*** Our 6 Seater Hovers...! ***

added by Emma on May 5, 2016 at 05:28

Very early sneak-peak of our upcoming 6 seat open/cabin craft. What you see here is a basically 'naked' hovering platform. No screen, no thrust engine, no seating etc etc. This was today's first test of its lift characteristics and the results look very positive. Here it is with six on board, fully lifting - trim appears okay at this stage, the screen, cowling and components are calculated to bring the front down to where we need it. It has a full 14" of hover height, and a load capacity in the region of 500kgs or driver and five passengers.



We promise it'll look as pretty as a Coastal-Pro when completed and fully clothed! Pricing from approx £40-50,000.00 plus VAT for the open version. We aim to be delivering the first customer orders by summer with the cabin version available a little later.

Hovercraft Manufacturers Association wins industry award!

added by Emma on May 4, 2016 at 04:24

We're delighted to announce that the Hovercraft Manufacturers Association has been awarded a Marine Safety Award by the Royal Institute of Naval Architects. RINA is an internationally renowned professional institution whose members are involved at all levels in the design, construction, maintenance and operation of marine vessels and structures, so it's particularly exciting that the hovercraft industry has been recognised by such a prestigious organisation. I'm pretty sure this is a first (for many years at least!) and it marks another step in our ongoing efforts to mature the hovercraft industry.

The award was jointly shared with Griffon Hoverworks, who contributed their enormous experience in the technical preparation of the Hovercraft Code of Practice. Speaking for ourselves, the new code has already made a substantial difference to our business, with an increase in sales of our Coastal-Pro model to small UK companies who are operating them in a commercial role for survey, monitoring and crew transfer. We also have our own craft that we hire out to companies and organsations operating in intertidal areas via Coastal Transit Services. None of this would be possible without the new code, and other members of the HMA are benefitting equally, seeing both opportunities and safety improved through a set of clear, plain regulation written specifically for small hovercraft by the industry itself.

Our thanks, on behalf of the HMA to RINA, and on a personal note, congratulations to the HMA members who contributed so much time and experience in seeing this daunting project through to its successful completion.



Mark Downer from Griffon Hoverworks and Russ Pullen, from The British Hovercraft Company receiving the award from RINA at the Lancaster Hotel, London.



FOR SALE! - The Jeremy Clarkson Marlin II Hovercraft! As driven by JC at CH&M LIVE!

added by russ on April 27, 2016 at 09:04




Absolutely as new (apart from one small dent which JC applied whilst showing off.....) this Marlin II 'Beast' is the actual craft used to open the LIVE Shows in 2015.

Fantastic condition, with a brand new Vanguard 37bhp 'Savage' engine, fully marine ready, lots of extras including LED lighting, chrome blades, deck lights and flexiteak flooring.

It's even been signed by James May & Jeremy Clarkson!

Awesome hovercraft, ready  for use in a marine environment, floats like a boat, does 40mph, 15mpg, low noise levels and a years warranty. An absolutely thrilling toy for lads and dads, yacht tender or summer fun. Simply (as JC put it) "The Most Fun You Can Have With an Engine!" This is a professionally built, serious bit of kit which complies with the regulations in the MCA Hovercraft Code of Practice and comes with training and a years warranty. Just a few hours from new and never been used in the sea or gotten dirty.

Can be delivered in the UK or shipped overseas in a container. Price includes VAT.

For full details, see our website http://britishhovercraft.com/Buy-A-Hovercraft/Marlin-2-3-Seater.aspx

Any questions, call or email us.

0044 (0)1304 619820

Hovercraft and your Public Right of Navigation

added by Emma on March 24, 2016 at 09:38

 Your right of navigation on UK tidal waters

We often get asked “where can I use a hovercraft?” by potential buyers. The answer is simple enough and very few of our owners have any issues using their hovercraft. Drive sensibly, with due respect to other water users and public, follow our code of practice, understand what you can and can’t do, where you can and can’t operate your hovercraft - and you should be safe in the knowledge you are breaking no laws.

What we’re looking at here is what your rights are when you occasionally run into an over-officious warden or harbour master who will cite a bye-law or rule which means you should not be operating on ‘his’ patch. To avoid an argument, or being ‘bullied’ it’s wise to be ready with the facts.

Now – we’re not lawyers, let’s be clear about that. But the basis in law of our answer ‘anywhere you can use a boat’ can be simply broken down into a couple of points.

In the UK, we have a Public Right of Navigation (PRN) using a vessel in tidal water.

Hovercraft are vessels, just like boats (Jetski’s aren’t – legally speaking)

The ongoing battle between (primarily) kayakers and fishermen with rights to fish non-tidal rivers is a separate matter altogether (even though it’s proven that the kayaks don’t disturb the fish, but that’s another matter…) But, the PRN in tidal waters an uncontested right. For sure, no cases have been found which disputed the existence of a public right of navigation on tidal waters.

However, there are one or two places around the country where hovercraft have been ‘banned’ using a local bye-law. We strongly contend that this is not legal because the law of England is that public rights can only be extinguished in three ways.

  1. Statute (ie an act of parliament.)
  2. Statutory Authority,
  3. Conditions changing so that the right cannot be exercised,

In 2002, Mr Justice Lightman said “PRN may only be extinguished by legislation or exercise of statutory powers” (Josie Rowland v Environment Agency – 2002.)

 A byelaw is NOT a statutory law – therefore it cannot be used to remove a PRN.

For rivers, the normal reason that the right cannot be exercised is that the river has silted up and is no longer passable by conventional boats - but public rights are not extinguished by non-use for any period of time. This means that even if a boat hasn’t used / cannot use a tidal river, the right still exists.  Lord Lindley in the House of Lords who said “the doctrine ‘once a highway always a highway’ is, I believe, as applicable to rivers as to roads.” 

The foreshore is the area between the high water mark and the low water mark. When the tide is in there is an absolute right to navigate through the water (although not necessarily a right to land a boat or launch one) and so it is not possible to fence off foreshore areas, as this would limit navigation. All foreshore belongs to the Crown unless it has in the past been sold or given away. This has occurred in a few places and there are often bylaws prohibiting bait digging on or near the foreshore, which is probably the most common reason for people to use such areas. In any case such activity is usually prohibited by law in protected areas. However, this activity is clearly a separate matter to the PRN which exists.

The Crown Estate gives what it calls a ‘general permissive consent’ for ‘non-commercial public access’ along the foreshore it controls. Approximately half of the UK foreshore and around half of the tidal riverbeds are owned by the Crown and managed by The Crown Estate, in addition to virtually the entire UK seabed out to 12 nautical miles. The Crown Estate is a landowner and not a regulatory authority and ostensibly the owner of the foreshore by virtue of prerogative right. The same applies to the seabed, being land below mean low water. This, in effect, means that the Crown owns all of it unless it has in the past given it away or sold it.

Other owners of foreshore include, for example, the Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster, Local Authorities, RSPB, National Trust, MOD and some is in the ownership of private individuals. Beaches are owned, although almost all beaches allow public access, often because of the practical impossibility of preventing it. Ownership does not necessarily revoke the PRN. The judge in the 1864 case of Gann vs Free Fishers of Whitstable said that “The foreshore is owned by the Crown except in those places where the ownership has passed to an individual by grant or adverse possession. Where this has happened the grantee takes it, in general, subject to the public right of navigation.”

While we’re on that, it’s worth mentioning that the judge also ruled that ‘constructed’ pits where the owner has dug out an area which fills with tidal water are legally designated as privately owned. He mentioned gravel pits, but bringing that forward to today, inland waterways constructed to give ‘river’ frontage and inland marinas which are controlled by tidal/sluice gates etc – for instance the Sovereign Marina, Eastbourne (look it up on Google Earth) - may well not have a PRN.

Low water, and travelling over mudflats.

There’s lots of court cases which firmly set the precedent that you have a PRN even when the tide is low and you are navigating over foreshore or seabed – some of which I’ll quote here. Lord Widgery : ‘The public right of navigation in tidal waters is a right given by the common law which extends to the whole space over which the tide flows and is not suspended when the tide is too low for vessels to float.’

This was supported by Sir James Hannen, ‘The rights of all vessels are not co-extensive. It may be reasonable and right that a small vessel should go up to the farthest point she can reach in order to give the public the benefit of the public way.’

Lord Denning, ‘There are many cases where people with canoes have a right to take their canoes up and down a river. They certainly have such a right in tidal waters. The right of soil in arms of the sea and public rivers must in all cases be considered as subject to the public right of navigation”

More recently Park J said, ‘There is a right to navigation over all tidal waters, even where at certain states of the tide the water may disappear from the particular place where the navigation is taking place.’

Interestingly, in 1990, Brotherton Vinelott J held that on a section of the river Derwent which was probably tidal there was no public right of navigation. This part of his judgement was effectively reversed by the parties to the action who, when the case came to the Appeal Court, stated that it was agreed by the parties that there was a right of navigation from Sutton to Stamford Bridge. No reasons were recorded. This would seem to mean that the decision of Vinelott J on this matter is void of any authority. As stated previously, no cases have been found which disputed the existence of a public right of navigation on tidal waters.

In Conclusion.

Hovercraft frustrate authorities due to their ability to operate at low water, over mudflats and to access areas they hadn’t ever considered would be available to recreational ‘boaters.’  That’s not our fault - or problem. We’re boats remember. We have a right which we exercise in accordance with the law and if they prevent such, they are potentially committing a criminal act. Back to what I said at the beginning of this article - behave responsibly, in accordance with the code of practice and I honestly cannot imagine any authority would wish to challenge such operation in court. However, this is our advice only – we’re not lawyers and this case has never been tried. To be fair, it’s never come even remotely close to that in 35 years of hovercrafting!

  • Stand firm!
  • You have a right of navigation on tidal water.
  • A bye-law is not a statutory law and cannot, therefore, remove that right.
  • It is uncontested that the right includes use of a vessel.
  • Hovercraft are legally categorised as vessels.  
  • The PRN extends to the foreshore and seabed.

 Other Matters

There’s two other issues that you need to consider. A harbour master can control access and behaviour within his area of authority. Nothing here is meant to suggest otherwise and you should and must act in accordance with local bye-laws. So, it may be that you need to observe speed limits or request permission to pass through the harbour to avoid conflict with (for instance) commercial traffic or lifeboat operations. Council’s may decide to restrict your ability to launch from their slipways. However, you have an ancillary right to exercise your PRN, and if they control the access and prevent you from launching, they are likely committing a criminal offence in doing so.

The other issue is your legal right to operate in protected areas such as RAMSAR sites, SSSI’s (and a million acronyms!) which are mostly administered by Natural England, and organisation with a huge history of Ultra Vires behaviour. We’ll look into that in a future article.

If, as a hovercraft operator, you do run into any issues where your PRN is challenged, do please let us know.

Happy Hovering!


Our MD, Emma Pullen, spoke last week at the launch of 'Women for Britain' - her is the transcript of her speech.

added by Emma on March 14, 2016 at 08:13

Emma spoke at the Launch of Women for Britain last week - alongside fellow businesswoman Paulette Furse, MP's and politcal fihures such as Priti Patel, Anne-Marie Trevalyn and Suzanne Evans.

Below is a transcript of her speech which was met by a standing ovation and a most complimentary article in the Daily Mail by Quentin Letts. The speech has since been reproduced in the Daily Express. Read on to understand why we at The British Hovercraft Company have given our support to a 'Brexit' so that we can better trade within a wider export market that EU laws currently make so difficult.


March 8th 2016.

Good Morning Ladies and Gentlemen, My Name is Emma Pullen, I'm a businesswoman operating a small manufacturing business in Kent and I want the UK to vote leave on June the 23rd.

Being asked to speak here today is no trial to me, as I'm passionately excited about this huge opportunity we have in Britain to take back control of our country, take our place on the world stage and build a bright future for British businesses to flourish outside of the EU.

So a little about me. I’m 36 years old, married with an 8 year-old daughter and live in the political hotspot of Thanet. I love my business and I find it utterly rewarding. I'm proud of what I do and I feel a huge responsibility knowing that 15 staff members are relying on me to find their wages each month. As a friend once said to me “Payday is a lot less exciting when you're the one doing the paying” but I wouldn't have it any other way – in fact after 5 years of working for myself, I think it's likely that I'm completely unemployable!

My business is a small manufacturing company, operating from a rented factory on a wartime industrial estate. Our draughty unit isn't a glamorous looking building, but it's big and it's cheap - and interesting things get built inside it!

80% of our production is export, but almost none of it goes to EU countries – partly because nobody seems to have any money but also because our product falls foul of an EU Directive. Whilst not actually banned, it makes selling and using them within the EU somewhat difficult and as a result, customers opt to spend their money elsewhere. 

So – what do we make in this big old factory that so offends the EU rule makers?

Well, the clue is that my factory is just a mile from the remains of the Pegwell Bay hoverport and my business is called The British Hovercraft Company!

Yes, I build hovercraft!

But not the cross channel hovercraft that once plied their trade to Calais. These are more modest craft used for recreational and commercial purposes such as survey work in tidal estuaries, super-cool tenders for luxury yachts and ice-rescue on frozen rivers.

It's certainly a niche market and a quintessentially British invention - it's creator a Norfolk broads boat builder called Sir Christopher Cockrell and I genuinely get a kick from the fact that in some small way we continue the tradition of this remarkable 1950's Boffin.  Our company name is one of the best decisions we ever made. I've been told by several foreign clients that the word British in the title says to them “Quality, Reliability and Trust' British engineering is admired around the world and that word – 'British' has played its part in establishing us as the world's leading small hovercraft company

By my company doesn't need the EU, in fact we would be much better off without it. For us to be free to fulfil our full potential, we need trade deals with countries that matter.  Wealthy countries, countries with growing economies, emerging nations & our friends in the commonwealth – we lose so many sales to these countries because the EU has failed to negotiate a suitable trade deal. Let me give you one recent example which is fresh in my mind from late last year.

An enquiry from a wealthy Brazilian businessman who wished to order 5 small hovercraft from us for a proposed driving activity centre in Sao Paulo. Purchase price, £50,000 – duty cost in Brazil £42,000. That’s an 80% duty! Needless to say, the deal didn't go ahead and there's been plenty of similar outcomes dealing with other non ‘EU approved’ nations.

Britain is not allowed to make it's own trade deals, and this prevents us from selling our products, bringing money into the UK, growing the business and employing more staff.

Ignore the scaremongering coming from the 'Remain' camp.  This is an incredible opportunity for UK business. One that we, of all nations can exploit to thrive in a fast-changing global marketplace. We can do this! We have the world's 5th largest economy, and we're the 11th biggest manufacturing nation on the planet. Britain supplies products & services that are in demand all around the world – we must make it cheaper and more straightforward for our trading partners to deal with us. 

But you know, there's other reasons aside from my business that move me to stand here today.

I've watched horrified at the mishandling of the Migrant crisis by the EU, seen the misery, economic damage & discord it has caused between the nations of Europe. I've watched it lead to the surge in support for far-right political parties in countries such as France, Greece and Finland.  I'll be honest – it scares me and I fear that the demands made of this country by the EU could eventually see similar parties gain momentum here in Britain.

It frustrates me to see the EU waste such vast sums of our money on ridiculous laws and directives, vanity projects and mind-boggling corruption. Every year we send billions of pounds to an organisation which hasn't been audited in over 20 years!  I'm absolutely at a loss to understand how the IN campaign can live with themselves in defending this. Let's save our money and spend it on hospitals, schools and the most vulnerable in society who have every right to expect help from their own country.  

The EU makes our laws, takes our money and does so with no accountability to the British Public. This is what we have our own MP's for - and if they get it wrong, we can kick them out after 4 years! We've done pretty well on our own since the Romans went home and we've written the democratic blueprint for much of the modern world. How dare Brussels steal that democracy away from us? British MEP's are powerless to influence the myriad of laws that issue forth from Brussels – they are defeated and outvoted over 86% of the time.

The Common Market was a great idea and if it had remained simply as a free market, I wouldn't be here today. But this power creep, this erosion of our democracy and sovereignty isn't what we signed up for.

Let me end by telling you why my heart as well as my head wants to leave the EU.

I'm extremely proud of my late father. He fought at Tobruk in 1941. He wasn't a hero, he was just a lad from Chatham who  knew what had to be done and got on with it in that stolid way his generation did. As a 20 year old Tommy, I doubt he ever even considered it, but he was fighting for #British Sovereignty and freedom. He suffered a lifetime of illness for that cause; many more paid the ultimate price on our behalf. I will never forget that and I see it as a dishonour to The Greatest Generation that everything they fought for is being eroded by our EU membership.

The British showed the world what we're made of in 1940, I believe that fire still beats in our hearts and I pray that June the 23rd will be the day when Britain once again becomes Great Britain!










Hovercraft Engines - Briggs & Stratton Vanguard, Kohler, Subaru, Honda?

added by Emma on February 17, 2016 at 07:36

Briggs & Stratton Vanguard Engines are superb for our application! We've used well over 1500 of the 22,23,31,33 & (mostly) the 35bhp engines in both big and small block sizes. They're very reliable, air-cooled, economical, relatively light and well priced. Honestly cannot complain about them at all. We ndertake extensive modifications to them including full marinisation and removal of internal and external governor components. Video HERE if you're interested!

But of course, when we came across the Subaru range of commercial engines we were interested and decided to look into it, after all - Subaru's a pretty sexy name and I still miss my Impreza Sti which the wife forced me to sell (but that's another story!) so the idea of as Scooby powered hovercraft was irresistable.

In the end, we imported a 40bhp Subaru motor from the USA as they're not available in the UK. This was fitted to the first of the 'beasts' we supplied to The Clarkson, Hammond & May Live Show which Jeremy used to open the show in. We were certainly the first manufacturer to fit these engines, as we were the Big-Block Vanguard. We're always open to try new products! Since then, we've built another two which has been interesting but how does it perform?

Quite well actually. It's a bit lighter then the Vanguard 35bhp and slightly more powerful. maybe not quite as smooth in the mid-range and it does cost more of course, but overall the craft does gain a performance advantage - all things being equal. It feels slightly more maneovrable and in tests, seemed to be around two seconds quicker to 30 knots than the equivalent Vanguard and feels pretty lively. It doesn't of course, equal the performance of our 50bhp 'Rampage' version of the Vanguard which is a real step up in performance! The 28bhp fuel injected engine - which we'd hoped would be an alternative for the smaller 'Snapper' hovercraft... Hmmm, less ure as it's pretty big (as big as the 40bhp motor) due to the wide 'V' layourt of the twin cylinder engine. Fan data seems to suggest that it's not quite the full ticket in bhp terms either. We'll keep playing with it and report back in due course.


We've previously looked at the Kohler 40bhp motor which turned out to be less powerful than the 35bhp Vanguard, more expensive and heavier too. The Honda is a lovely engine but they don't make anything bigger than 25bhp. Kawasaki do a superb looking 37bhp engine - but it's only available as a vertical shaft, no use at all! And we steer away from water cooled engines for their weight, complexity and space requirements. Small hovercraft love air-cooled engines!

So - for now we're making the Subaru available as an upgrade option. It costs considerably more for us to buy, import and fit them, but it's genuinely a really nice engine with a great brand name. As standard, all British Hovercraft Company hovercraft will remain fitted with the frankly-still-awsome Briggs Vanguard engine.





Businesses, Charities & Rescue Organisations - book your demo on the "Why Not a Hovercraft?" Tour!

added by Emma on February 11, 2016 at 12:55

Used Coastal-Pro hovercraft for sale - be quick and save over £5,000 on new price - rare opportunity.

added by Emma on February 4, 2016 at 09:49

Buying a Hovercraft - Our 'Top-Ten' tips to avoid a costly mistake!

added by russ on February 3, 2016 at 11:15

Our Top Ten Tips for hovercraft buyers!


1.If you don’t know anything about them, do your research into hovercraft in general. Be sure about what they should be able to do, whether a hovercraft is what you want, how they work and join your local club. Hovercrafting is still a small (but growing) community and you can gather some very useful information and feedback.

2.Do not pay for a hovercraft if you can’t actually see a real one exists – especially do NOT pay a deposit on a hovercraft which is only available in CGI form!

3  Is the supplier a member of the HMA? Hovercraft Club? Chamber of Commerce? BMI?

4.See it in action, preferably drive it, and ask to see its capabilities – as described – demonstrated. Drive more than one model before making any decisions.

5.Ask to see videos of other – identical - craft in varied conditions (water, land, mud, one up/two up etc) and look online on Youtube specifically for the make you’re considering  – do you have plenty of confidence that WYSIWYG?

6.Does it come with a service manual, warranty, training and registration?

7.Does the manufacturer offer a Money Back Guarantee if the product doesn’t measure up to the  sales hype?

8.Does the manufacturer have agents and dealers? This is a good sign that they are established and serious.

9.Can you obtain references from dealers/customers?

10. Ask to see photos of the build as it happens, or visit the factory. Small hovercraft should be easily completed within 4-6 weeks – any longer should make you nervous if there's not a good reason!

Good luck with your purchase – just be careful with your money!

John Sturgeon, the moose-hunting hovercraft pilot - and UK Law!

added by russ on January 20, 2016 at 10:22

Over in America, specifically Alaska, a chap by the name of John Sturgeon is currently in the Supreme Court standing up for his right to use a small hovercraft to hunt moose in a national park. Back in 2007, John’s noisy old-fashioned and unreliable 1991 ‘Scat’ hovercraft broke down on his way to a moose hunting expedition. He was accosted by park rangers who told him he could not use his hovercraft in the national park and eventually had to remove it on a boat as, even when mended the Park Rangers would not allow him to drive the hovercraft out again! They were, according to John “real jerks!” But, it turned out they'd picked on the wrong man! To cut a long story short John has taken his case all the way to the Supreme Court. Now, whilst not pretending to understand American law it appears that John's case centres around federal law attempting to overrule state law and his right to navigate on rivers in national parks.

You can read more HERE


I'm watching this case with considerable interest and it would appear it has far-reaching consequences for hovercraft use in America. Here in the UK, over the years, there's been a few odd occasions where overzealous wardens have tried to prevent hovercraft owners exercising their right of navigation on tidal waters. This is usually done by stating that hovercraft cannot be used in the many environmentally protected areas around the coastline of the UK. In fact, pretty much every inch of UK coastline now has some type of environmental protection. Choose from SSSI, RAMSAR, SPA, AONB, LNR,NNR,MNR… To name but a few! The situation is confused further by the inevitable fact that there are protected areas designated by the EU present in the UK as well!

Of course protecting the environment is extremely important and in my experience the type of people who operate small hovercraft for recreational and pleasure purposes are not the type of people who set out to cause problems act irresponsibly or cause distress to animals, plants or Park Rangers. Occasionally however, you meet the type of warden who would prevent anybody from doing anything within "his area" and goes well beyond his given powers in trying to prevent anything he may perceive as threatening unwelcome or illegal. The most commonly cited reason for an objection to a hovercraft is that it may disturb birds feeding on the waterline. This is easily countered by observing an ‘offset’ of 100 m, something which we advise all our owners to do. But you can no more blame a hovercraft for scaring birds then you can blame a car for exceeding 70 miles an hour. Like all these things common sense needs to be applied on both sides.

Just to re-cap, hovercraft do not poison the water with exhaust fumes like boats do. They have no propeller water which means animal strikes are impossible and there is no underwater disturbance to damage the seabed or plant life. At anything over 8 knots, there is no wash meaning riverbanks are not washed away. They use a fraction of the amount of fuel of an equivalent sized boat which must be a good thing for both the owner and the environment! There’s no powered marine vessel which is more environmentally sound. Why then do they get such a bad rap? I believe it is because some hovercraft were/are noisy and this is a very obvious downside compared to the discrete poisoning of the water which boats are guilty of. Our own craft have slow fans, good exhausts, low powered engines and clever engineering which keeps noise down to very acceptable levels but to some their preconceptions will not be overcome.

Confronted by an intransigent council, warden or Harbour Master is there any defence? Well yes! Fortunately, getting on for 1000 years ago, King John signed the Magna Carta. This granted us all a right of navigation on tidal waters around the UK which persists today. You cannot use a bylaw to remove a common law right which brings us neatly onto Langstone Harbour which has a bylaw preventing the operation of hydrofoils, jet skis, skiing, seaplanes and hovercraft amongst other things. I often wonder if I should visit Langstone Harbour by hovercraft observing the speed limit and sticking to the Channel to see what would happen, as the Harbour Master has certainly prevented operation of hovercraft previously. This would make for a very interesting test case with the same far-reaching consequences that John Sturgeon’s case in the US may have across the pond. Whilst advocating responsible operation of hovercraft, and being somebody who would much rather avoid feeding the lawyers, in this case it is clear the Harbour Master has no intention of seeing reason. To prevent this type of behaviour in other locations it may be that some “direct action” may be required to prevent other authorities acting in a manner which they are unaware is illegal and beyond they given powers

However, we have never heard of any incidents where hovercraft have damaged the environment, owners have been charged or prosecuted or operators refused the right to launch (other than good old Langstone Harbour of course!) But sometimes a little education is necessary. Given the increasing numbers of small hovercraft regularly used every weekend throughout the country this is a testament to the responsible behaviour and low noise levels of modern hovercraft. One of the things I love about hovercraft is that they aren’t well-known or understood by the many and I enjoy educating people who go on to become lifelong hovercraft enthusiasts. However, I will fight to the very end to protect our rights and as I said above it would be better if situations such as that in the US were avoided. We work towards the day when there is  was an acceptance that hovercraft do not represent any type of a threat to the environment through which they travel.

 In the meantime good luck John, stick it to ‘em on behalf of the little guy!






Recent Posts