Leeds Bradford - General Thread

[tonysmith]

Right that’s me done with F4A. Puns can only really be made in relation to a specific topic, not just randomly posted in a specific jokes thread. So if that is what is required then I stand by a previous comment of F4A following the world in going mad. I get that people would always love facts and news but I bet if you put a poll out there then many would still want them included. Rant over and that’s me on my way. Take care all

Well said

 

[Sherburnflyer92]

@Kevin Farnell I am sorry but you are completely missing the point of the effect of a pun. This is now my very last comment on anything, certainly until if/when sensibility is allowed to return otherwise it’s pointless

Pun is a form of whit and humour. I don't see the issue. My god.

When did this forum become so formal? A humour/pun on subjects is in my opinion something to lighten what could quite easily be a heated discussion. And a little chuckle is always good. The forum has its discussions, we are very good at having discussions, so a little pun isn't going to hurt anyone. If anything if I was a visitor and read a bit of pun I'd think it shows of the individual personalities of the forum members.

 

[LBA4EVER]

I do enjoy the humour and puns but i can see both sides of the argument, its good to have a laugh and giggle but I must admit sometimes it does clog up the forum rooms, sometimes i check the forum rooms due to loadsa posts thinking there is big news and it just turns out to be lotsa funny jokes and puns haha so i do understand the views of the mods
I think we all get abit too giddy on here!

 

[Len Fish]

@Kevin Farnell I am sorry but you are completely missing the point of the effect of a pun. This is now my very last comment on anything, certainly until if/when sensibility is allowed to return otherwise it’s pointless

I for one will miss your humour. I always thought one of the strengths of these forums is that we know when to be serious and when we can be a bit more lighthearted, unlike some other forums that are downright miserable and full of personal attacks on contributors.

 

[Aviador]

Forums4airports has never been strict and the odd lighthearted joke is absolutely fine. As ever, all we ask is for a bit of self moderation. If there's already been a couple of posts with puns, maybe it's time to get back on topic. Alternatively take it to the Jokes thread. Please also remember, the moderators are also here by choice. It's a hobby for all of us so let's be sensible about this and remember to be mindful about others when posting.

_________________________________

 

[Sherburnflyer92]

I for one will miss your humour. I always thought one of the strengths of these forums is that we know when to be serious and when we can be a bit more lighthearted, unlike some other forums that are downright miserable and full of personal attacks on contributors.

I’ve always hated dry fruit.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

I am really pleased with this. Ive been suggesting for years that the airport contributes more to the local communities. It can only be a good thing. Lets hope they have a presence at this weekends Otley Show.

Leeds Bradford Airport flies to the rescue of Yeadon Carnival's happiness parade

Yeadon Carnival have confirmed their much loved parade will be returning this July, thanks to entertainment funding from Leeds Bradford Airport.

www.wharfedaleobserver.co.uk

 

[Aviador]

We've all said it so it's good to see them getting involved in the local community again.

 

[Len Fish]

In contrast a well known local anti-LBA group will be holding their annual Misery Festival a couple of weeks later!

 

[White Heather]

Regarding LBA and the alleged breach of the night flying quota, and our local rag the YEP, I have long since he's the view that they are anti LBA and supportive of those idiots who make more noise than the aircraft. You know who I mean .

Today, the YEP have demonstrated their unbalanced and anti airport stance perfectly. They have seen the now published minutes of the last Consultative meeting and published an
article confirming that the airport CEO told the meeting that LBA 'may have breached' the night movement cap and that the regulations governing them were open to interpretation. They went on to give time for the chair of the anti airport mob, to say her bit, claiming justification, and criticising the airport and council for taking so long. The YEP also state that the Council haven't commented.

What the YEP don't bother to cover is that the minutes also state that the Council planning department, who are supposed to police
compliance with the quota they set, have themselves reported the summer quota to the plans panel as May to October for years. Also that the apparent error (if there is one) seemingly dates back to the time when the airport was still Council owned (4 West Yorkshire Authorities). So the Council are more complicit than the current LBA owners. The current reported time period appears to have started on their watch!

They also ignored the fact that the Council can only enforce the planning restrictions that were breached, if they do so within 10 years of the breach starting. They haven't. Effectively the May to October period has become Custom and Practice. These comments were made by myself on behalf of the LBA Support Group, and included in the minutes alongside the CEOs honest comments. The YEP chose to ignore them. That, is not balanced reporting in my view. It's one sided and biased.

Interestingly, the majority of comments I read were supportive of LBA and opposed to those who shall not be named. One made the same comments as me regarding Council complicity and the 10 year time limit. The main objector included a false noise map originating from they who shall not be named,.suggesting he was one of them. Another suggested aircraft should take off over Otley as their are less houses! I took the opportunity to enlighten her about the issue of wind direction!

 

[YorkshireLad]

Regarding LBA and the alleged breach of the night flying quota, and our local rag the YEP, I have long since he's the view that they are anti LBA and supportive of those idiots who make more noise than the aircraft. You know who I mean .

Today, the YEP have demonstrated their unbalanced and anti airport stance perfectly. They have seen the now published minutes of the last Consultative meeting and published an
article confirming that the airport CEO told the meeting that LBA 'may have breached' the night movement cap and that the regulations governing them were open to interpretation. They went on to give time for the chair of the anti airport mob, to say her bit, claiming justification, and criticising the airport and council for taking so long. The YEP also state that the Council haven't commented.

What the YEP don't bother to cover is that the minutes also state that the Council planning department, who are supposed to police
compliance with the quota they set, have themselves reported the summer quota to the plans panel as May to October for years. Also that the apparent error (if there is one) seemingly dates back to the time when the airport was still Council owned (4 West Yorkshire Authorities). So the Council are more complicit than the current LBA owners. The current reported time period appears to have started on their watch!

They also ignored the fact that the Council can only enforce the planning restrictions that were breached, if they do so within 10 years of the breach starting. They haven't. Effectively the May to October period has become Custom and Practice. These comments were made by myself on behalf of the LBA Support Group, and included in the minutes alongside the CEOs honest comments. The YEP chose to ignore them. That, is not balanced reporting in my view. It's one sided and biased.

Interestingly, the majority of comments I read were supportive of LBA and opposed to those who shall not be named. One made the same comments as me regarding Council complicity and the 10 year time limit. The main objector included a false noise map originating from they who shall not be named,.suggesting he was one of them. Another suggested aircraft should take off over Otley as their are less houses! I took the opportunity to enlighten her about the issue of wind direction!

Well this is annoying... Wish someone could get sense into these people's heads but no, false report after false report. News should be factual, biased anti-airport opinions should be kept to OPINION columns for the people who refuse to see any benefit to LBA's existence

 

[Jetchaser]

Why has the LBA PR team not responded to these utter rubbish claims from the YEP. Surely the airport has to stop such bias reporting. Just wait until Mondays Look North, they will do their totally bias coverage of this too.

 

[Aviador]

What makes this so utterly laughable is the majority of these "night flights" (roll eyes) are during a period every other airport considers as day time. Seven of these "night flights" operate tomorrow morning for example. Long after the dawn courus has finished and McDonald's has already been serving breakfast for two hours!

 

[LBAYORKIE]

What makes this so utterly laughable is the majority of these "night flights" (roll eyes) are during a period every other airport considers as day time. Seven of these "night flights" operate tomorrow morning for example. Long after the dawn courus has finished and McDonald's has already been serving breakfast for two hours!

If I remember correctly WH said that the airlines were aware of the situation and had planned/were planning their schedules so there wouldn't be any impact shoild the decision go the 'wrong' way.

 

[White Heather]

If I remember correctly WH said that the airlines were aware of the situation and had planned/were planning their schedules so there wouldn't be any impact shoild the decision go the 'wrong' way.

That's what we were told, yes. We have 2800 scheduled night movements available over whatever the period is , excluding delayed flights of up to 90 minutes. In April there weren't too many but the numbers are increasing now.

Why has the LBA PR team not responded to these utter rubbish claims from the YEP. Surely the airport has to stop such bias reporting. Just wait until Mondays Look North, they will do their totally bias coverage of this too.

Well, what they have published isn't technically rubbish. They are reporting what the CEO said, and what is now publicly viewable in the minutes. But they are being selective in what part of the minutes they report on in order to progress what appears to be an underlying anti LBA agenda.

 

[Aviador]

I suppose Spencer Stokes will spew up some more drivel on Monday blaming the airport and providing those whom shall not be mentioned on here, more air time.

 

[Statto]

GALBAs approach is that they issue formal press releases to all of the local media organisations. This is just another example. And inevitably the press release is going to be biased in favour of their view of the world. They know that most local media outlets are massively under resourced and will just copy and paste most press releases word for word. GALBA also accompany their press releases with a named spokesperson who, should the press be interested, will front up and provide an interview which gives them credibility as there are real, named people behind the story.

I doubt the airport authority are going to get into responding to every GALBA press release about planning controls etc because they will be in discussions with the council and there's no upside in trying to hold these discussions via the media.

 

[LBA4EVER]

Can someone on here just clear up the situation regarding max and neo aircraft operating in the "night time" period please? Are these types going to be excluded from the night time quota because if this was the case then thats a massive boost for the airport? Is this decision part of what the airport management are waiting on?

 

[Threegreens]

Afraid not, they are included

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Afraid not, they are included

Are you sure?