DOCSLIB.ORG

BAE Systems Operations Ltd Woodford Aerodrome

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
BAE Systems Operations Ltd Woodford Aerodrome Woodford Aerodrome BAE Systems Operations Ltd Desk Study for Potential Contamination Woodford Aerodrome BAE Systems Operations Ltd DOCUMENT CONTROL FS38745 EMS 54524 Woodford Aerodrome, Cheshire BAE Systems Operations Ltd. BAE Systems Environmental EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction and Objectives BAE Systems Environmental was commissioned by BAE Systems Operations Ltd to conduct a Preliminary Risk Assessment for Land Contamination (PRALC) on the BAE Systems Woodford Aerodrome at Chester Road, Woodford, Cheshire; an airfield and an aircraft assembly facility. The objective of the desk study is to carry out a contaminated land assessment of Woodford Aerodrome as part of the corporate Contaminated Land Strategy. The desk study and site reconnaissance will also enable appropriate information about the Site to be collected to assist any potential intrusive investigations. Site Characteristics The Site, which is centered on National Grid Reference SJ 900 825, occupies an area of approximately 205 hectares with an elevation of approximately 90mAOD. The Site is bound to the north by residential and commercial properties. To the east is a railway line, beyond which are residential properties and Adlington industrial estate. To the south is mostly agricultural land with a small group of residential properties. To the west is a small residential development and agricultural land. BAE Systems Woodford is currently involved with the assembly of aircraft (currently Nimrod) and the painting and paint stripping of aircraft. The Site consists of one main runway and four taxiways. The buildings on the Site are concentrated mainly into two areas: the main assembly areas to the north of the Site, and the main painting and stripping area located at the south of the Site. A large number of the buildings across the Site that were formerly used for assembly are now utilised for storage of aircraft components. Six named surface water courses are located on the Site, the majority of which flow to the River Dean located in the southern area of Site, an exception to this is Poynton Brook to the east of the Site as this is a tributary to the Mersey. The use of the Site has changed very little from the development of the Airfield on what was a greenfield site in 1920’s and 1930’s. Environmental Setting Geological records and borehole logs indicate the majority of the Site to be underlain by Glacial Till. Glacial Sand and Gravel and Peat deposits are identified within the centre of the Site. Fluvio- Glacial Gravel deposits are located to the east and south east of the Site. Glacial Sand and Gravel and Alluvium deposits are mapped adjacent to the southern boundary of the Site. A BGS borehole located to the south east of the Site records clays and sands to the base of the borehole, which was terminated at 8.0m below ground level The solid geology beneath the Site comprises of Pebble Beds to the east and the Upper Mottled Sandstone to the west of the Site. Both stratum form part of the Sherwood Sandstone Group, of Permian Triassic age. Four faults are indicated on the geological map across the Site, running in a north – south direction. A borehole located 700m to the west of Site confirms the presence of solid geology at 20.7 mbgl. The report identifies Glacial Till underlying the Site to be a non aquifer due, to its negligible permeability. The presence of groundwater within the Glacial Till is likely to be restricted to any sand and gravel horizons and may not be laterally continuous. The Glacial Sands and Gravels are classified as a Secondary B Aquifer due to their moderate permeability. Groundwater within the solid geology beneath the Site is identified to be a Principal Aquifer. This classification relates A0787-00-R2-1 i OCTOBER 2011 Woodford Aerodrome, Cheshire BAE Systems Operations Ltd. BAE Systems Environmental to deposits with high intergranular and/or fracture permeability implying they provide a high level of water storage. The Site lies within a Zone II and a Zone III Source Protection Zone. Two source protection boreholes are located within 1000m of the Site, borehole reference NW001 is located 375m to the south of Site and borehole NW148 is located 705m to the northwest of the Site. Initial Conceptual Model and Potential Pollutant Linkages The Conceptual Site Model (CSM) is a simplified representation of the environmental conditions at the Site and its surroundings that enables third parties to build up a picture of the Site. Due to the large number of potential sources of contamination identified on the Site there remains the possibility that on Site sources of contamination may exist. These potential sources are listed below. Made Ground placed during Ash fill area near coal fired Plating activities (e.g the construction of the boiler house as detailed in the degreasing, alchroming etc) factory. Environ Report. The paint store, painting and The Ordnance depot, explosives Waste storage areas (both stripping processes. store and positions of anti- historic and current waste aircraft guns. storage). Historic Fuel tanks (UST’s) The demolition of Site buildings Made Ground where new associated pipework and that were undertaken at the Site. site levels required infilling engines containing aviation of the existing ponds. fuel and diesel. The garage processes. The old fire training pit. AST’s, associated pipework and engines. Landfill area within pit area. Boiler houses. Sewerage treatment areas. Chemical storage Substations. Airfield Known pollution incidents The occurrence of any contamination is most likely to be within localised hotspots around drains and floor slabs of the former process buildings, around fuel storage tanks and areas of previous landfilling. Several pathways have been identified on Site. A pathway is a means by which a receptor can be exposed to, or affected by, a contaminant. The current pathways on Site include migration through the unsaturated zone, via underground services, groundwater, via soil and service trenches, from ingestion of contaminated soil, inhalation of vapour and direct contact with contaminated soil. A total of four receptors have been identified that could be adversely affected by potential on site sources. The first of these is groundwater this includes the shallow groundwater within the Glacial Till, perched water within Made Ground and the deeper groundwater within the major aquifer. The second identified receptor is the six surface waters located on the Site. Also identified as a potential receptor are future site users following any future redevelopment and maintenance personnel. The final receptor identified on Site is any buildings in particular the building fabric and underground services. A0787-00-R2-1 ii OCTOBER 2011 Woodford Aerodrome, Cheshire BAE Systems Operations Ltd. BAE Systems Environmental Recommendations To address the potential distribution of contaminants, and the pollutant linkages that may be associated with them, it is recommended that an intrusive investigation is undertaken. The investigation should concentrate on establishing firstly whether contamination sources exist at the Site and whether these have caused, are causing or are likely to cause harm or pollution to receptors at the Site. The investigation should comprise the sampling of soils (including appropriate leachability testing of soils) and surface and ground water’s with testing for contaminants of concern and subsequent appropriate risk assessments. In addition surface water sampling off the Site should also be undertaken in order to assess if the Site is impacting on the quality of the local surface waters. The investigation should also be undertaken to determine the nature of the underlying geology at the Site and the depth to the solid strata. An intrusive investigation would also assist in setting an environmental baseline for the Site from which future potential environmental impacts can be measured. A0787-00-R2-1 iii OCTOBER 2011 Woodford Aerodrome, Cheshire BAE Systems Operations Ltd. BAE Systems Environmental CONTENTS PAGE NO 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. SITE DETAILS AND DESCRIPTION 2 3. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 4 4. EXISTING REPORTS AND SITE INVESTIGATIONS 8 5. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT & SITE ACTIVITIES 10 6. WALKOVER SURVEY 14 7. UNEXPLODED ORDNANCE 23 8. ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION 25 9. INITIAL CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL 30 10. PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT 38 11. RECOMMENDATIONS 40 TABLES TABLE 1 PROPERTY DETAILS TABLE 2 GEOLOGY TABLE 3 LICENSED WATER ABSTRACTIONS ONE KILOMETRE RADIUS OF SITE TABLE 4 UXO FREQUENCY TABLE 5 POTENTIAL SOURCES TABLE 6 POTENTIAL PATHWAYS TABLE 7 POTENTIAL RECEPTORS A0787-00-R2-1 iv OCTOBER 2011 Woodford Aerodrome, Cheshire BAE Systems Operations Ltd. BAE Systems Environmental FIGURES FIGURE 1 SITE LOCATION PLAN FIGURE 2 SITE LAYOUT PLAN FIGURE 3 EXTRACT OF GEOLOGICAL MAP FIGURE 4 EXTRACT OF GROUNDWATER VULNERABILTY MAP APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 SITE WALKOVER PHOTOGRAPHS APPENDIX 2 BGS LOGS – SUPERFICIAL DEPOSITS APPENDIX 3 BGS LOGS – SOLID GEOLOGY APPENDIX 4 ENVIROCHECK REPORT APPENDIX 5 COAL AUTHORITY LETTER APPENDIX 6 HISTORICAL MAPS APPENDIX 7 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS APPENDIX 8 ANNOTATED SITE LAYOUT PLAN APPENDIX 9 BUILDING NUMBER PLAN APPENDIX 10 TANK LOCATION PLAN APPENDIX 11 SERVICE PLANS APPENDIX 12 ASBESTOS REGISTER APPENDIX 13 POLLUTION INCIDENT LETTERS APPENDIX 14 LOCAL AUTHORITY SEARCH A0787-00-R2-1 v OCTOBER 2011 Woodford Aerodrome, Cheshire BAE Systems Operations Ltd. BAE Systems Environmental 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Background and Objectives BAE Systems Environmental was commissioned by BAE Systems Operations Ltd to conduct a Preliminary Risk Assessment for Land Contamination (PRALC) on the BAE Systems Woodford Aerodrome at Chester Road, Woodford, Cheshire; an airfield and an aircraft assembly facility. The objective of the desk study was to carry out a contaminated land assessment of Woodford as part of the corporate Contaminated Land Strategy. This assessment has been conducted in general accordance with current industry good practice guidance documents and within the UK legislative and policy framework. 1.2. Scope of Work The Site is located and delineated in Figures 1 and 2 respectively.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Woodford Garden Village Supplementary Planning Document CONTENTS
    Woodford Garden Village Supplementary Planning Document CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 4.0 OPPORTUNITIES & CONSTRAINTS 23 Purpose of the Document 2 Introduction 24 Scope and Status of Document 2 Topography 24 Existing Land Uses & Buildings 24 2.0 SITE CONTEXT 5 Context & Character 28 Introduction 6 Highways & Transportation 28 Background 6 Landscape & Trees 34 The Site & Surroundings 8 Ecology 35 Land Ownership 11 Heritage 38 Planning History 11 Contamination & Remediation 42 Noise & Vibration 43 3.0 PLANNING POLICY 13 Air Quality 43 Introduction 14 Hydrology & Drainage 44 Sustainable Development 14 Community Facilities 44 Development Principles 15 Future Land Uses (CEC Area) 44 Highways & Transportation 18 Future Land Uses (SMBC Area) 44 Environmental Assets 19 Infrastructure & Utilities 21 CONTENTS 5.0 DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES 47 Introduction 48 Sustainable Development 48 Development Principles 50 Development Form & Mix 60 Phasing 66 Highways and Transportation 66 Environmental Assets 72 Infrastructure & Utilities 80 Planning Obligations 81 6.0 DESIGN & LAYOUT GUIDELINES 83 Introduction 84 Approach to Design & Master Planning 84 Garden Village Design Principles 98 FIGURES, TABLES & APPENDICES FIGURES Figure 2.1 Location Plan 7 Figure 2.2 Site Plan 9 Figure 3.1 Woodford Aerodrome MEDS 17 Figure 4.1 Existing Land Uses 25 Figure 4.2 Highways & Transportation Network 31 Figure 4.3 Local Services & Facilities 33 Figure 4.4 Heritage Assets and Key Buildings 39 Figure 5.1 Woodford Garden Village Site Indicative Masterplan 52 Figure 5.2 Woodford
    [Show full text]
  • ISSUE No. 225 AUGUST 2019
    FIREISSUE No. 225 COVERAUGUST 2019 Complimentary copy for the recipients use only onward transmission is not permitted for copyright reasons F o 3 u 6 THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF n 9 d 1 ed in in ter THE FIRE BRIGADE SOCIETY Manches FINDING A PINZGAUER By Mick Ford It is always interesting to learn the fate of a fire appliance MUSEUM WATCH after it’s retired from brigade service. One such machine was discovered during a visit by staff of the Essex Fire Museum to Newflame Fire Safety Specialists of Yaxley, Peterborough. In the Glasgow’s Riverside Museum middle of their warehouse stood a magnificent 6x4 Pinzgauer Nigel Churchman has supplied the following images of the / Saxon, registration J115 UPU. It became immediately fire engines in Glasgow’s Riverside Museum. evident that this was an ex-Essex machine, one of eight such These clearly demonstrate the difficulty of getting good appliances the brigade acquired between 1991 and 2008. images of the fire engine exhibits. This particular Steyr Puch Pinzgauer Light Water Tender (LWrT) This problem is common to a lot of museums. Certainly was the second in the batch, arriving in 1992. It was sent to space is always going to be an issue for those who arrange Manningtree where it remained until joining the ‘spares fleet’, exhibits, but where as some twenty to thirty years ago when before its disposal. From Manningtree it seems to have been photography was less popular, with the prolification of cell acquired by the MoD to cover the Shoeburyness ranges. phones, with incredible picture quality, photograph has arrived Newflame purchased it in March 2018 and had its engine rebuilt with the masses.
    [Show full text]
  • Woodford Neighbourhood Plan Representations to Regulation 14 Consultation and WNF Responses
    Woodford Neighbourhood Plan Representations to Regulation 14 Consultation and WNF Responses This document presents all the representations received by Woodford Neighbourhood Forum to Regulation 14 Consultation on the Woodford Neighbourhood Plan during the consultation period 16th May to 30th June 2018. Contents Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Responses from residents who supported with no comments .................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Responses from residents who supported overall and made comments (some of which were objections) ............................................................................................. 6 Responses from residents who objected .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 24 Responses from local businesses and organisations ................................................................................................................................................................................. 28 Responses from residents in neighbouring communities ........................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Download the Index
    The Aviation Historian® The modern journal of classic aeroplanes and the history of flying Issue Number is indicated by Air Force of Zimbabwe: 11 36–49 bold italic numerals Air France: 21 18, 21–23 “Air-itis”: 13 44–53 INDEX Air National Guard (USA): 9 38–49 Air racing: 7 62–71, 9 24–29 350lb Mystery, a: 5 106–107 Air Registration Board (ARB): 6 126–129 578 Sqn Association: 14 10 to Issues 1–36 Air Service Training Ltd: 29 40–46 748 into Africa: 23 88–98 Air-squall weapon: 18 38–39 1939: Was the RAF Ready for War?: Air traffic control: 21 124–129, 24 6 29 10–21 compiled by Airacobra: Hero of the Soviet Union: 1940: The Battle of . Kent?: 32 10–21 30 18–28 1957 Defence White Paper: 19 10–20, Airbus 20 10–19, 21 10–17 MICK OAKEY A300: 17 130, 28 10–19, back cover A320 series: 28 18, 34 71 A A400M Atlas: 23 7 À Paris avec les Soviets: 12 98–107 TAH Airbus Industrie: The early political ABC landscape — and an aerospace Robin: 1 72 “proto-Brexit”: 28 10–19 Abbott, Wg Cdr A.H., RAF: 29 44 Airco: see de Havilland Abell, Charles: 18 14 Aircraft carriers (see also Deck landing, Absolute Beginners: 28 80–90 Ships): 3 110–119, 4 10–15, 36–39, Acheson, Dean: 16 58 42–47, 5 70–77, 6 7–8, 118–119, Addams, Wg Cdr James R.W., RAF: Aeronca 7 24–37, 130, 10 52–55, 13 76–89, 26 10–21 Champion: 22 103–104 15 14, 112–119, 19 65–73, Adderley, Sqn Ldr The Hon Michael, RAF: Aeroplane & Armament Experimental 24 70–74, 29 54 34 75 Establishment (A&AEE): 8 20–27, Aircraft Industry Working Party (AIWP): Addison, Maj Syd, Australian Flying 11 107–109, 26 12–13, 122–129
    [Show full text]
  • Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)
    Tuesday Volume 598 21 July 2015 No. 37 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Tuesday 21 July 2015 £5·00 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2015 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 1349 21 JULY 2015 1350 as the centrepiece. Does that not clearly demonstrate House of Commons that the Conservatives are the natural party for hard- working people and their families? Tuesday 21 July 2015 Mr Osborne: My right hon. right Friend is absolutely right. We are building the higher-wage, lower-tax, lower- The House met at half-past Eleven o’clock welfare economy that our country needs if it is to compete in the future and give real opportunities to working people. The new contract that we offer is this: PRAYERS businesses will pay higher wages and pay lower taxes and people will receive bigger pay cheques, but there [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] will be lower welfare. That, I think, is a contract that the British people support. BUSINESS BEFORE QUESTIONS Mr Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op): The Chancellor’s plan will not look very well planned or QUEEN’S SPEECH (ANSWER TO ADDRESS) very long if it does not include some reference to THE VICE-CHAMBERLAIN OF THE HOUSEHOLD reported productivity, higher-quality management, and, indeed, to the House, That Her Majesty, having been attended manufacturing. What is he going to do about those key with its Address of 27 May, was pleased to receive the issues? same very graciously and give the following Answer: I have received with great satisfaction the dutiful and Mr Osborne: We entirely acknowledge that we need loyal expression of your thanks for the speech with which to improve the productivity of the British economy.
    [Show full text]
  • Woodford Garden Village Harrow’S Role
    Woodford Garden Village Harrow’s Role Acquisition / Deliver Planning Demolition & Remediation Implementation of Infrastructure Deliver Commercial & Extra Care Manage Phased Disposals Management of Tenants Promote Further Development Opportunities Location Woodford Aerodrome, History – Formerly owned by Avro/British Aerospace Ownership boundary within both Stockport and Cheshire East The Runway Classic ‘X’ Planning Background Following the announcement of the closure of the Woodford BAE Systems site, the site was identified in the emerging Local Plan for both Stockport MBC and East Cheshire Council as a possible mixed use development site suitable for housing. The site was designated a Major Development Site (MDS) in the Green Belt and was therefore restricted to development that would have no greater impact than the existing facility on the Green Belt. Extensive work was undertaken by Harrow Estates to produce a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) to support the emerging Local Plan and the proposed allocation of the site. The SPD would review the existing constraints and establish defined parameter while also seeking to optimise the scale of development that would be acceptable in Green Belt terms. Time line February 2012 – Preparation begins on the SPD January 2013 – SPD is adopted by Stockport Council’s Executive. July 2013 – Public Consultation Workshops. September 2013 – 2 day Public Exhibition. November 2013 – Application validated by Cheshire East Council for landscaping works. December 4th 2013 – Three applications validated by Stockport Council (1. Hybrid application; 2. Full application). July 17th 2014 – Bramhall & Cheadle Hulme South Area Committee. July 29th 2014 – Stockport MBC Planning & Highways Regulation Committee resolves to grant hybrid application. January 21st 2015 – Decision Notice issued by Stockport Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Report Template
    Woodford Garden Village Supplementary Planning Document Report of Survey 13 July 2012 Woodford Garden Village SPD – Report of Survey Contents 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Site Context 2 Introduction 2 Background 3 The Site & Surroundings 3 Land Ownership 8 Planning History 8 3.0 Planning Policy 9 Introduction 9 Sources & Methodology 9 Baseline Information 9 Conclusions & Constraints 20 4.0 Context & Character 21 Introduction 21 Sources & Methodology 21 Baseline Information 21 Conclusions & Constraints 25 5.0 Dust & Air Quality 26 Introduction 26 Sources & Methodology 26 Baseline Information 27 Conclusions & Constraints 29 6.0 Noise & Vibration 30 Introduction 30 Sources & Methodology 30 Baseline Information 31 Conclusions & Constraints 32 7.0 Hydrology & Drainage 33 Introduction 33 Sources & Methodology 33 Baseline Information 34 Conclusions & Constraints 34 8.0 Ground Contamination 35 Introduction 35 2726511v2 Woodford Garden Village SPD – Report of Survey Sources & Methodology 35 Baseline Information 36 Conclusions & Constraints 40 9.0 Ecology & Nature Conservation 42 Introduction 42 Sources & Methodology 42 Baseline Information 43 Conclusions & Constraints 47 10.0 Cultural Heritage & Archaeology 49 Introduction 49 Sources & Methodology 49 Baseline Information 49 Conclusions & Constraints 53 11.0 Landscape & Visual Amenity 55 Introduction 55 Sources & Methodology 55 Baseline Information 58 Conclusions & Constraints 62 12.0 Transportation 63 Introduction 63 Sources & Methodology 63 Baseline Information 64 Woodford Traffic Generation and Impact
    [Show full text]
  • Woodford Aerodrome Supplementary Planning Document PDF 90 KB
    CHESHIRE EAST COUNCIL Strategic Planning Board ____________________________________________________________________ Date of Meeting: 3 October 2012 Report of: Strategic Planning & Housing Manager Subject/Title: Woodford Aerodrome Supplementary Planning Document Portfolio Holder: Cllrs David Brown & Rachel Bailey ___________________________________ 1.0 Report Summary 1.1 This report considers a draft Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) prepared by Stockport Council to guide the redevelopment of the part of the Woodford aerodrome site which lies within its area. 2.0 Recommendations 2.1 That the Board considers the draft Woodford SPD attached as Appendix 1 2.2 That, subject to any comments made by the Board the Portfolio Holders for Performance and Capacity & Communities and Regulatory Services be recommended to approve the following response: “Cheshire East Council generally supports the proposals in the SPD, particularly in relation to recognising the need for non-vehicle links to Poynton and to the wider countryside, but requests that: • Suitable reference is made in the SPD to identifying how secondary education is to be accommodated. Current analysis suggests that Poynton high school has capacity to accommodate an increase in pupils arising from the Woodford development. However such analysis is sensitive to a variety of factors and varies over time. Consequently the SPD will need to emphasis that should an impact be identified suitable mitigation will need to be provided; • Reference is made to working with Cheshire East Council to agree the highway impacts and identify appropriate monitoring and mitigation measures; and • A Glossary is added to the final document to aid understanding of technical terms.” 3.0 Reasons for Recommendations 3.1 To ensure full consideration is given to the potential impacts of any development on Cheshire East.
    [Show full text]
  • Woodford Aerodrome Opportunity Site SPD
    Stockpoo rt Metr opolitan Bor ough Council Local De velop ment Fram e work Woodford Aerodrome Opportunity Site SPD January 2013 If you would like this document in large print, on audio tape, in Braille or on disk, please contact: Planning Policy Team Placce Directorate Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council FREEPOST Stockport SSK1 3YQ Telephone: 0161 474 4395 Fax: 0161 474 4337 Stockport LDF: Woodford Aerodrome Opportunity Site SPD Contents 1 Introduction 3 Purpose of the Document 3 Scope and Status of Document 3 2 Site Context 6 Introduction 6 Background 8 The Site & Surroundings 8 Planning History 11 3 Planning Policy 13 Introduction 13 Sustainable Development 13 Development Principles 14 Highways & Transportation 17 Environmental Assets 17 Infrastructure & Utilities 19 4 Opportunities & Constraints 21 Introduction 21 Topography 21 Existing Land Uses & Buildings 21 Context & Character 24 Highways & Transportation 24 Landscape & Trees 31 Ecology 31 Heritage 33 Contamination & Remediation 37 Noise & Vibrations 38 Air Quality 38 Hydrology & Drainage 38 Creating a Sustainable Community 39 Future Land Uses 39 5 Development Guidelines 43 Stockport LDF: Woodford Aerodrome Opportunity Site SPD Contents Introduction 43 Sustainable Development 45 Development Principles 46 Development Form & Mix 63 Phasing 69 Highways & Transportation 71 Environmental Assets 78 Infrastructure & Utilities 84 Planning Obligations 85 Appendices Appendix 1 Relevant Planning Policies 87 Appendix 2 Explanation of Housing Numbers Calculation 89 Appendix 3 Glossary 90
    [Show full text]
  • Avro Lancaster
    Avro Lancaster Avro Lancaster Royal Air Force Avro Lancaster B I PA474 of the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight. Type Heavy bomber Manufacturer Avro Designed by Roy Chadwick Maiden flight 8 January 1941 Introduced 1942 Retired 1963 (Canada) Primary user Royal Air Force Number built 7,377 Unit cost £45-50,000 when introduced ≈£1.3-1.5 million in 2005 currency Developed from Avro Manchester Variants Avro Lancastrian Avro Lincoln Avro York The Avro Lancaster was a British four-engine Second World War bomber aircraft made initially by Avro for the British Royal Air Force (RAF). It first saw active service in 1942, and together with the Handley-Page Halifax it was one of the main heavy bombers of the RAF, the RCAF and squadrons from other Commonwealth and European countries serving within RAF Bomber Command. The "Lanc" or "Lankie," as it became affectionately known,[1] became the most famous and most successful of the Second World War night bombers, "delivering 608,612 tons of bombs in 156,000 sorties."[2] Although the Lancaster was primarily a night bomber, it excelled in many other roles 1 including daylight precision bombing, and gained worldwide renown as the "Dam Buster" used in the 1943 Operation Chastise raids on Germany's Ruhr Valley dams. Design and development Side profile of a Lancaster front turret Tail turret of an RCAF Lancaster The origins of the Lancaster lie in a twin-engined bomber design powered by Rolls-Royce Vulture engines submitted to meet Specification P.13/36 which was for a new generation of twin-engined medium bombers.
    [Show full text]
  • Woodford Aerodrome's History Is Closely
    Woodford Aerodrome’s history is closely associated with the iconic Lancaster and Introduction .......................................................2 Vulcan bombers, and the various other aircraft Archaeological Investigation .............................4 assembled and tested at this important site. Early Landscapes ..............................................8 The purpose of this booklet is to tell the story Medieval Woodford .........................................18 of the landscape and buildings that evolved Post-medieval Woodford .................................26 before and during the establishment of the Avro and Woodford Aerodrome ......................40 aerodrome. Archaeology and Development ..........................52 Glossary ...........................................................54 The opportunity to do this was presented by the Further Reading ..............................................56 closure of the aerodrome and its redevelopment Acknowledgements .......................................... 57 for housing. Planning obligations required the developer to fund archaeologists to carry out a programme of investigations prior to the development to provide an archive record of this significant site for posterity. The results offh this work k are presented d in this h booklet b kl which, in keeping with others in the Greater Manchester's Past Revealed series, provides a well-illustrated and readable account in a ‘popular format’. Oxford Archaeology North and CgMs are to be congratulated on providing a lucid and fascinating
    [Show full text]
  • Woodford Neighbourhood Draft Plan
    Woodford Neighbourhood Plan Submission Version Prepared by Woodford Neighbourhood Forum, September 2018 Duration of the plan: 2018 - 2033 Woodford Neighbourhood Plan Submission Version September 2018 1 Table of Contents 1. Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 4 2. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Submitted Plan Proposal ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 7 2.1. Supporting Documents ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 7 2.1.1. Consultation Statement ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 2.1.2. Basic Conditions Statement ................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]