Airport News
Below are news items relating to specific airports
Government First-Tier Tribunal to hear Heathrow appeal against having to disclose environmental information
Heathrow is trying to overturn a ruling in February 2020 that it must disclose environmental information. The Information Commissioner’s decision that Heathrow counts as a public authority and must disclose the information will be subject to an appeal next week. The ruling last year followed a similar one concerning energy producers and suppliers, extending a duty that the water industry has been subject to since 2015. They all resulted from the ambiguity of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004, which states that any organisation that “that carries out functions of public administration”, or has public responsibilities, functions or provides services related to the environment, is subject to the law. Heathrow does not want to have to answer demands for information about planning applications, aircraft noise or environmental impacts of the airport. The appeal comes as the Good Law Project, which is pursuing a legal challenge against government policy approving the third runway, said that it was making “a focussed request for documents and communications between Heathrow Airport and the DfT, for a Development Consent Order, for a 3rd runway.
Click here to view full story...
Southampton Airport runway decision put back to 8th April after rejection by Eastleigh’s Local Area Committee
Plans to extend Southampton Airport's runway have been rejected by Eastleigh's Local Area Committee, which voted 5 to 3 against the 164m (538ft) extension - which would allow longer-haul flights (and so increase carbon emissions). The matter will now go to a full council meeting on 8 April where the proposals will finally be decided. Eastleigh planning officers recommended to approve the expansion, despite finding the number of people affected by airport noise would go up from 11,450 in 2020 to 46,050 in 2033. One councillor said: "It's a matter of balance, it's balancing the economy, jobs, the future of our planet." Another said: "By refusing this application we will not be closing the airport. By voting for refusal we are simply stopping the dramatic impact on carbon emissions." Campaigners - including naturalist Chris Packham - had objected to the expansion since it was officially proposed in 2019 and there have since been four public consultations. Local authorities, including Southampton and Winchester city councils, Test Valley Borough Council, four parish councils, as well as Bournemouth Airport, Southern Gas Networks and Dorset Local Enterprise Partnership, all objected to the plans on the grounds of noise and climate change.
Click here to view full story...
Campaign groups call for ban on Gatwick Airport night flights
Both community groups at Gatwick, GACC and CAGNE, are calling for a ban on night flights from Gatwick. “If night flights continue to be allowed, GACC argues they should be limited to those that are genuinely essential for economic reasons, not leisure flights, and that they should be far more strictly regulated.” Successive governments have acknowledged that noise from aircraft at night has significant health, economic and other impacts on communities near airports and under flight paths, and have asserted that they take this very seriously. But there has been no bottom-up review of the UK's night flight regime since 2006. Instead, the government has repeatedly rolled forward night flight limits set many years ago, without any re-examination of what we believe are the very limited economic benefits, whilst failing to take account of the increasingly strong evidence of the adverse physical and mental health impacts night flights have on communities. There is no reason to continue to operate services at night when there is ample capacity at times of day that have less serious health and community impacts. The first part of the DfT consultation on night flights ended on 3rd March; the second part ends on 31st May.
Click here to view full story...
DfT spending £5.5 million on airspace change, to “drive improvements to UK’s ‘motorways in the sky’”
There is much talk, in the DfT and the CAA about "modernising airspace". The main aim is to make it easier for more aircraft to use UK airspace safely. It means more planes flying along exactly the same route - which the DfT refers to as "motorways in the sky." The industry would also like to get the amount of noise nuisance from aviation to be as low as is possible with ever more planes. There has never been any satisfactory solution to whether to fly most planes over fewer routes (concentrated routes) or to fly planes on more routes. So the choice is affecting a smaller number of people very severely, or a larger number less badly. There has never been decision on the alternatives. The concept of "respite" is popular with some - so more planes fly a certain route part of the time, giving those under another route some rest from the noise - then switching the two. Now the DfT has announced it is spending £5.5 million will (in the greenwash) "support airports to develop and evaluate design options aimed at making journeys quicker, quieter and cleaner." It will "deliver for all the UK." And help the sector to "build back better." ... The main aim is to fit in more flights, and ensure planes do not stack on their arrival at an airport.
Click here to view full story...
Stansted Public Inquiry – MAG challenging Uttlesford’s refusal – has ended. Inspectors’ decision by June?
The Stansted Airport Public Inquiry to consider plans for further airport expansion (from 35 to 43 mpps) came to a close on Friday 12 March after 8 weeks of evidence hearings and cross-examinations. QCs for the 3 main parties - Manchester Airports Group (MAG), Uttlesford District Council (UDC) and Stop Stansted Expansion (SSE) - presented their closing submissions at the end of last week. It will now be for the Panel of 3 Inspectors to decide whether to approve the airport expansion proposals. A decision is expected in around 3 months (June?). UDC's Planning Committee had voted 10-0 to refuse permission, though officers had recommended acceptance. SSE says the Inquiry might not have been necessary if UDC had supported SSE's call, 3 years ago, for the Secretary of State for Transport to deal with the Stansted Airport Planning Application nationally. Instead, UDC insisted on dealing with the application itself, despite its limited resources and expertise in this area. During the inquiry, most of the legal attack by MAG was against the detailed evidence produced by SSE, as UDC did not present much.
Click here to view full story...
People overflown by Heathrow dreading the resumption of increased plane noise, when flight restrictions are eased
While for many people lockdown has been a really difficult and isolating time, for those living under the Heathrow flight paths it’s given them the respite from noise that they have really wanted and needed. One resident in Windsor said: “The worst thing for me is the night flights. I worked in a pressurised full time job and we had done as much insulation as possible. But when you wake up at 4.30am - when the first arrivals start - you start thinking about work and you can't get back to sleep and it almost drove me round the bend. For your mental health the night flights are an absolute nightmare.” The problem can be worse in summer, in warm weather, when people want the window open - the noise is then far worse, and people get woken up. One resident said, about the prospect of high numbers of planes returning, when restrictions on air travel are lifted: "I am absolutely dreading it, in fact I am thinking about moving away which is a shame because I love this area and I love where I live." The campaign group No 3rd Runway Coalition ran a noise survey during lockdown which received 3,419 responses. It showed a high number noticed a beneficial impact on their sleep, from fewer planes.
Click here to view full story...
Alex Sobel MP tells government to stop Leeds Bradford Airport’s new £150m terminal
The MP for Leeds North West, Alex Sobel, has told the government it needs to dramatically intervene to stop the building of a new terminal at Leeds Bradford Airport. The airport is in his constituency. He has asked the Secretary of State, Robert Jenrick, to call in the decision made by Leeds City Councillors to approve plans for a new terminal. The expansion plans are intended to increase the number of flights and passengers, and therefore the amount of noise and carbon emissions. Mr Sobel has been a long-time critic of the airport’s plans. He has pointed out that the expansion plans are not in keeping with the advice of the Committee on Climate Change, to limit aviation expansion, in order to reach UK carbon targets. He said: "I do not believe that a local plans panel of 14 councillors is in any way a competent body to be making a decision of this significance. Applications which significantly affect the carbon budget must be made nationally. We need a national aviation plan and significant measures to reduce net emissions from UK flights. I look forward to seeing these in the Government’s response to the Committee on Climate Change’s Sixth Carbon Budget Report.”
Click here to view full story...
20 years after Manchester’s 2nd runway, the forecast jobs did not materialise – about 1/3 less than forecast
In 1997 there were lengthy, determined protests - for around 6 months - involving tunnels and tree houses, to stop the building of a 2nd runway at Manchester airport. In the end the bailiffs the protesters (including Swampy) were removed and the runway finally opened on February 5, 2001. This is an account of the protests. The runway was meant to increase the number of passengers at the airport from just below 15 million per year to 30m by 2005. In reality, by 2019 there were 29.4m. In 2010 there were 17.7m. That was WAY below the forecasts. The runway was meant to create 50,000 jobs in the longer term, to add to around 45,000 - 55,000 jobs associated with the airport in 1997. The government inspector then ruled that even if the passenger and job forecasts were wrong, the impact on the region's economy 'would be huge'. In 2019 (just before the pandemic) the airport employed 3,500 workers directly and a further 19,300 indirectly - while the total number of jobs said to be supported by the airport was 45,000. All that comes to about 68,000 jobs, some 30,000 fewer than had been envisaged prior to Runway 2. This is just another airport in which the predictions of thousands of jobs did not materialise.
Click here to view full story...
Leeds Bradford Airport terminal recommended for final approval – but old building could remain standing
A new document has shown Leeds Bradford Airport may not be able to demolish its old terminal building if/when a replacement is built, as it contains much of the site’s crucial infrastructure. As part of a Leeds City Council's recent in-principle acceptance of the rebuild last month, members wanted the ageing terminal building to be demolished as soon as possible once the new one was built. But a document set to go before the panel next week claims the airport cannot do this, as it currently contains the airport’s air traffic control tower, fire station, IT, communications, security, safety and mechanical infrastructure These are needed for the airport to maintain its aerodrome licence, but the airport says it has committed to creating a “masterplan” to get rid of the site in the longer term. The report, set to go before the Council's plans panel on 11th March. It said: "The existing terminal will not be used by passengers which is restricted in the proposed (planning) agreement....[it] houses some of the Airports critical operations..." The airport’s management offices are also included in the terminal building, as well as Jet2’s staff offices.
Click here to view full story...
Greenpeace France “greenwash” an AirFrance plane at Charles de Gaulle airport
Greenpeace France activists got onto the tarmac at Paris Roissy-Charles de Gaulle airport to denounce the government's greenwashing of aviation. They painted the side of an AirFrance plane green - greenwashing it. They say we need to reduce air travel, in order to be compatible the Paris Agreement targets. This comes a few days before the start of parliamentary debates on the “Climate and Resilience” bill. Greenpeace says airport expansion must be stopped - several French airports have such plans at present. They say now only should flights be replaced by rail journeys if the train time is under 2hours 30 minutes, but when the trip is under 6 hours. Greenpeace is not against novel technologies, but they say these will not be enough to make a sufficient difference, in the necessary timescale. The proposed technical solutions are a risk, as they delay real action. They explain why biofuels, hydrogen planes, or electric planes are not going to cut aviation emissions any time soon, if ever. Synthetic fuels made from surplus renewably generated electricity offer a small potential, but they will be expensive and only produced in small amounts. So air travel needs to be regulated and reduced.