@Dennis Murphy I'm looking at your photo and I see few uncultivated spaces. The vast majority of land in your photo is arable (which is where the proposed airfield at Little Mongeham is going to be built on), there's a couple of tracks and the rest seems to be close mown grass to create the runway. So I'm not too sure what spaces, in your photo, have been set aside for wildlife. If the owner of the land the airfield is to built on was so concerned about wildlife why didn't they apply for a Countryside Stewardship Grant? https://www.gov.uk/countryside-stewardship-grants? P.S. The Cirrus SF50 Vision Jet "the world's smallest and most affordable private jet" needs just 620m for takeoff (admittedly this wouldn't be sufficient to clear a 50ft obstacle) and 496m to land. P.P.S. Glad to see that the plane you are flying is prohibited from aerobatics and intentional spins. As flying is a recognised sport, will every pilot flying from this proposed airfield be similarly restricted?

@jgsrambler On KCC's Public Rights of Way Map, two gates are shown on entry to and from the farmyard. When I first looked at the wooden kissing gate I thought it might have been knocked down while they were building the access track. However on a closer look it appears that the wood is rotten and the gate has fallen in on itself. Interesting, there's no indication, on the map, about the step you have to negotiate to get around the end of the gate. I'll raise these issues with the KCC's PROW department.

A couple more paddocks added near Burgess Green and Hacklinge.

@jgsrambler As far as the planning application is concerned, I haven't found any proposals to remove or re-route PROW EE420. I understand that the permissive footpath being proposed is intended to route walkers away from the end of the runway and it also means you can walk towards Northbourne without having to use the road. I've had a look at the KCC Countryside Access website and there are two reported problems at the Little Mongeham end of of EE420. A recently reported problem looks like it relates to the heavy machinery that was used to build the access road - so I guess this will only be a temporary problem. The other problem, reported in September 2018, seems to relate to a locked gate/access to the path. I can't find anything that relates to the kissing gate, which from an initial visit a few weeks ago, looks like it has been "destroyed". I'll try and pop by this weekend and get some photos and report it through the KCC Countryside Access website.

@Keith Jones Many thanks for your reply. To clarify: 1. Can only be answered by one of those involved in the planning application. 2. Can only be answered by one of those involved in the planning application. 3. Can only be answered by one of those involved in the planning application. 4. Many thanks for your answer. I did some further research and found clear statements & instructions that pilots can change their own oil. 5. Again, thanks for your answer, in particular about the Rotax engine. It looks like refuelling will be performed at the airfield.

Wow!!!

We'll done!!!

@Lady jane The trouble is proving that to the Dover District Council Planning Department.

I hope this works for you. I've made an animated gif that shows the new track overlayed on a satellite image of the farm. It clearly shows that the start and end of the track go through existing hedges & trees. P.S. I've always wanted to have the opportunity to create and animated gif.

One more Red Dot :). Updated and thanks

Woah (excuse the pun). I missed those paddocks and I practically drive past them every day. One more update.

Updated. Many thanks. Tony

Keith, When I moved into this quiet, rural location I WAS expecting to hear lawn mowers. I WAS expecting to hear farm machine and I WAS prepared to put up with some traffic noise. I didn't move into the area to hear airplane enthusiasts indulging in their hobby, particularly on those days when I want to be outside in my garden enjoying the peace & quiet of this rural environment, enjoying a pint in the garden of a rural pub or taking my dog for a walk through East Kent countryside. You talk about lawnmowers. You forget that I also have a lawnmower so my neighbours have to put up with the noise it makes when I am cutting my lawn. You talk about "the issue with the campaigners was not the noise but a need to fill their own life’s with an purpose". My life is totally full of purpose without having to find the time to get involved in this, what I consider to be a perfectly valid campaign. So please don't make statements about how I choose to run my life and why I want to get involve in local and community activities.

@Andy I'm so enjoying this conversation but I must be getting on, so this will be my last post of the day. Firstly, I agree, I exaggerated the statement about "day in day out, every day of the year" (I must stop doing that). But a couple of points..... Given the few light aircraft we get in a typical day at the moment opening this airfield will be like having Heathrow next door to us. The days that they will be able to fly will be the days when we want to be outside, so the noise from these planes will be more of a nuisance.

@Andy We live in the country side so we accept that ploughing and fertilising and harvesting will happen. However this is just a few hours a few times a year. With the new airport this will be regularly, day in day out, every day of the year. I was interested in your choice of aircraft as I suspect you picked it because it is a modern light aircraft. The Cessna 172, which is arguable " the most successful aircraft in history" (Wikipedia) emits significantly more noise - rated at around 80db. • 65db Is normal conversation. • 78db is the sound of a washing machine. https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/TCDSN%20EASA.IM_.A.051%20Issue%205.pdf https://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Technical/Sounds/Decibles.htm As to the government website you referred us to. There's no mention of 80db in it and there is no limit to road noise although this might need to be assessed when building a new road. In relation to airports the majority of flight restrictions, such as agreed flight paths and a limit on the number of flights a day, probably apply to the major airports.

@Andy There is a huge difference between traffic noise and aircraft noise. The noise from a vehicle is very localised, only lasts a few seconds, is suppressed by houses, hedges, walls etc and only affects those houses built next to the road. Noise from aircraft is not suppressed, lasts a significant amount of time and will affect ever house along and near its flight path. We live in a very quiet part of Kent where the majority of the roads are country lanes so traffic is very light and mostly cars and light vans. We do get tractors and other farm traffic but after all we decided to live in the countryside. So, the sound of aircraft flying overhead will be a significant change to our current soundscape. I've attached a small video taken at the end of the proposed runway to give you an idea of just how quiet our community is.

@Paul Osborne Hi Paul, Thanks for the update. To make this clear I've updated my original post.

@Andy Seems to be be your stock response. However, if you read the rest of my post carefully you'll notice I said "Something to consider". In other words when we eventually see the planning application what mention is made of the expected number of visiting planes.

Reading an article in The Flyer about the Maypole Airport uncovered the following statements: "The airfield was popular as a stopover before cross-Channel flights" and “We have managed to secure alternative hangar spaces elsewhere, for all the residents at Maypole, should they decide to take up the option,” Something to consider when DDC and the applicants publish the full planning application.

@Andy "Most aircraft use a 3 degree approach path," Sounds like you're a pilot so perhaps have a vested interest in the project?