BMFA National Flying Centre

[Keith Lomax]

Posted by cymaz on 05/06/2015 06:05:51:

Posted by onetenor on 05/06/2015 05:04:12:

If and when the purchase of land for an N.F.C. is made I have little doubt that it will be made in the southern part of the country not somewhere in the central regions.

I'm sure it will be round the Leicester area....can't think why

Perhaps because Leicester is in the "central regions"? The proposed potential site is not particularly close to Leicester.

It is worth noting that Leicester is our administrative base. Only three of the staff based there are model fliers, two of whom have a considerable commute and the other relcoated to the area after he was appointed to avoid an even longer commute.

The ten Executive members live around the country - Buckinghamshire (1), Lincolnshire (3), Kent (1), Essex (1), Cambridgeshire (1), South Bedfordshire (2), Derbyshire (1). Previous members (who were in role during the time that the definition of the "central area" were agreed - see below for the parameters) were in Lancashire, Tyne & Wear and South Wales. Other Council members, by definition are spread out across the country (including Devon and Northern Ireland).

Laws Lawn Farm was identified as a possible site by a member who I believe lives somewhere near Oxford.

There is no ulterior motive in the location other than it being reasonably accessible from major roads in the central band of the country.

In terms of this central area, the logic that was used to define this was: There are three major roads that go North-South - The M5 and the part of the M6 North of J8; The M1 and the A1. There is one major East-West route that links these - the M6 from J8 to the M1 and the A14 from the M1 to the A1 (and which is a continuation of the M6 at the same junction of the M1). The Area identified as the key target for potential National Flying Site was agreed around 20 to 25 years ago to be within 30 minutes drive either side of this East-West route, excluding the Western 20 miles or so as that is (a) always congested, and (b) heavily built on.

[Erfolg]

Last week I went to the Forrest of Bowland with my Grandchildren and family. Now you are thinking what has theis to do with anything. Well, a lot!

The centre of mainland UK is apparently there at Dunsop Bridge.

Which made me think, do the claims about the position of LLF stand up to scrutiny? Apparently not very well at all.

If we consider just England and Wales, the location is Market Drayton. This is a lot further North and to the west.

If we just take England, the centroid is Fenny Drayton.which is 44 miles from LLF. The importance of this is that the ideal area is north of the M6 at the southern end and midway, between the M1 and M6 north south route.

It may seem pedantic although by population the centre is thought to be near to Derby. The difficulty here it is there are a number of claims although the Centre of English Policy Studies, has placed the centre in this area. All the indications are that LLF is to far East by something approaching 50 miles.

But more importantly LLF does not lie inside the box of major N,S, E & W major routes of the M1 & 6 (N/S) and the A50, M6 (W/E).

So is the question is affordable land so short that LLF is the best option.

It does seem that the idea put forward with respect to RAF Cosford has some attractions by centroid of area for England and Wales. Perhaps this is something that could be pursued as a one of to see if it works as a NATs venue?

[Colin Leighfield]

Cosford is an active military airfield engaged in basic training and experience flights for Air Cadets. Also there is a flying club based there, as well as the Air Ambulance. I don't see how BMFA could fit into that. The number of days in which it is available for exclusive events will inevitably be limited.

It doesn't matter what option you put forward, there will always be reasons to criticise, compromise has to be the order of the day. It is up to competent management to produce an effective modus operandi and deliver it. That is what I expect to see. As far as location is concerned, it looks reasonable to me from the national accessibility point of view. If you get any closer in to the central motorway box it will just become progressively more expensive and even less likely that all of the necessary permissions will be forthcoming.

[Keith Lomax]

Posted by Erfolg on 05/06/2015 11:30:07:

Last week I went to the Forrest of Bowland with my Grandchildren and family. Now you are thinking what has theis to do with anything. Well, a lot!

The centre of mainland UK is apparently there at Dunsop Bridge.

Which made me think, do the claims about the position of LLF stand up to scrutiny? Apparently not very well at all.

If we consider just England and Wales, the location is Market Drayton. This is a lot further North and to the west.

If we just take England, the centroid is Fenny Drayton.which is 44 miles from LLF. The importance of this is that the ideal area is north of the M6 at the southern end and midway, between the M1 and M6 north south route.

It may seem pedantic although by population the centre is thought to be near to Derby. The difficulty here it is there are a number of claims although the Centre of English Policy Studies, has placed the centre in this area. All the indications are that LLF is to far East by something approaching 50 miles.

But more importantly LLF does not lie inside the box of major N,S, E & W major routes of the M1 & 6 (N/S) and the A50, M6 (W/E).

So is the question is affordable land so short that LLF is the best option.

It does seem that the idea put forward with respect to RAF Cosford has some attractions by centroid of area for England and Wales. Perhaps this is something that could be pursued as a one of to see if it works as a NATs venue?

There are lots of different definitions of the "centre of the country". Meriden near Warwick has a claim, as do many others.

Dunsop that you quote is only the centre if you include the Scottish Islands.

Your definition of major routes excludes the main one linking the South to the NorthEast - the A1. If you include that then LLF does lie within the box - albeit towards one end.

By population the centre is probably not far from LLF as over 20% of the population lives within the M25.

[Andy Symons - BMFA]

Actually Keith I havent relocated still a 100 miles to the office. LLF will add about another 50 miles to my commute. So its certainly not especially convenient for all the staff.

[Keith Lomax]

Posted by Andy Symons - BMFA on 05/06/2015 13:02:36:
Actually Keith I havent relocated still a 100 miles to the office. LLF will add about another 50 miles to my commute. So its certainly not especially convenient for all the staff.

Apologies Andy, I thought that you had.

[Erfolg]

Keith, I really do suggest that you do look,,seriously at the population distributions by regions, rather than thinking what is probable.

You may be surprised, the answer is almost certainly not the answer you seem to assume.

What is the ideal location is the starting point, thereafter it is all about the real world, and deciding what is important, relevant therefore applicable. There is certainly no room for hunches. I perhaps should have suggested that there are a lot of definitions with respect to a apparently, beguiling simple idea, the centre of either the UK, England etc. It is an interesting idea and the data so varied in type and even value as to be contentious.

But interesting non the less.

[Erfolg]

I have just done a quick check for you Keith

The North West-East corridor has a population of approx 14.5 million.

That is against approx 8.3 million inside the M25 ring road.

[Dave Hopkin]

The Demographic Centre of England and Wales is Appleby Magma, Liecs, some 50 Miles from LLW so its pretty central

[Steve T]

What is the point of arguing backward and forward about location if it will never be financially viable! Put it in the Shetlands or next door to the NEC...if not enough people are interested in watching/learning/the history/ sodding etc. radio control anything then it will not be worth er.....much! The only issue should be monetary, shame really as I would love it be be somewhere to encourage youngsters, (the future)

[Erfolg]

I think there is a lot of sense in your concerns Steve. Only today at our field, we were discussing my concerns with respect to the numbers of members we actually have in our club, together with the age profile. My concerns revolve around the continuing viability of the club. The easy answer is we increase subs, although I suspect that this will result in a further decline in membership.

At a practical level new (preferably younger) RC modellers are required, which I suspect is an underlying issue around the country.

Yet the location of both LLF and the NFC are of concern, also discussed, together with the views of other RC modellers in this region. An extra hours journey (46 miles) is almost certainty a non starter for the greater number of RC modellers in this region. Location does matter. It did and does not take much effort to identify a general preferred region for the whole of the country, which for many of us is not east of the M1.

It should be recognised that the UK is arranged on a radial system from London. On that basis, London always has a direct route. In the case of the regions, which can be considered to be the West Country, Wales and the Northern Belt, if the destination is not London, it begins to matter greatly where we are going. For those of us in the West Country, Wales and the NW, Birmingham is often an issue, another of the great population centres. In short the Location of the NFC really does matter if it were to service the whole of the UK, excluding Scotland,

As others have suggested a little imagination, or that great cliche "thinking outside of the box" is required in finding acceptable solutions to the the location of the NATS and the continuance of our hobby. That is if our future is not to be as individuals, flying when ever and where ever we can get a flight in.

There are potentially other solutions other than a NFC or LLF. Some of which may deliver a future in the UK

For me the social aspect is as important as the flying, although for myself and other members of my club, we are no longer interested in competitions, although fly ins, tick the box.

Edited By Erfolg on 05/06/2015 19:57:41

[Steve T]

I despair when it comes to the 'younger pilots' who practically do not exist. I have tried letting teenagers have a fly with one of mine, general opinion it's boring. I tried letting them have the virtual experience using Pheonix, now that was much better! Much more like it, for about 15 minutes then that was boring as well. Building a model of your own, that resulted in a look of absolute disbelief, was I some sort of moronic idiot, they all had far better things to do than build a plane. Out of a class of 20, 14 year olds the interest level was a whopping zero. It just does not appeal to them. I know the place does not even exist yet but what could a NFC do to prevent our hobby dying out with us in the next 15 ish years?

Edited By Steve T on 06/06/2015 12:24:18

[Dave Hopkin]

Posted by Steve T on 06/06/2015 12:23:26:

I despair when it comes to the 'younger pilots' who practically do not exist. I have tried letting teenagers have a fly with one of mine, general opinion it's boring. I tried letting them have the virtual experience using Pheonix, now that was much better! Much more like it, for about 15 minutes then that was boring as well. Building a model of your own, that resulted in a look of absolute disbelief, was I some sort of moronic idiot, they all had far better things to do than build a plane. Out of a class of 20, 14 year olds the interest level was a whopping zero. It just does not appeal to them. I know the place does not even exist yet but what could a NFC do to prevent our hobby dying out with us in the next 15 ish years?

Edited By Steve T on 06/06/2015 12:24:18

Sadly we live in an age of "instant gratification" and "disposable consumer products" - those of us at or approaching retirement probably grew up in an era where things were repaired rather than replaced, things that were beyond repair became things for the kids to dismantle and play with, we had construction toys all of which I think created a mind set that was more in tune with building things - of course I think we owe a huge debt of gratitude to the likes of Airfix and Kielcraft for giving a lot of us the first steps into model aircraft

Today its all about gadgets, communications and instant action - pick up an xbox and jump "in" a Spitfire or F-16 and become immersed in a virtual dogfight - I am not sure how a humble trainer plodding round circuits competes with that

[Keith Lomax]

Posted by Erfolg on 05/06/2015 19:55:02:

It should be recognised that the UK is arranged on a radial system from London. On that basis, London always has a direct route. In the case of the regions, which can be considered to be the West Country, Wales and the Northern Belt, if the destination is not London, it begins to matter greatly where we are going. For those of us in the West Country, Wales and the NW, Birmingham is often an issue, another of the great population centres. In short the Location of the NFC really does matter if it were to service the whole of the UK, excluding Scotland,

That is precisely why the area selected was chosen - based on the major routes.

From the NW and West Mids, the route is the M6 (although to avoid the Birmingham area many use the A50/A500 to jump across to the M1). From the NE it is the A1. The M1 serves the population centres of Leeds/Bradford and Sheffield, plus the East Midlands. From the SW, it is the M5, from which you bypass South and East of Birmingham using the M42 and join the M6 to the East of Birmingham. (East Anglia has virtually no good roads.)

All of these are linked by the A14 which is an almost motorway standard dual carriageway from the M1 at the junction with M6 to the A1.

(BTW - around 13.5 million people live inside the M25, not the 8.6m quoted above - that relates to people whose local council is "London Borough of xxxx".)

[Area 51]

Posted by Colin Leighfield on 05/06/2015 11:53:06:

Cosford is an active military airfield engaged in basic training and experience flights for Air Cadets. Also there is a flying club based there, as well as the Air Ambulance. I don't see how BMFA could fit into that. The number of days in which it is available for exclusive events will inevitably be limited.

It doesn't matter what option you put forward, there will always be reasons to criticise, compromise has to be the order of the day. It is up to competent management to produce an effective modus operandi and deliver it. That is what I expect to see. As far as location is concerned, it looks reasonable to me from the national accessibility point of view. If you get any closer in to the central motorway box it will just become progressively more expensive and even less likely that all of the necessary permissions will be forthcoming.

The RAF work 0900-1700 at such sites, Mon-Fri also. I can see very clearly how a BMFA centre would fit nicely with this.. I can see any or many "local BMFA members" to an NFC flying between 0900-1700 Mon-Fri.. A dedicated flying zone within the airfield boundaries would be easy to establish and manage, right angles to the operational runway with an agreed seperation and comms / radio facilities.

For any sort of NFC it to work, it needs footfall - short and simple.. there is already a substantial attraction at Cosford and those visiting with an aviation interest may also find the BMFA museum worth a visit.. Elder guests may well take younger members of the family and a trip to the BMFA after seeing full size may well light a spark of interest..

Current users of Cosford would be foolish not to look at other revenue opportunities - regularly! This current government has no great development commitment to armed forces.... If they decide to scale back RAF involvement at Cosford.. just HOW would the site cope overall..? Answers on a postage stamp I fear..

I have a view the BMFA should consider such sites in conjunction with other aviation activities.. the cash being mooted for the farm site plus any need for development should go into three to four UK wide location.. North/midlands/south (Elvington/Cosford/home counties etc)... its only my opinion but I can see three or four sites gettting more local and frequent support!

Super article in RCMW this month about site and land management.. one club worked in "harmony" with a new neighbour threatening their "purchased" flying field.. great solution worked out to the benefit of all.. However my own take on the article is the flying club got maximum benefits...

This Lawn Farm place is one fanciful idea too far for the BMFA.. to preserve and promote the hobby they need to pitch in behind other minority aviation activities (micro lights/ museums) and build a strong voice ....

Then again its only my view as a member of the BMFA..

[Colin Leighfield]

Hi Area 51. Believe me, I would love for it to be at Cosford and I can see where you are coming from. I just thought that there would be too many obstacles, but I would like to be proved wrong. I agree absolutely that this needs to be co-ordinated with wider aviation activities and think that this needs to reflect in the new development, wherever it finishes up.

[Cuban8]

Just thinking aloud, but as a regular visitor to IWM Duxford I can't think of a better place as an alternative venue for the Nats. Huge airfield and musem, nearby additional fields that are often used for overspill parking on airshow days, good motorway connection & not an active military facility. Problems..............outside of airshow weekends some fullsize activity (pleasure flights and aircraft tests etc) and I think the Cambridge University Air Squadron use it for gliding. The LMA had a couple of shows at Duxford IIRC but I think a problem might have put paid to any further shows - not sure. perhaps someone can clarify. If it was financially beneficial to the IWM to have us there on an otherwise quiet weekend (probably not August bank holiday) maybe it could work?

Some video that I shot in 2009

Edited By Cuban8 on 08/06/2015 07:53:10

[Keith Lomax]

Posted by Erfolg on 05/06/2015 16:59:58:

Keith, I really do suggest that you do look,,seriously at the population distributions by regions, rather than thinking what is probable.

You may be surprised, the answer is almost certainly not the answer you seem to assume.

No I won't be surpised.

I had looked at the population, not by region, but by the largest population centres, and Kings Cliffe is within easy reach of the two largest, and also number 5 (according to Wiki). Numbers 3 and 4 (Manchester and Liverpool) would have difficulty getting to anywhere central.

I have now taken that a stage further. From wiki I obtained a list of the largest centres of population - there are 12 over 3/4 of a million. From Google I obtained the driving times and distances from each of these to Kings Cliffe.

These 12 locations account for 33.1 million people, or just over half of the total UK population. The weighted average drive to KC is 115 miles and would take 2 hours 25. 64% are under 100 miles. 75% are under 3 hours.

[Andy Meade]

Population centres, of course, do not equal a centre of people flying r/c aircraft though. Who has this information readily to hand? Oh, the BMFA...the people who made the decision to (potentially) base the centre where it is now. You're all second-guessing the Association on the theory that a large populace might equal a large percentage of fliers...but it also might not. Not open green areas? Too many NIMBY's? Too close to to an airport? List goes on.

IMHO there could be concentrations of fliers around centres of UK avaiation excellence - Derby (RR), Filton (Airbus), Manchester (MBDA).

Just trying to make a point that we probably don't have all the data, but the BMFA (I'd hope), does.

Edited By Andy Meade on 08/06/2015 14:07:45

[MattyB]

Posted by Dave Hopkin on 06/06/2015 12:32:51:

Posted by Steve T on 06/06/2015 12:23:26:

I despair when it comes to the 'younger pilots' who practically do not exist. I have tried letting teenagers have a fly with one of mine, general opinion it's boring. I tried letting them have the virtual experience using Pheonix, now that was much better! Much more like it, for about 15 minutes then that was boring as well. Building a model of your own, that resulted in a look of absolute disbelief, was I some sort of moronic idiot, they all had far better things to do than build a plane. Out of a class of 20, 14 year olds the interest level was a whopping zero. It just does not appeal to them. I know the place does not even exist yet but what could a NFC do to prevent our hobby dying out with us in the next 15 ish years?

Edited By Steve T on 06/06/2015 12:24:18

Sadly we live in an age of "instant gratification" and "disposable consumer products" - those of us at or approaching retirement probably grew up in an era where things were repaired rather than replaced, things that were beyond repair became things for the kids to dismantle and play with, we had construction toys all of which I think created a mind set that was more in tune with building things - of course I think we owe a huge debt of gratitude to the likes of Airfix and Kielcraft for giving a lot of us the first steps into model aircraft

Today its all about gadgets, communications and instant action - pick up an xbox and jump "in" a Spitfire or F-16 and become immersed in a virtual dogfight - I am not sure how a humble trainer plodding round circuits competes with that

Personally I think we need to stop mourning the passing of the hobby as we have known it for the last 60-70 years, and embrace the change - the BMFA certainly need to do this in their planning for the NFC.

Within 10-20 years the number of people building wooden scratch builds, plans and kits will be miniscule, but that doesn't mean the death of building - it will just be different (look at the large number of people building in foamboard of creating their own 250 FPV mini quads). Traditional modellers may not like it, but it is happening and will only continue.

We also need to stop thrashing around trying to engage teens and twentysomethings with traditional modelling - with so many other exciting options that require less investment and sticking power, building and flying is always going to be an extremely tough sell. Instead we should be thinking about the "new beginner" in their 40s with kids away/finished university and more disposable income and time on their hands. The only way of engaging youngsters is I think through the increasing number of RTF/BNF toy and hobby grade products that might drag them in; they can investigate building later if they are enthused, but pushing that is not going to help. The old model of "Build a BMFA Dart and capture them forever" is now broken and simply cannot be fixed.

PS - I went on a slope soaring awayday last week, and ended up discussing the NFC with about 15 friends in the pub afterwards. Being glider guiders they obviously aren't truly representative of the likely "average" NFC user , but their views are worth reflecting on...

• All but a couple were aware of the NFC and the latest update from the BMFA (which did surprise me, even though it has been discused on our internal club forum);
• Nearly all supported the concept of an NFC; several were extremely enthusiastic;
• All though LLF seemed a highly compromised option vs. the rather nebulous vision expressed in the Powerpoint deck. The absence of planning permission for our intended use was highlighted as a particular worry to many;
• No-one thought the proposed purchase of LLF was a good idea at this time given the information distributed to date (interesting given LLF is actually quite accessible for this group in general - we live only an average of ~30-40 miles away);
• No-one believed that an NFC at LLF could be funded in the long term based on loation and information we know so far without a substantial increase in contributiosn from the wider membership.

Edited By MattyB on 08/06/2015 14:52:00

[John F]

Posted by Area 51 on 07/06/2015 19:01:26:

The RAF work 0900-1700 at such sites, Mon-Fri also. I can see very clearly how a BMFA centre would fit nicely with this..

Current users of Cosford would be foolish not to look at other revenue opportunities - regularly! This current government has no great development commitment to armed forces.... If they decide to scale back RAF involvement at Cosford.. just HOW would the site cope overall..? Answers on a postage stamp I fear..

Cosford, is most certainly not a 9 - 5 unit.

I have worked there for a few years and done plenty of duty Medic duties covering flying evenings and weekends for military flying alone!

Wreking Gliding Club will fly evenings and weekends too.

On a flight safety note you would never get approval to fly anywhere near an active airfield on the promise of staying a minimum separation away from the active part. A promise is simply not enough, not on a site like Cosford.

The development and support of Cosford is massive and Governments don't just scale back a unit leaving them with a budget defecit to somehow get from somewhere else. It doesn't work like that! The unit would cope very well if they had to close buildings.

I know you're a fan of Cosford, as you've mentioned it before, but it simply aint gonna happen there as the Air Ambulance is 24 / 7 so that trumps everything around.

On another note, out of interest, what is it that makes you think the current Gov. has no development committment to the Armed Forces?

[MattyB]

Remember this? (from the May 5th update)...

• Initial focus of the study was MOD/ex MOD airfields as these were felt likely to yield opportunities.
• This route proved problematic and ultimately fruitless as current airfields listed for disposal already marked for development/housing and former airfields either already developed or in alternative use (gliding, skydiving, general aviation or industry)

All this talk of MOD or ex-MOD fields is interesting, but I know someone on the team that was evaluating potential sites for the NFC; they trooped round a lot of these and talked extensively with the current users. That they moved on to focussing on brownfield farmland etc is a direct result of issues securing ex airfields in the right locations at affordable prices. We may not have visibility of all the issues at this point but I do not doubt they are there - after all, the BMFA are not going to be able to pay the same as one of the big housing developers. Still doesn't make LLF a good idea to my eyes though!

Edited By MattyB on 08/06/2015 15:06:17

[Erfolg]

Keith

This is what i find so disturbing, some aspects of the figures you quote. The population within the M25, which was your criteria is at the low end is 7 million.

I actually provided a number from Population UK 8.3 million, which apparently is the latest estimate or if we were to take the London Evening Standard 8.4 million.

Now you can imagine I am little concerned that the peer review of the report contains similar values as 13,5 million you quote.

My weighting puts the ideal position to the west of the M1. Also for those of us in the North West,  in 2011 the pop was 7.1 million, some more recent have suggested 8 million, which is approx 15% of the population. (England). The distance by road is circa 140 miles, which for most due to speed restrictions is over 3 hours. When my daughter was at Leicester University this was an approx 4 hour drive, without stop, via Stoke and the A50.

I am more than a little concerned that we do have members in the West Country and Wales, where my weighting does not accommodate in a sensitive manner. Although I have not sat down and undertaken any calculation, the Internet Value for the centre of the whole of England, the West Country and Wales is Market Drayton, which is possibly, arguably fair to all.

Perhaps it is time for all to see the report, so that it can be vigorously exposed to an in-depth peer review?

 

Edited By Erfolg on 08/06/2015 15:39:36

Edited By Erfolg on 08/06/2015 15:49:24

Edited By Erfolg on 08/06/2015 15:51:08

Edited By Erfolg on 08/06/2015 15:52:36

[Tomtom39]

Interesting comment MattyB. At our club we have taken a varied approach to attract new members into our hobby and club:-

1. Appeal to the youngsters at Schools,ATC , Scouts , school fairs etc . We sell or give away "chuckies" at the target age of 6-10 (Darts and the building of these I have found seem to work well at age 8/10) . Hopefully we will by them playing with these insert a "seed" of wanting to explore the hobby and other aviation interests in the future.

2. With older kids ie early teens we demonstrate a variety of models from Fixed wing (rubber, Ic,electric) and more recently ie last few weeks Multi rotors (Inc FPV racing a few members that seem to have got themselves into it - the 14-16 understand these and its interesting to watch them with one of our guys demonstrating the building and setting up with a laptop. I'm too busy with PVA, tissue and dope to get into these!!!) We have two new members joining following a talk at the ATC. Its not all doom and gloom (two of the under 16's at our club have gone on to build some good old traditional build kits and one is currently drawing/designing his own model as part of his GCSE DT project)

3. We also try and interact with the retired folk out there (I did a talk at our local Rotary and have had one member joining and another potential one in the pipeline). We hope that by doing so ,this interest will follow down the line (not necessarily to their busy children) but their grand kids.

We have a great hobby and I always try and enthuse our members to talk about what they are interested in . Some are "frustrated pilots" others love the building (or both) . We have held some informal building chats at members homes (nothing like seeing and touching the real thing and having knowledge on building hints imparted .) In many ways the availability of "good" quality ARTF's, progress in electric power and dare I say it the lower intro cost to the hobby has helped to attract many new modellers that were put off by the perceived high cost of RC flying (sorry no free flight at our club although some are trying out control line (I just get very dizzy and fall down - and thats before I open my bottle of Pale Ale!)

A National Model Flying Centre would I'm sure help to preserve this and hopefully inspire a new "generation" (regardless of their age) to take up model flying in whatever guise their interest take. I can still remember my dad dragging me along to Hendon Air Museum at age seven and my mother still recounts my badgering my father to take me back. I'm all in favour and hope the BMFA will make this happen.

[The Wright Stuff]

Posted by Erfolg on 08/06/2015 15:31:08:

Keith

This is what i find so disturbing, some aspects of the figures you quote. The population within the M25, which was your criteria is at the low end is 7 million.

I actually provided a number from Population UK 8.3 million, which apparently is the latest estimate or if we were to take the London Evening Standard 8.4 million.

Now you can imagine I am little concerned that the peer review of the report contains similar values as 13,5 million you quote.

My weighting puts the ideal position to the west of the M1. Also for those of us in the North West, in 2011 the pop was 7.1 million, some more recent have suggested 8 million, which is approx 15% of the population. (England). The distance by road is circa 140 miles, which for most due to speed restrictions is over 3 hours. When my daughter was at Leicester University this was an approx 4 hour drive, without stop, via Stoke and the A50.

I am more than a little concerned that we do have members in the West Country and Wales, where my weighting does not accommodate in a sensitive manner. Although I have not sat down and undertaken any calculation, the Internet Value for the centre of the whole of England, the West Country and Wales is Market Drayton, which is possibly, arguably fair to all.

Perhaps it is time for all to see the report, so that it can be vigorously exposed to an in-depth peer review?

There are many metrics to use for proximity: centres of geometry, population, transportation, ranked by distance, time or convenience. I'm not sure it's safe to argue that the geometric centre is necessarily the fairest metric to use.

I'm afraid I see the location as very much secondary to the quality and scope of the centre. Of course in an ideal world it would be equal for everyone. We don't live in that world. There are lots of 'National' centres that are not in the geometric centre of England and Wales. The National Railway Museum? Nope. National Gallery? Nope. National Maritime Museum? The National Museum of Computing? National Horseracing Museum? National Museum of the Royal Navy? National Army Museum, National Science Museum? Need I go on?

My point is that anyone expecting this to be commutable from anywhere in England and Wales for use as their regular flying field is going to be sorely disappointed. As far as I can see, it would be somewhere to visit once or twice a year, make a weekend of it, and visit some other places in the location while you're at it.

Edited By The Wright Stuff on 08/06/2015 16:40:35