Airport News
Below are news items relating to specific airports
Sally Pavey’s comment on the CAA’s Gatwick PIR – it ‘ignored’ human cost of changed flight paths
Responding to the publication of the PIR (Post Implementation Review of Gatwick flight path changes since 2013, Sally Pavey (Chair of CAGNE) commented that it was "extremely disappointing". It concluded that only the departure route taking off to the west, and heading north, had to change. Local group, Plane Wrong, welcomed that admission, but are dismayed by the CAA’s conclusion that the easterly departure route does not need to be changed. The PIR said a route towards the south-coast and another heading east were acceptable but should be reviewed by Gatwick; the remaining six routes did not need to change. Sally said the PIR now needed to be reviewed by the Aviation Minister, Robert Goodwill: “For a Government, in this day and age, to implement and subject residents to such an airspace concentrated system without any research into the noise readings or emissions from concentrated routes is beyond belief.” She added: “The noise shadow is far grater from a concentrated route than a dispersed route. It’s like having a country lane next to your home, which might see a few cars throughout the day and night, and changing it to the M1 overnight. The noise is relentless. Until the aviation industry recognise that concentrated routes create noise shadows these reports are pointless as they serve only the aviation industry and not the taxpayers.” The report offers little for people affected in West Sussex.
Click here to view full story...
Canadian Transport Minister Marc Garneau confirms no expansion, and no jets, at Toronto lakeside airport
Billy Bishop waterfront airport is a small airport in Toronto, on the lake edge close to central Toronto. It has a small number of passengers and its one runway is only about 1,200 metres. For several years there have been plans to expand the airport, extend its runway, and get jets instead of the turboprops at present. These plans have been strenuously opposed by people who did not want the much loved water front to have loud planes only perhaps 600 feet overhead. There is already a large airport, Pearson, outside Toronto. Now the local group, "NOJets .O" are delighted that the new Transport Minister Marc Garneau has confirmed that the expansion will not go ahead. The minister’s clarification means the expansion proposal has been stopped, and the threat of jets over the city's water front has been removed. This is a credit to the two and a half years of very active campaigning by Toronto citizens, wanting to preserve the quality of their area, and the public amenity of the lakeside. The decision is seen as a blow to Porter Airlines Inc. expansion plans and a potential aircraft order topping $2-billion for Bombardier Inc.
Click here to view full story...
TfL confirms extent to which Airports Commission underestimated Heathrow runway impact on surface access
On 10th November, the GLA Transport Committee had a session looking at the implications for surface access - road, rail and Tube - if there was a 3rd Heathrow runway. There was a presentation by Richard De Cani (Transport for London's Managing Director - Planning). The meeting was described as a "well mannered mugging" of the Airports Commission's (AC) analysis of the situation. The AC did not assess the impact of a fully utilised 3rd runway, with 148 mppa; instead they only looked at the situation in 2030 with 125mppa. That might mean 70,000 more trips per day than estimated by the AC.They also did not take into account how recent employment forecasts will increase demand even further, or increased vehicles needed for expanded air freight capacity. TfL estimates it would cost between £15 and £20 billion to improve the transport infrastructure needed to get all passengers to and from Heathrow, with a 3rd runway. Unless this is spent, the road congestion and the rail congestion even by 2030 would be "some of the worst that we currently see in London." It would "impact quite significantly on the whole performance of the transport network across west and south west London.” If there was a congestion charge, the impact on public transport would be even higher (perhaps 90,000 more trips per day than estimated by the AC).
Click here to view full story...
Gatwick hopes a YouGov poll of Londoners (not local people) favouring its runway over Heathrow, will help its case
Gatwick airport is hoping to persuade people that there is support for its runway. It has commissioned (yet another) YouGov poll, in the attempt to show people want a Gatwick runway. As there is a high level of opposition in areas near and around Gatwick, the poll had to be of Londoners - who would not get any adverse environmental impacts of a Gatwick runway themselves. The details of the poll have not been publicised, but it was of 1,072 Londoners - details of where they were located not published, nor is the interview script. Several London councils have been supportive of Gatwick for a long time, fearing the noise impact on their residents if there was a Heathrow runway - and knowing the opposition within their boroughs. They hope some of their residents might get jobs at Gatwick. The backing of Southwark, Wandsworth, Kingston and Croydon for Gatwick has been public for a long time. It is hardly surprising, if Londoners are asked about aircraft noise, that they would say the negative impact on quality of life for local residents (meaning noise and pollution?) would be lower at Gatwick than at Heathrow. They also say there would be more regeneration benefits at Gatwick - but the area has minimal unemployment. Yet another example of a dubious survey, being "spun" for even more dubious reasons.
Click here to view full story...
Jeremy Corbyn reported as saying we should “look at the under-used capacity” of other airports
During a visit to a pre-school in Crawley, Jeremy Corbyn was reported as implying a 2nd runway at Gatwick would be better than a 3rd runway at Heathrow. He is known to oppose a Heathrow runway, due to inadequate air pollution controls. He is quoted as saying: “Gatwick already has spare capacity at the moment and does have facility to expand beyond 2019...“Gatwick is a possibility but I also think we should look at the under-used capacity all around the South and the South East so there’s also a question of expanding flights in Stansted and even Southampton and further afield in Birmingham.” The recent briefing produced for the AEF states: "The South East accounts for one third of the UK population but its airports handle nearly two-thirds of UK air travel. The Airports Commission argues that a new runway would be good for everyone. But in fact its own modelling suggests that traffic at regional airports would fall on average if a new runway was built at either Heathrow or Gatwick compared to a ‘no new runways’ scenario. Due to the limit of - at the maximum - 60% increase in air passengers, recommended by the Committee on Climate Change, it would make no sense to build a new runway if it simply redistributed traffic around the UK and increased congestion in the South East."
Click here to view full story...
The CAA’s disappointing PIR finally published, showing only one Gatwick route to be slightly changed
Since autumn 2013 there have been changes to flight paths for Gatwick airport, given provisional approval by the CAA. Routes have been altered, and flight paths have been more concentrated. This has been done without consultation of affected communities. The CAA has done a PIR (Post Implementation Review) that ended in January. It has finally, after delays, published its findings. These are regarded as very disappointing, as almost no concessions have been made and though hundreds of complaints were sent in, there are few changes to routes. GACC says: "In a 198 page report they devote only 2 pages to the possibility of dispersal – spreading the aircraft over a wider area – and to the possibility of respite – giving people a break from constant noise. And then reject both. We will now need to take the case to the Government and indeed will raise this when we meet the Minister for Aviation, Robert Goodwill MP ...on 18 November." The more concentrated noise has caused great distress for the people unlucky enough to live directly under the flight paths. The only change to a route is one which takes off to the west, and flies over Holmwood, Brockham and Reigate - Gatwick will be consulting on a revised route in the next few months. People are angry that the CAA, yet again, ignores input from the public.
Click here to view full story...
Cabinet said to be ‘falling behind’ on Heathrow expansion decision (as runway sub-committee struggles)
The Standard reports that insiders (in the Cabinet?) say the Cabinet sub-Committee is having a very difficult time deciding what to do about a runway, and the schedule is slipping. It is not likely to be announced by the Autumn Statement by George Osborne on 25th November. The meetings of the Economic Affairs (Airports) Sub-Committee are secretive and Cabinet will not reveal even their dates. However, the Standard has been told that last week an “informal” gathering of its members was briefed by Sir Howard Davies, and that David Cameron and George Osborne also had updates separately from Sir Howard. "Other ministers at the gathering raised questions but none of them were seen to pose an insurmountable challenge to another runway in west London." Some sort of announcement still should be made before the Commons rises on 17th December. A second official meeting of the Cabinet sub-committee is understood to be due in the next week or two, so the DfT officials can present their analysis of the Airport Commission’s final report. It is understood that the full Cabinet would be able to discuss the sub-Committee's decision, and this could happen in December. The Standard says: "Few Cabinet ministers are expected to defy Mr Osborne and block a 3rd runway."
Click here to view full story...
Simon Jenkins comment: Don’t buy the idea that Heathrow expansion is ‘good for the nation’
Simon Jenkins was on great form when he wrote a comment piece in the Evening Standard, on the subject of Heathrow and its expansion hopes. Well worth reading, in full. It is so full of wise words, telling analysis and crushing put-downs that summarising it is impossible. But here are a few quotes: "Heathrow was only allowed to grow because gutless ministers dared not stand up to the airlines lobby." ..."Heathrow is primarily for leisure travel, and that travel is overwhelmingly outbound. A new Heathrow runway is an aid to the foreign tourist industry..."..."Of course it would generate economic activity and jobs. So does all infrastructure. So would a heliport in Hyde Park. But it has nothing to do with “British exports”. Precisely the opposite." ..."We should have no truck with the archaic “predict and provide” line of the Davies report. Just because more people want an airport does not mean a runway must be built. .... Demand is not God." ... "Air travel is overwhelmingly leisure travel, a modern luxury that needs no subsidy nor deserves planning privilege." ... " a bigger Heathrow should be unthinkable. It should concentrate on business travel. Above all, the decision should be decided on a proper plan, not the Davies report’s attempt to reconcile competing lobbyists." .... "We just need to keep calm and remember, they are in it for the money. All else is hogwash."
Click here to view full story...
Already 236 people are claiming compensation from Farnborough airport, for decreased house value
In 2010 Farnborough airport expanded their West One Apron from from 19,800 square metres to 32,600 square metres, providing facilities for a greater number of aircraft. Residents in the area say the value of their house has been decreased due to noise and other physical factors. The Lands Tribunal recently ruled that residents whose property values had decreased due to the expansion of Farnborough airport could pursue a compensation claim against the airport's operators. Hugh James is the law firm representing the claimants, which is currently 236 people (at the 9th November). Neil Stockdale, head of environmental law at Hugh James commented: "TAG Farnborough Airport has developed a huge operation widely regarded as Europe's leading business aviation centre and my clients feel the impact on them hasn't been taken into account and that's what they're pursuing these claims....It doesn't take much for each claim to be worth £ X, you multiply that by the number of properties affected and you would expect many hundreds of thousands if not millions of ££s in compensation." Residents have until 28 May 2017 to claim, but cases will need to be prepared for lodging with the Tribunal. That takes time so people should get their claims in sooner rather than later.
Click here to view full story...
Edinburgh TUTUR flight path trial ended 2 months early – but residents say changes persist
In June Edinburgh airport started a trial of a new, concentrated take off flight path (TUTUR), designed to enable the airport to deal with more planes per hour, and therefore make more money and raise the airport's value. Due to the utter noise misery the trial produced and the huge volume of complaints, it was ended two months early - on 28th October, not 24th December. However, as has been the pattern at other airports, people overflown say the route has not returned to how it was before the trial. Campaigner Helena Paul from local group SEAT (Stop Edinburgh Airport Trial) said: “Despite assurances that the TUTUR trial has ended, the noise disturbance has not stopped. In fact, many residents are reporting a serious increase in the levels of noise from flights compared to before the trial started. ... It’s perfectly clear to many thousands of us that there’s been a significant change in the pattern of use of the skies above our heads, to the severe detriment of many communities living beneath.” Helena has asked for data gathered during the trail period to be released, so that questions can be answered. They want to show definitively and precisely what happened pre-trial, and what is happening now.