Airport officials, CAA and NATS face hundreds of angry residents at CAGNE 2nd AGM

Local campaign group, CAGNE (Communities Against Gatwick Noise and Emissions) held its 2nd AGM on 15th April, attended by around 200 people. Senior spokespeople from Gatwick, NATS and the CAA were invited to speak, but faced angry residents who are not satisfied with what is happening about Gatwick noise issues.  During the meeting Bo Redeborn, who headed up the Arrivals Review, confirmed that it had not considered departures – only arrivals.  Phil Roberts of the CAA  explained how it is seeking greater transparency in airspace changes, having been surprised by the public outcry at various airports due to airspace changes. He confirmed that, (obviously) changes in one area impact airspace in other areas [arrivals and departures]. The CAA hopes that use of PRNAV or PBN (aircraft navigation by ‘satnav’) will improve the noise problem in future. [That is not inevitable, depending how it is used, and is likely to lead to concentrated flight paths, even if those could be varied. Sally Pavey commented that the CAA view of ‘dispersal’ would mean a ‘multitude of concentrated routes’ and not dispersal as people would normally consider it.  NATS confirmed that though the LAMP programme, with routes outside current NPRs, has been put on hold, it will return by 2023/2024.
.

 

Airport officials face hundreds of angry residents

25 April 2016  (West Sussex County Times)

.
Senior spokespeople from Gatwick Airport and the aviation industry faced hundreds of angry residents at the second annual meeting of an airport protest group at Warnham village hall on Friday.

CAGNE (Communities Against Gatwick Noise and Emissions) is the West Sussex and Surrey lobby group that shares information with communities that are affected by aircraft noise from flight paths and the potential impact of a second runway at Gatwick Airport.

The aviation industry spokespeople included representatives from Gatwick Airport, its independent Arrivals Review team, the Civil Aviation Authority and NATS, which operates air traffic control.

During the meeting Bo Redeborn, who headed up the Arrivals Review, confirmed that CAGNE was right that the Gatwick Airport review had not considered departures when suggesting changes to arrivals.

The formal procedure of the AGM was conducted quickly with Sally Pavey being re-elected as chairman of CAGNE and the committee members being re-appointed by the audience, all unanimously.

Speaker Phil Roberts of the Civil Aviation Authority said that the CAA is the body tasked with ensuring that the aviation industry meets the highest safety standards and that drives improvements in airlines’ and airports’ environmental performance.

Mr Roberts detailed the role of the CAA and how residents could get involved in the current CAA consultation ( see details – ends 15th June ) and said that the CAA is seeking transparency in airspace changes. He also detailed how such changes in one area impact airspace in other areas, and that the way forward was PRNAV or PBN (aircraft navigation by ‘satnav’) on arrivals.  [ie. flights have to be flown more accurately, so it is likely routes will be more concentrated, as planes fly almost the exact same course with little deviation. AW note].

Sally Pavey said later: “Both of these technologies result in concentrated flight paths against which CAGNE is lobbying.  CAGNE’s appeal is for the exact opposite – dispersed flights – in order to achieve fair and equitable distribution of noise. Sadly the Government body defines ‘dispersal’ as a ‘multitude of concentrated routes’ and not as we knew it.
“This is because their policy is ‘concentration’ and ‘to save CO2 (fuel)’”.

Dave Curtis of the National Air Traffic Service (NATS), which is the UK’s largest provider of air traffic control services, explained how airspace works.  In answer to a resident’s question, he said that villages are not shown on air traffic controllers’ screens but that aircraft and the volume of movements tend to dictate airspace routing guidance given to pilots.

Mr Curtis added that the LAMP (London Airspace Management Programme) document to modernise airspace, which was put on hold in 2014 as it pitched communities against each other with proposed new routes outside of the NPRs (Noise Preferential Routes) and which CAGNE battled to stop, will return in 2023/24.

Vicki Hughes of Gatwick Airport, who was accompanied by Bo Redeborn, the leader of Gatwick’s Arrivals Review team, said that she had just joined Gatwick to deal with feedback on the Arrivals Review and would be hosting a public meeting on April 26 and residents should email her via arrivalreview@gatwickairport.com; the final report is being published on May 31.

Jeremy Quin, MP for Horsham, speaking from the floor, advised Mr Redeborn that he would be meeting with Gatwick Airport soon to discuss the Arrivals Review and that he hoped that departures and their associated problems would be addressed.

In a question and answer session, two members of the public challenged the CAA over noise metrics, claiming that that they are out of date.

Sally Pavey, chairman of the meeting, stressed that the ambient noise in the countryside is much lower than in urban areas and so each low-flying aircraft is an ‘event’.

Other residents made it clear that sleep deprivation is a major concern for their families and that this is affecting their health and quality of life with departures as well as arrivals.

A Warnham resident asked if there were any plans to move flights from the westerly Dorking route (LAM 26) and place them over West Sussex and Warnham. [This means the possibility of moving some of the traffic that currently takes off from Gatwick to the west, and then turns north, before going east  – and whether some of that traffic might in future be directed to turn south and then east  AW note.  Maps of Gatwick flight path routes below]

The CAA and NATS both confirmed that this was not the case and would not happen.

Another Warnham resident Michael Brookes said after the meeting: “The speakers must have left feeling the communities’ intense anger and frustration and their high level of mistrust at the whole issue of airspace changes. The meeting will have shown to them that it is not just one or two CAGNE committee members who are unhappy but the great swathe of inhabitants of the West Sussex and Surrey who CAGNE seek to protect.”

“Changes to airspace and flight paths will be met with strong and vehement criticism if those who wish to make them do not take into consideration with sincerity and in a practical way the feelings of those beneath the flight paths.”

http://www.wscountytimes.co.uk/news/local/airport-officials-face-hundreds-of-angry-residents-1-7348219


 

Map showing the 9 different Gatwick departure flight paths

Taking off towards the west:

RWY26-CLN/BIG/LAM/DVR

RW26-TIGER/WIZARD

RW26-SFD

RW26-SAM/KENET/BOGNA/HARDY  (2 parts)

and

Taking off towards the east:

RW08-SAM/KENET

RW08-SFD

RW08-CLN/BIG/LAM/DVR

RW08-LAM  (joins with the route above eventually)

Gatwick routes

Naming of routes

Bognor Regis for BOGNA,

Seaford for SFD,

Dover for DVR,

Clacton for CLN,

Southampton for SAM   etc

 

RWY26 means using the runway to take off to the west.

RWY08 means using the runway to take off to the east.

RWY26-DVR/CLN/BIG/LAM

That means Westerly departures on that route

RWY08-SAM/KENET

That means Easterly departures on that route


 

CAGNE also reported that:

Gatwick and aviation representatives faced angry at AGM

Senior spokespeople from Gatwick Airport and the aviation industry faced angry residents and community leaders at CAGNE’s second AGM, at Warnham village hall on Friday 15 April with some 200 people packed into the village hall.

CAGNE (Communities Against Gatwick Noise and Emissions) is the West Sussex and Surrey lobby group that shares information with communities that are affected by aircraft noise from flight paths and the potential impact of a second runway at Gatwick Airport.

 

Sally Pavey explained later, “Both of these technologies result in concentrated flight paths against which CAGNE is lobbying. CAGNE’s appeal is for the exact opposite – dispersed flights – in order to achieve fair and equitable distribution of noise but sadly the Government body call dispersal a multitude of concentrated routes and not as we knew it, as the policy is concentration and to save CO2 (fuel)”.

Challenged by a resident that NATS was ‘owned’ by the airlines and so had little interest in the affected communities, Mr Curtis said that it was not owned by the airlines. He said that an ‘Airline Group’, which held NATS shares, had recently diluted its shareholding.

CAGNE confirms that NATS’ current website, states that the Airline Group (comprising eight airlines including BA, Virgin and EasyJet) holds a 42% interest with Heathrow holding another 4%.

Attendee Martin Spurrier, who represents a rural community at Coneyhurst, near Billingshurst said,  “The Arrivals Review is a step in the right direction and there are some good things in it. However, we sense that insincerity permeates the whole distasteful flight path and aircraft noise issue. It appears to be run by a self-interested ‘Club’ largely for its own and the airlines benefit”.

Sally Pavey, Chair of the meeting, added that until noise ‘events’ are measured (a noise ‘event’ is the noise of each individual aircraft disturbance) and not ‘average of noise’ over the period of  7am-11pm at Gatwick, the noise measurements cannot reflect the true ‘impact’ on rural areas. She stressed that the ambient noise in the countryside is much lower than in urban areas and so each low-flying aircraft is an ‘event’.

Other residents made it clear that sleep deprivation is a major concern for their families and that this is affecting their health and quality of life with departures as well as arrivals, especially the noise generated by the Emirates’ huge airbus.

On this topic, Ian Jopson of NATS said that the World Health Organisation are conducting a study into the affects of aircraft noise. This was not satisfactory for those in the audience who expressed further annoyance that the NATS representatives did not know the location of specific village to which they were referring in relation to aircraft routing.

Closing the meeting, Sally Pavey, said. “We thank our speakers as CAGNE wants to provide a platform for regular open debate so that residents can ask questions of those who seek to ‘modernise’ the airspace above their homes and dramatically impact residents’ lives.”

“We believe that cost efficiency and profit for Gatwick Airport shareholders and the aviation industry is top priority.  We feel that it is vital that those who want to bring radical changes to the skies above communities, hear the pain that they impose on affected communities and work with us, not against us”.

 

www.cagne.org

Representing residents of West Sussex and parts of Surrey

cagnegatwick@gmail.com