Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Island airport mentality in covid / coronavirus times

Reading this report from Germany and seeing stuff like this

L1534/21
SCILLY ISLES/ST MARYS ATS AD OPERATING HOURS WILL VARY AT SHORT
NOTICE TO ACCOMODATE SCHEDULED OPERATOR FLIGHTS ONLY AND REMAINS
STRICTLY PPR, AD REMAINS AVAILABLE TO SAR, EMERGENCY AND MIL
FLIGHTS AT ALL TIMES, LOCAL BASED OUT OF HOURS INDEMNITIES ARE IN
FORCE.
FROM: 01 APR 2021 07:02 TO: 11 APR 2021 17:30

(Scilly Isles are a part of England and thus subject to the same restrictions and the same freedoms as England)

and having seen Isle if Wight do the same for much of last year (comment on England as above)…

I am wondering whether the administrations of these places are acting legally.

Of course somebody will say “any travel spreads the virus” but what stops the local council around, say, Littlehampton (a rather run down place in the south coast of the UK) putting up a barbed wire fence around it, and road blocks, citing this reason?

The reality is that the Scilly Isles are probably not closed at all; you could get a ferry there… having travelled all day to get to the ferry port first. It is merely the airport whose “management” (which for the Scilly Isles could not be described as GA-friendly) has decided to operate its own policy.

Funnily enough, once you land and walk out of the airport, there is no problem with the locals Some cross the road to avoid you, as they were doing in the final pre-lockdown days on Alderney, a year ago, but nobody has been unfriendly.

The Croatian Islands managed to be welcoming as ever during these times, and remain so even right now when entry to the country is very difficult.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

When travelling around, the respective regulations and “strong requests” not to come for touristic reasons should be respected – I believe that is common sense. No personal offense intended, but someone who is travelling around to a place which clearly says “please don’t come”, then complaining about some random people being not amused and finally spreading around that the respective island is not welcoming guests or does not want to have foreigners is pretty remarkable, to say the least.

In Germany are clear rules / “strong recommendations” not to travel around for touristic reasons. Sure, one can say what is not strictly legally forbidden is allowed, but the subsequent consequence might be a hard lock-down. In contrast to other countries, i.e. USA, vaccination is not where it should be and hence people can’t just drop by and get their vaccination to then stop whining around when a tourist shows up to spend some money.

Questioning whether the administrations acting legal… Well, somehow they have to tackle the pandemic. Obviously it is not possible to have a pre-Covid lifestyle while getting the infection numbers down at the same time. It is understandable that people are tired about it, but it is what it is currently.

So my bottom line: When an island or whatever place asks not to come, simply don’t come. When another place is currently open for tourists then, in gods sake, go for it if needed (but stop whining around when one gets infected).

LSZF Birrfeld, LFSB Basel-Mulhouse, Switzerland

Questioning whether the administrations acting legal… Well, somehow they have to tackle the pandemic.

Yet, that leaves unanswered my Q about whether an island should do this, while a town on the mainland would not be allowed to block itself off.

I intentionally did not mention say the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man which, like some other islands around Europe, have their own “government”.

And keeping this on the topic of GA, I’d say the risk from GA is miniscule, for all the obvious reasons (e.g. mostly 1 or 2 people, doing their own thing). This isn’t an A320 full of young clubbers who – on past record, from bulk tourism to Spain and some Greek islands – will infect not just a load of locals but also each other. Actually the UK data, from Spanish tourism last summer, is more “each other” than the locals…

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

I’d say the risk from GA is miniscule,

Sure, I agree. Fun fact (or actually not so funny): When you privately fly to Switzerland in your GA-aircraft, you need to show a valid PCR-test. When you cross the border with your car you don’t (in general; obviously there are fine-prints depending of the country you are coming from).

To your point about an island being able to block itself off, in contrast to cities. It is not that the island has build up fences or called the army to block everyone off. Obviously the only thing they, same as with cities, can do is to “strongly request” visitors not to come. Obviously the government can issue rules that limits the radius of personal movement. I would consider that rather as a sort of emergency law.

LSZF Birrfeld, LFSB Basel-Mulhouse, Switzerland

Personally I think that if a place is unwelcoming then this should be called out.
Someone commenting on my perfectly legal actions would get short shrift from me.
And people have long memories when it comes to negative experiences.

One of the most insidious things to have happened over the last year is this concept that everybody should be miserable and that it is a prerequisite that stopping anyone enjoying themselves is more important than actually determining if an activity is likely to actually spread this virus or not. The rise of the curtain twitcher and “oooohhh, look at what hes doing… I cant do that so he shouldnt be allowed either!!!” attitude is pretty frightening. There has been an explosion of little fifedoms in some areas of society whereby something perfectly legal and safe is curtailed or banned just because someone thinks they have the power to do so. Unfortunately GA has seen more that its fair share.

Regards, SD..

Peter wrote:

Yet, that leaves unanswered my Q about whether an island should do this, while a town on the mainland would not be allowed to block itself off.

Perfectly legal in Norway, and has been done several places during the pandemic. It’s up to each county to decide. In fact, the first thing that happened here was my neighboring county isolating itself. It can only be done for 7 days in a row I think.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

To your point about an island being able to block itself off, in contrast to cities

Yet, it doesn’t block itself off – in some cases – to passenger ferry traffic!

Why not? There would be an outcry / uproar.

So this is a private initiative by the airport manager, worth about as much as him venting his spleen on FB saying that everybody should suffer together (which in turn is a strong feature of CV19-era politics, everywhere, because politicians love division)

people have long memories when it comes to negative experiences.

They certainly do in GA. Shoreham gets bad rep some 20 years after it last deserved it, but the UK GA chat site boycott brigade is still at it. Perhaps because if you fly 5hrs/year you have a lot more time to remember stuff

this concept that everybody should be miserable and that it is a prerequisite that stopping anyone enjoying themselves is more important than actually determining if an activity is likely to actually spread this virus or not.

Exactly.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

This is the typical reaction of any tinpot administration to a situation, they decide to gold plate already cautious rules with restrictive rubbish in an effort to be seen to be doing something.

I have seen this petty and stupid stuff from airports to the parish council allotment committee.

Air raid warden Hodges would be proud.

Last Edited by A_and_C at 02 Apr 09:36

A_and_C wrote:

Air raid warden Hodges would be proud.

Dad’s army?

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

Give a small man a little bit of power and he WILL use it. Give a big man a little bit of power and he’ll delegate it to a small man!

Last Edited by Stickandrudderman at 02 Apr 10:21
Forever learning
EGTB
32 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top