Was there not a “/s” at the end of it?
Not really grinds my gears but I’m sure it will grind someone’s - apparently the tarmac at Brize has melted so the runway is understandably out of action.
Not the first time that Runway has melted, fancy having all your air transport assets at one base.
Luton are also doing emergency repairs at the moment!
Must be the same contract as the people who installed the roof on the new hanger; The one that blew down the last time we had a red weather warning, but for wind 
3 Likes
BBC saying the runway has had to close. And then in the next sentence: “They added that none of its operations had been affected by the closure.”
If closing the runway hasn’t affected operations, then what the hell do they do at Brize?!
5 Likes
It’s all a cover! 
RAF or ‘London’?
5 Likes
Being surveyed by a Canberra?
10 Likes
If you have a load of sneaky beaky flights that don’t exist, then they can’t be affected when something happens. 
1 Like
That poor old Canberra never gets a rest.
4 Likes
United Utilities banning SUP across all of their reservoirs. Including the one I paddle on with my club. With no real rationale. 
Is it a temporary measure during the very hot weather?
Might be to avoid more deaths due cold shock?
Could be at the request of the ambulance service?
Sadly not - this has been on the cards for some time. I think its because the SUP market has exploded - not just in a little way - but massively! Its become a hugely accessible (and cheap) watersport - which has brought a massive number of issues. There are people putting on all over the shop - with no regard to ownership of land, erosion of banks and breaking of fences - or other waterways users. There’s also the invasive species issue (which is probably the one credible statement they made) whereby users aren’t doing the whole “Check, Clean Dry” thing between uses and/or waterways - increasing the risk of bringing in an invasive species which would smash through the ecosystem.
UU are also absolutely paranoid about somebody dying (probably through cold water shock) and them being held responsible. They also make vague statements about “water quality” and “swimmers in the water”. Its just easier to ban everything.
Forgetting that the £199 Lidl or £150 Amazon special SUP buyer probably won’t be too fussed about whether or not they should be SUPing there - and will still die - but that “will be their fault, as they shouldn’t have been there anyway”.
3 Likes
And they never wear BAs!
Yep. But the cold water shock argument is nonsense given it applies to canoes & kayaks as well. In fact, the majority of those arguments apply to all watercraft.
I agree it’s down to the accessibility of it - but it’s no less annoying when there are far biffier (?) people in the club in a boat that are much more likely to end up in the water than me on a SUP. In fact, I’ll probably be the one fishing them out.
Nowt wrong with that…situation dependent 
That is if they have the competence to make an informed decision.
Absolutely - but SUPs are cheap as chips relative to other craft - which has fueled the explosion. And because it’s cheap, lots of people are going full #suplife without the necessary skills knowledge, experiences or behaviors to make safe choices on the water. And, as you say, it increases the number of biffs on the water - and with it, the number of biffs IN the water.
What a few reservoirs locally have done have partnered with clubs such that only club members can paddle - but that requires investment from the stakeholders - the club and the owner/manager. Some are doing this really successfully and have become, overtime, self regulating - and allow SUPs alongside other non-powered craft.
Rather than tackle the issue and promote safe use, UU just ban the craft type. It’s cheaper for them and less ongoing support/effort/energy.
Not really a cheapo Inflatable SUP is a similar cost to an inflatable Kayak etc
Yeap - they’ve been killing and damaging people for years too! But they have been a relative slow burner compared to the SUP explosion.