge.

It is clear to me from both the SANE website and the discussion with Ian Williams on Swansea Sound that a strong underlying theme is an objection to commercial air transport in general, as opposed to the status and future of Swansea airport in particular. SANE members are perfectly entitled to this viewpoint, but people should be clearly aware of where they are "coming from".

Sadly, I do not see it as SANER's responsibility to collect data to allow Neil and his colleagues to identify how far their opinions differ from those of the majority of the local community. Given the considerably greater resources which SANE appears to have at its disposal, maybe it should consider (e.g.) further leaflet drops etc., to GENUINELY probe and report upon popular opinion/reservations.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> [> Re: SANER - statistics for Neil -- cyfrin, 13:58:42 07/10/03 Thu

One of the most important questions is:
What & how many aircraft will be using the maintenance facilities?
This will be 'continuous' noise probably during the middle of the night.

I was a Meteorologist at an airport for 30 yrs. and worked shifts. The running up of jet engines after 11pm caused the most upset to those living nearby.

This would cause quite a disturbance within Gower, Dunvant & Killay.....But I still support the expansion, and all that goes with it!

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[> [> Re: SANER - statistics for Neil -- Joe Marshall, 10:07:10 07/10/03 Thu

AFTERTHOUGHT:

One area where I do agree with Neil and SANE is that answers are required to the following questions:

What is the maximum number of commercial flights per day that are envisaged by 2008?

How many commercial night flights are proposed?

How many non commercial (private) flights are envisaged?

What is the split between passenger flights and freight?

Is the export and import of livestock amongst the plans?

It is intended to secure charter flights from the airport? (This is important since it is the charter flights that utilise large aircraft and need to fly at all hours of the day and night)?

What are the largest aircraft that it is envisaged will be in use by 2008 and will this necessitate runway lengthening?

I think that other local residents would also be very interested in pressing for answers to these questions. Maybe it would even be possible to organise a joint approach, provided it is limited to getting the required answers in an impartial manner? If Neil or his colleagues wish to explore this, they are welcome to contact me.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[Edit]

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT+0
VF Version: 2.94, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums^(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2008 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.