PS-99: RAF BINBROOK Ojection to a Wind Turbine incl. Wind/Sound Data

Help To Arm People
With The Truth & Facts
To Make Their Case & Defend Themselves



(PS-99: RAF BINBROOK Ojection to a Wind Turbine incl. Wind/Sound Data)


this letter, with all the ‘sound’, ‘acoustic’ & ‘pressure’ data, & so much more, was ‘e’mailed to me with the offer that it could be used in any way to oppose Wind Turbine Planning Applications:

Hello Greg.
I have attached my objection to monstrous wind turbines which helped stop the turbines being built here if it is of any use to you.
Don’t be fooled by ‘professional’ acoustic assessments quoting dB-A weighting.
It is dB-C that REALLY matters. Low frequency over distance!
Ray Whiteley

RAF BINBROOK Crest for WT Objection 01


Hughie Edwards Way

Binbrook Technical Park




(01472) 398739




Dear Sir.


I wish to object in the strongest terms possible to the planning application reference number 131343.


The application and its supportive documentation are totally and utterly flawed and I will go through each document in turn.


WLDC application form ref 04:5954 filled in by Mr Allsop of Life Long Energy.


Section 3. Description of proposal.


The proposed Tozzi Nord Victory 24-60 60kW wind turbines can have a hub height of 22m or 30m according to the Italian manufacturer’s data however this is different to Life Long Energy’s own web site which states that the hub height is 24m.


Section 12. Assessment of flood risk.


The proposal will increase the flood risk as the applicants, Total Reclaims Ltd have destroyed the communal surface water drainage infrastructure and this has already caused problems for us and others with surface flooding, continuous wash in of demolition and concrete crushing debris, polythene membrane and other litter and large rain associated soil erosion to such an extent that our western land boundary and at least one memorial tree has roots now in thin air!

The proposed disposal of surface water to a main sewer is most interesting, as only two, known to be working, 4 inch main sewer pipes leave the area.

We have spent six years clearing demolition rubble from them so that we can use them and not inflict problems for those companies downstream in the technical park.

The 4 inch outgoing system from the Heritage Centre has been successfully tested and proved to flow downstream as far as the central water tower, therefore eliminating any future problems for other current users of the site communal system.

The entire former aircraft apron site drops over 10 feet from end to end and water gathers at the proposed turbine 1 site because Total Reclaims destroyed the communal surface water drainage infrastructure.


Section 13. Biodiversity.


  1. Protected species
  2. Important habitats.


The answers to questions a) and b) filled in by Mr Allsop are incorrect.

The correct answer to a) and b) is yes, on land adjacent to or near the proposed development.


There are at least three known protected species and possibly more.


Bee Orchids – as photographed for Cleethorpes Camera Club Photo Competition 2012 and in 2014 we had 21 plants in flower in our camping area with care advice being taken from Steve Jack the Lincolnshire Wolds Countryside Service Manager.

Roman Snail 01

Roman Snails

Natterjack Toads


There are many other unidentified species awaiting confirmation of identification by the relevant authorities.

I was very concerned about the situation and had correspondence with English Heritage and the Lincolnshire Conservation Trust in August 2012.

It is an important brown hare breeding ground with partridge, lapwing and skylark ground nesting areas.

Barn owls, kestrels, sparrow hawks and buzzards use the area for hunting, we have resident stoats and weasels and it is an annual breeding ground for swifts, swallows, pied wagtails and fieldfare.

The silver birch trees in particular attracting large quantities of ladybirds which then attract goldfinches, etc.

In winter, swans and geese use the area for transit flight from the lobby ponds at the bottom of Ash Hill en route to the Humber estuary.

One of the biggest roost colonies for rook, crow and jackdaw is in the wood behind the proposed turbine 1 at TF199961.

This wood originally stretched right across the land that RAF Binbrook airfield was built on, so may well have been a traditional breeding area for centuries.

They gather every evening from all over a wide area of the wolds taking up to half an hour to fly in. The concentration in the breeding season exceeds well over 1000 birds.

At night we have fox and other nocturnal animals.

It is truly a special, peaceful, tranquil and magnificent place within the AONB and must be protected at all costs.


Section 14. Existing use.


The land was subject to a planning tribunal against Winchester Marine Ltd and restrictions were placed on it at that time.

It has, I believe, only planning for open storage use with height restrictions and limited traffic movement with vehicle logging.

Now that the concrete apron area has been totally destroyed by the applicant, doesn’t it have to revert back to agricultural land under the Chrichel Down rules?


Section 15. Tree and hedges.


There are trees adjacent to the development and there is a boundary thorn hedge planted on the bund at great expense, in compliance with the planning tribunal by Winchester Marine Ltd and it attracts lots of wildlife especially the buzzards, sparrow hawks and kestrels whilst hunting their prey.

We have planted many more memorial trees in the adjacent Bomber Command Memorial Park to supplement other memorial trees already planted adjacent to the proposed turbine 1 site.


Section 23. Hazardous substances.


The answer is yes. Hazardous waste will be involved in the proposal.

The turbine pitch system is hydraulic and waste hydraulic oil is a hazardous substance.

Wind turbulence which is a hazardous waste to anyone downwind and GRP blade shedding of any size can be lethal.

Our Air Cadet, veteran camping area and visitor picnic area is a matter of yards away from proposed turbine 2 and therefore the hazardous wind turbulence, horrendous noise, strobe effect and the total loss of amenity to our visitors would be indescribable.

It is very clear to me, that you could fit at least another 4 turbines in between the initial 2 should, god forbid, planning permission be granted and would open the door to further energy generation applications on the site, which could involve practically anything.


Drawing – Wind Turbine Elevations.


The turbine drawing shows a hub height of 22 metres however the drawing narrative clearly states it is 30 metres with a blade tip height of 42.4 metres.


Site Layout – Block Plan.


The proposed on site delivery route of materials runs along what is left of our western land boundary which will cause more damage to the existing damage already done by the applicant. He has already destroyed our communal storm drainage infrastructure, destroyed our western land boundary and covered our Bomber Command Memorial Park infrastructure and memorial trees with concrete dust, polythene membrane, litter, etc and the continuing HGV traffic removing the last of the crushed hardcore and the bringing back to site of soil, etc, of unknown origin or toxicity, continues to wash debris down into our southern end surface water soak away system, continuously blocking up the first main gulley.


Amended acoustic assessment.


As a former member of the Nottingham Society of Engineers and having worked for Plessey, GEC and Marconi, I am quite familiar with investigative research in regard to engineering, international and global standards compliance, computer modelling, calibration methodology and the bringing of products to market and the subsequent integration into the field.

It is my professional opinion that the amended acoustic assessment written by Life Long Energy Ltd is not only unprofessional but not worth the paper it is written on.

They might have learnt how to cut and paste within a document but clearly have yet to master a spelling checker.


I have attached documentation to support this.

I’ll start in Italy.

As you can read on the Tozzi Nord Victory 24-60 sales brochure from Italy:-


Tozzi Nord is the first Italian manufacturer of small wind turbines to have

Its TN535 turbine (10 kW) certified by an accredited body and to install

its product even in the UK. The same path is now being followed for the Victory 24-60 (60 kW).

Designed to meet the IEC61400-1 standard, the certification process for this turbine is currently underway (certification measurement performed by Windtest Grevenbroich gmbh).

This process also includes certification of the power curve and noise emissions, thus confirming the turbine’s qualitative excellence and guaranteeing the customer a secure investment.


Now we follow the trail to WTG’s wind turbine test facility in Germany.


There is no reference anywhere on their web site to this turbine being under test or having been tested for power curve or noise emissions but I emailed them to see if it was awaiting erection at their small turbine test site 8 but have not received a reply back so far.

It could be that it was tested at another site in Italy but you would have thought there would be a reference to it somewhere for WTG company publicity reasons unless their report, if any has been produced, was detrimental.


Next we travel back to the UK and Life Long Energy and several of their acoustic assessments in support of planning applications around the UK.


One: – Total Reclaims Ltd, Brookenby

Two: – New England Quarry, Plymouth

Three: – Burton Pidsea, Hull


Firstly, the use of ETSU-R97 does not comply with EU law or with UK regulations on environmental impact assessment.

It is considered by Dick Bowdler of New Acoustics and Mike Stigwood of MAS Environmental amongst many other experts, to be fundamentally flawed and very likely allowing situations to occur that are not only hazardous to health but likely to lead to major litigation in the future.


The three Life Long Energy acoustic assessments’ I have used here, are all for the Tozzi Nord Victory 24-60 60kW wind turbines but are not consistent with each other.


The Binbrook and New England Quarry 10 m/s turbine sound power levels in normal operation mode (table 3.1) and octave sound power data (table 3.2) appear identical, despite a hub height difference between the two turbine sites planned.

Binbrook’s hub is 22m, whilst New England Quarry’s is 30m.

Identical spelling mistakes appear in both documents, suggesting a cut and paste operation from another source.

We are told that the overall guaranteed sound power levels at various wind speeds and hub heights come from a document allegedly produced by WTG Germany for Tozzi Nord but this document and data cannot be verified, as we have no copy of it.


Next we go to Burton Pidsea.

An identical 30m mast height as per New England Quarry but suddenly the 10 m/s sound power levels for the turbines in normal operation mode, table 3.1 has been removed but the spelling mistakes are still there.

Why is this?


Now the octave sound power data (now table 3.1) is not only louder across the spectrum and a new low frequency band of 31.5 hertz added but we no longer know if the data is for 10 m/s.


It could be for 1 m/s for all we know at this stage!

We do know however that the nearest NSR is only 250 metres away and there are plans for a third turbine very close to the site and suddenly the operation of the third turbine could potentially result in cumulative noise!


Really? I am surprised.

Of course the modelling using ETSU-R-97 passes with flying colours, so let us dig a little deeper!

Luckily for us, each of the acoustic assessments has the WindFarm Software Acoustic Run Data at the back.


For clarity, the revision number would appear to be the number of times the model was changed before the noise results became ‘acceptable’.


New England Quarry – 10 revisions

Binbrook – 63 revisions

Burton Pidsea – 18 revisions rising to 22 when the third possible turbine was added into the equation.


By comparing the run time data for all three assessments, you can see that by altering the following parameters in the model, you can lower the noise results.




Source porosity

Middle porosity

Receiver porosity

Receiver height




Wind speed

Wind speed height


Of course, knowing the ‘alleged’ noise levels at 10 m/s is pretty useless to us when the turbine can operate to twice that speed (20 m/s) before ‘allegedly’ and hopefully cutting out.


Back to the Burton Pidsea assessment.


5.5 Model Qualifications


The accuracy of the ISO 9613-2 method is limited to approximately +/- 3 dB. Due to the uncertainty associated with noise modelling, it is important to use conservative input data and parameters for the model. The noise model and input data used for this analysis contain the following conservative input data:

  • Turbine sound power level of 94.5 dB (A)
  • A ground factor of 0.9 when the majority of the land is porous
  • Modelling favourable downwind propagation condition for all turbine sites simultaneously


Given the conservativeness of the noise model inputs and parameters, the predicted noise levels at the receptors should be somewhat ‘worst case’ compared to the long term average noise levels that are actually encountered. However, there may be certain condition under which the noise level at a receptor is higher than, or is perceived to be higher than, what is predicted. These conditions could include periods of high atmospheric stability and high wind shear, leading to low background noise levels at ground level. Temperature inversions may also periodically increase the sound pressure level at a receptor.


Now we are getting closer to the truth but are still not told what the highest turbine sound power level is at 20 m/s cut out speed or 43 rpm!


  • Turbine sound power level of 94.5 dB (A) per turbine!


This figure, of course, is only mentioned in the Binbrook acoustic assessment in our table 3.1 where it would appear to be the alleged sound power level for a low wind speed of 7.5-8.5 m/s.


All of this noise modelling is not only guesswork but fabrication of the results!

It is only as good as the person who wrote the computer program in the first place and we have no idea of what other parameters were fed into the model by Life Long Energy to get the results they wanted!

This is outrageous misinformation designed purely to deceive the casual reader of the document and hoodwink the planning committee’s concerned.

As far as Binbrook is concerned, the nearest main noise sensitive receptor (NSR) is not as stated in the flawed assessment but it is the RAF Binbrook Heritage Centre site and the offices of the business’s that occupy the three hangars facing the proposed sites which are only a matter of yards away from any of them.

The next nearest NSR after that, is the WLDC designated amenity land at TF197954 approximately.

There is still, rather conveniently, no mention at all of the dB(C)-weighted or dB(G)-weighted noise figures for prolonged low frequency average over distance, just the dB(A)–weighted figures.

The assessments using IEC 61-61400-11 states that low frequency noise or ‘infrasound’ is not required.

I totally disagree, as it can be both ground and airborne and easily deflected by large structures such as reinforced concrete aircraft hangars and this low frequency over distance is easily demonstrated here and even more so, since hangar one’s front was sheeted with metal cladding.

The front three hangars at Binbrook act like a parabolic sound mirror, with lower frequency sounds ricocheting off them with a Doppler Effect.

Shotgun fire, bird scarers, the testing of fireworks by Chestnut Trading, the cattle herd at Stainton le Vale, British motorcycles on Wednesday evening’s Bike Night en route to Willingham Woods, the heavy four stroke scramble motorcycles using the course near Caistor and even the Avro Vulcan taking off at the RAF Waddington Air Show are currently clearly audible over the background wind and tree noise.

The assessment does not mention anything about the Doppler Effect that will occur between the two turbines. There isn’t a way of synchronizing them together, so it will be akin to the twin engine Luftwaffe aircraft of WWII, always out of synchronization and creating additional harmonic noise at a distance point between them.


Planning guidance 2.1 National Policy Framework


The national policy framework clearly states that planners should identify and protect areas of tranquillity which have remained relatively undisturbed by noise and are prized for their recreational and amenity value for this reason.


The incorrect NSR location and the incorrect noise level data hiding the turbine ‘hum’ component, low frequency noise, etc, completely invalidate the acoustic assessment which is only a predicted assumption anyway.


Binbrook Pre Public Consultation.


Binbrook! We are the village of Brookenby and have been for nearly 25 years!

Yet again, what is the correct hub and blade height?

What site wishes to reduce its energy bills?

The applicant has no energy bills, as he has no business in operation on the land.

This again, is outrageous misinformation designed purely to deceive the casual reader of the document and hoodwink the planning committee.


Landscape and visual impact assessment – Life Long Energy Limited.


This assessment is just a rehash of the original and no-one even bothered to check it before submitting it to planning again.

At 4.6.2 table 5 Sensitivity of visual receptors, it clearly states that visitors to heritage sites are high zone 1 sensitivity.

At 4.6.2 table 6 the proposal becomes a very large magnitude of impact and will dominate the view.

At 4.6.2 table 7 using the decision matrix, the overall significance of visual effect is large and major.


It still refers to an associated substation at 6.2.1 necessary for the original proposed turbine model and we still have the fictional 25 year decommissioning phase at 6.4.

It is useless doing a desk based analysis because it doesn’t take into account recent local changes in the landscape, such as the removal of the tree screen around the former RAF Binbrook officers mess site and the removal of part of the mature tree screen to the east of York Road in Brookenby or provide knowledge of the historic nature of the site and the special place it holds in the hearts and minds of generations of families across the world.

Australian visitor families do not travel 12,000 miles for fun!


In section 8.0, it refers to existing wind energy developments.

The two at North Wold Farm, Thoresway which we knew nothing about until the first one appeared out of the fog one day and to which we would have submitted a planning objection and two at Tetney (incorrect NGR) which I believe have never been used due to the developer building them without plans or agreement for the power distribution from them!

Having spent a great many hours downloading and printing the view images, the wire frame images and the photomontage’s, I have been unable to replicate what they are trying to convince me of apart from viewpoint 16 (Swinhope Road and York Road, Brookenby).

The image clearly shows the first house in York Road facing towards my house in Salisbury Avenue.

Hubs nil, blades nil. Correct. As the photomontage image shown below is pointing in the opposite direction to the proposed turbine sites by at least 90 degrees!


All of the images are conveniently taken to the applicant’s advantage at 1100 on the 4 November 2014, so perhaps the images were damaged as they passed through the space-time continuum because you cannot be in 21 different locations at the same time!


Heritage and Conservation Impact Assessment. – Life Long Energy Limited


The whole area is of major archaeological importance. Not only for the recent RAF history from 1940-1988 but throughout the ages.

There are ancient looking earthworks at TF202947 which to my knowledge have not been investigated which could be related to a ford at Orford or as far back as the Iron Age.

There appear to be grave like cuts in the field at TF204946 which have only been spotted this winter and although we have heard of an Anglo Saxon site on the airfield having been investigated quite a few years ago, we can trace no record or any results so far.

In our search for RAF Binbrook artefacts, we have covered a wide area with metal detectors but only to a very shallow depth, although we have a number of deep ferrous targets / objects to investigate further.

The only possibly non RAF related artefact found so far from a very shallow depth, has been a bronze / brass hinge off a door or wooden chest.

It is inconceivable that there is not more to be found on a high strategic point in the landscape with a permanent spring fed water source in the valley.

I have attached a newly acquired aerial photograph of RAF Binbrook taken in the 1960’s.

As you can see in the fields to the east of Swinhope Road, Brookenby, there are marks in the fields.

The one marked ‘Roman’ was found a few years ago by me and I alerted the metal detecting club who told the relevant authorities.

I myself have found a knife blade on the surface and non local stone after ploughing and Roman artefacts have been coming out of the field since then.

I believe a proper field survey was carried out this year.

The photograph also shows something in the field opposite my house in Salisbury Avenue, Brookenby.

I have previously found old non local stone on the northern field edge bank which is higher that the present field cultivated level.

This edge bank leads down to the current stream which I believe was a lot deeper and navigable by small craft centuries ago to the sea outlet at Tetney High Sands.

There is certainly something strange and out of landscape context at TF211955 which warrants further investigation, as it is very close to Hoe Hill long barrow.

There are many areas of archaeological interest across the area which may well yet become the future scheduled monuments, etc.

Just because it isn’t on an ordnance survey map, a computer system or in a planning assessment, mean it isn’t there!

I can take you to a number of sites shown as a bit of woodland on the ordnance survey maps but when you are physically there, the landscape is much more.

An example is the tiny bit of woodland at TF226967. When you get inside it, you find that it is a large pit where iron ore has been extracted from the chalk and flint.


Design and access statement – Life Long Energy Limited.


  1. Introduction.


The proposed turbine sites are within an area with planning for storage on concrete (now removed by the applicant as well as the area’s service infrastructure), with severe limitations on it, as per the Winchester Marine planning tribunal and any remaining infrastructure to it, does not integrate with the Binbrook Technical Park without crossing land which is NOT owned by the applicant.

The land owner does not currently have any electrical energy requirements or reliance on fossil fuels on the land.

The other businesses within the Binbrook Technical Park seem to already have various choices of energy supply and I am led to believe the G4 Park is totally self sufficient.


  1. Proposal.


There is no documentation to support what they plan to do with the electricity produced and how they plan to integrate the supply into the national grid system or to the Binbrook Technical Park.

It is all pure speculation and a continuous stream of falsehood’s designed to hoodwink the planning committee.


  1. Consultation.


Mr Ian Elliot’s comments refer to our land and our projects not the applicants and have no bearing on this application.

The applicant’s land which is strewn with litter, rubbish and overgrown grass, has not been cut since his ownership and has been the subject of complaints to Environmental Health.

We have even tidied some of it up to stop the ingress of more debris onto our camping and picnic area and worked around the Skylark breeding season.

The RAF Binbrook Heritage Centre and Winchester Marine Ltd have spent a great deal of time, effort and money improving the area from the wasteland and dumping ground that it was back in the 1990’s as part of Aviation Heritage Lincolnshire and Lincolnshire County Council’s efforts to expand the tourism portfolio within the County, the AONB and West Lindsey in particular.

The specimen memorial trees in the Bomber Command Memorial Park have been sourced from Northern Ireland, Orkney, Brazil and Poland and in time will form a magnificent wildlife sanctuary and place of solace and tranquillity for those visitors from across the world seeking reflection and remembrance.

The species of conifers in particular have been chosen for their different texture, feel and fragrance so that blind or partially sighted visitors can experience a sensory trail when they have grown a bit.

This year 2015 is a special anniversary year.

It is the 70th anniversary of Operation Manna when aircraft from RAF Binbrook took part in dropping food supplies to the starving Dutch people and of course we have the 70th anniversary of the liberation of the Dutch people and the ending of hostilities in Europe.

To commemorate this, we have planted an additional 400 daffodils around the camping and picnic area and 362 white tulips on our northern boundary of the Bomber Command Memorial Park.


  1. Design.


To see the proposed hideous turbines being installed and to see just how they will integrate visually into the AONB, I suggest you watch this:-


They will really blend into the background in an AONB, won’t they?

The off white colour and bright blue company logo will not blend into the landscape but if the masts were painted with canary yellow stripes, at least the crew of the international space station could use them for navigation.

They will be visible for miles as another hideous eyesore and there is no reference to future painting maintenance schedules if any has been taken into account, over the proposed and I believe fictional, 25 year life cycle.

The concrete foundations are a massive structure and would have to be poured in one go. This entails a large amount of heavy vehicle movements bringing structure components to each site.

There is no water on site to support any part of the construction phase.

To prevent lightning strikes all of the earthing infrastructure will have to be re-installed as the original RAF infrastructure was destroyed by the applicant.

I am deeply concerned about ice build up and subsequent ice throw from the turbine blades in winter especially spinning at up to 43 rpm.

They don’t have de-icing boot systems like aircraft do and people at the Heritage Centre could be seriously injured without warning with the temperature having been down to -16.5C in recent years.

The proposed turbine sites do not have any service infrastructure, fire fighting capabilities, security infrastructure, designated safety zones or disaster recovery and contingency plans.

We will not tolerate any more dust, debris, litter, food waste, hazardous waste, etc from operations on their land blowing onto our Bomber Command Memorial Park or camping area.  

The bringing back to their site of soil, etc, of unknown origin or toxicity may well have an effect on our planned drinking water borehole.


4.2 Use of Proposal.


The applicant’s have failed to provide any support documentation on HOW they plan to integrate into the existing infrastructure of the Binbrook Technical Park and the National Grid Network.


Transport statement – Life long Energy Limited.


The maps showing the proposed delivery route of materials and equipment to site does now show the traffic coming past Binbrook village school, however the route chosen from Market Rasen, via Tealby and Bully Hill is totally unsuitable for large, heavy goods vehicles. The road from Bully Hill to Kirmond le Mire in particular is already very badly damaged along one entire edge and needs a total rebuild.


Impact on the landscape.


There will be a major impact on the AONB and it will destroy the peaceful, reflective solitude of the Bomber Command Memorial Park, our magnificent views across to the Yorkshire Wolds, the Humber estuary and our wonderful dark night skies.

These are enjoyed by visitors from across the world.


Shadow flicker.


This will greatly affect the visitors to the Heritage Centre and particularly people such as me, who are blind in one eye from birth and very susceptible to strobe effect.


Aviation and radar.


The proposed turbine site is directly in line with aircraft taking off from Humberside airport and others going in to land at RAF Coningsby and RAF Waddington and will no doubt interfere with Eastern radar at Claxby.

RAF Tucano aircraft from RAF Leeming and others involved with low level training flights from RAF Cranwell regularly fly low level sorties across the site and other RAF aircraft fly over regularly to pay their respects to the 460 Squadron RAAF memorial site.

It is used by all types of aircraft en route to North Coates flying club and is a visual flight rules (VFR) navigation aid to the Lincolnshire Air Ambulance en route to accidents on the A180 and when taking casualties to Grimsby hospital.

Bond helicopters from Humberside airport use the air space for flight testing of their helicopters and transit flights to the southern North Sea oil and gas platforms.

A variety of aircraft use the airspace to practice display routines, including solo Red Arrows, a private Supermarine Spitfire and Me109 and an aerobatic pilot whose display routine is outstanding.

Aircraft en route to the Cleethorpes Air Show use the hangars as a navigation reference and we have been in contact with them in regard to staging our own air show at Binbrook in the future.

The proposed wind turbines would have to have anti collision beacons on them which would be a breach of WLDC’s own dark skies policy.

It is against my human rights as a disabled person not to be able to enjoy aviation related activities at the Heritage Centre and I shall seek further advice from the European Court of Human Rights should this planning application be granted.





Over 14,000 wind turbines from Alaska to Hawaii have been abandoned by companies which have either gone into liquidation or just left them because of rising maintenance costs, upgrade or replacement costs and lower feed in tariffs.

Who will decommission the proposed sites and associated national grid infrastructure if the company responsible for building and operating them is no longer in existence and more importantly, who will pay for the alleged cleanup operation in the alleged 25 years time.

The composite materials that the turbine blades are made from, is non-recyclable, so where is the designated land fill site going to be to accommodate all of the blades from all of the turbines in Lincolnshire already approved?

Worn out and damaged blades are already stacked up all over Europe awaiting disposal.

A friend of mine is a director of the Humber Gateway project where Siemens are currently fitting a 3Mw turbine off shore a week. This small scale ‘get rich’ scheme is not needed whatsoever, especially in the Lincolnshire AONB.

The proposed development will have a devastating impact on the landscape, wildlife and amenity of the AONB.

More and more visitors from across the world are discovering the peace, tranquillity, beautiful views, dark skies and undeveloped quality of the countryside of the Lincolnshire Wolds AONB.

This proposal will decimate the hard work put into the tourism portfolio for the area and the local business infrastructure that supports it.

The camp sites, the caravan sites, the B&B’s, the holiday cottages, the pubs, the restaurants, the guest houses, the museums, tourist attractions and the local market town economy.

The cumulative effect of passing these proposals within the AONB will be major and destroy what has already been achieved.

I have written to the prime ministers of the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand and to President Obama in the USA regarding this matter as the last American killed whilst flying from RAF Binbrook, Captain William Schaffner was sadly lost without trace in the North Sea in 1970.




The RAF Binbrook Heritage Centre, Museum, 460 Squadron RAAF Memorial, Hughie Edwards VC Memorial and the Bomber Command Memorial Park attract visitors from across the world.


The 460 Squadron RAAF Memorial is registered nationally and consecrated.



Human ashes have been scattered on our site and also on sites around the hangars.

Several more requests are currently awaiting better weather conditions for the veteran’s families.



We have an Air Cadet / veteran camping area and picnic facilities for visitors.

We are bee and wildlife friendly and conform to WLDC’s dark skies policy.

We hope to become part of the proposed WLDC Aviation Heritage Trail.

Our visitors include veterans and their families from across the World, including Australia, New Zealand, USA, Hong Kong, Cyprus, Holland, Denmark, Belgium, Germany and Canada.

We also get visitors from across the UK and have hosted amongst many others:-


Members of Cleethorpes Camera Club

Members of Binbrook Camera Club

Members of Brookenby Camera Club

Paranormal Lincolnshire

Students from Lincoln University

Lincoln Astronomical Society

Touring cyclists

Touring motor cyclists

Vintage Car enthusiasts

Lightning Training Flight veterans

MT Drivers veterans

5 Squadron veterans

11 Squadron veterans

12 Squadron veterans

85 Squadron veterans

101 Squadron veterans

139 Squadron veterans

142 Squadron veterans

460 Squadron RAAF veterans

Royal Observer Corps veterans

101 Squadron Association

RAF National Service Association

Serving RAF personnel from Coningsby, Waddington and Leuchars.




We hold one of the finest collections of RAF artefacts, photographs, aircraft drawings including the entire English Electric Company’s Lightning drawing archive and reference and engineering books, some of which are totally unique.

We collaborate with other museums worldwide and provide engineering parts support for the Royal Australian Navy’s (RAN) Fairey Firefly and Ed Kurdziel’s Fairey Firefly WB518 in the USA.

We also provide parts and engineering drawing support for various English Electric Lightning projects including the Anglo American Lightning Organisations T5 XS422 return to flight status in Mississippi and Supermarine Spitfire projects such as the rebuild of BL246 in both the UK and USA.


We have had discussions with organisers of the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award Scheme, Lincolnshire Young Offenders Scheme, North East Lincolnshire’s Young Offenders Scheme and Morton Hall and we hope to get prisoners from North Sea Camp in the future but a simple planning enquiry from us in support of this took from 15/3/13 to 12/10/13 to get a reply from the WLDC planning dept.


My great grandfather C S Carter was one of the founder members in 1884 of the Louth Naturalists’ Antiquarian and Literary Society which continues to this day as Louth Museum.

The work they did to discover the beautiful and rare geological and ecological things in the Lincolnshire Wolds was the foundation stone of the current AONB status.

I will fight to continue the preservation of what he and his Victorian friends started.

I request that the planning proposal be refused and that the unique Cold War iconic 11 Squadron line building (weighbridge) at TF 197956, possibly the only one of its type still left in existence and of international, if not worldwide importance, be afforded some form of listed protection.

I would also request that the Heritage Centre land and the grass and tree filled land either side of us be changed to D1 (Museum) status to protect it and the 5 Squadron maple leaf crest on hangar 2 which has been there for fifty years this year, be afforded some form of protection along with the memorial trees in front of the hangar itself if they haven’t already got it.

Yours sincerely,



R J Whiteley


RAF Binbrook Heritage Centre


We believe the information gathered on this site can act to bring the truth, regarding the dishonesty of the claimed benefits of Wind Turbines (WT) to the front of people’s minds as they are regularly taxed, in a hidden tax, on their energy bills to fund these politically correct and fundamentally all but useless monstrosities.

We have gathered a great deal of information in our efforts to prevent the industrialisation of Stroat and the banks of the Severn Estuary and across the wider area including the Forest of Dean (FoD) as administered by The Forest of Dean District Council (FoDDC), areas of outstanding natural beauty (AoONB), sites of special scientific interest (SSI) & wildlife habitats.

Please help to spread the truth about the Wind Turbine scam and the fundamental flaws and lies of the ‘Warmists’ & self proclaimed ‘Greens’, which are presented as ‘fact’, regarding the anthropogenic influence of mankind on Global Warming and Climate Chance.

Arm yourself with facts to defeat the biggest con of the late 20th and early 21st Century, and do please spread the truth and the URL of this site as widely as you can.

Posted by: Greg Lance – Watkins (site owner)

If you would like more information about Stroat see:

If you would like more information about Greg_L-W see:


PLEASE NOTE: We do not accept responsibility for material on links and other sources

IF you note ANY errors of fact in this or any other web site or blog I own or manage please bring it to my attention for correction @ – Thank you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s