General News
Below are links to stories of general interest in relation to aviation and airports.
The cost of a new Gatwick runway – £50 extra per return flight
A new research study - ‘Who would pay for a new runway’ - examines who would pay for a new runway at Gatwick or at Heathrow. It concludes that a new runway at Gatwick would mean an increase in airport charges (landing fees, aircraft parking charges etc) per passenger from £8 at present to £33.60 – an increase of £25, or £50 per return flight. At Heathrow the increase would be from £19 per passenger to £31. The calculations are based on the estimate made by the Airports Commission that a new Gatwick runway would cost £10 - £13 billion. The local Gatwick campaign, GACC, say Gatwick often claim that a new runway at Gatwick would be cheaper than one at Heathrow. But they don't mention that the cost would need to be borne by roughly half as many passengers at Gatwick as at Heathrow. In the past the cost of new infrastructure was met by the Government, or spread among BAA's airports. But now all the airports are privately owned by separate companies. The cost of a Gatwick runway would have to be met only by the passengers using Gatwick. £50 extra on a return flight might well cause price sensitive passengers and airlines to choose to use Stansted instead.
Click here to view full story...
Gatwick offers to pay households for noise of 2nd runway – dismissed by opponents as a “very small bribe”
Gatwick airport is on a PR and charm offensive to try to get support for a 2nd runway. This has been somewhat upset over the past two weeks by the impact on the village of Warnham of an unannounced flight path trial. Now Gatwick airport may have been rushed into making the offer of £1,000 per year to "all households most affected" by noise from a 2nd runway. The airport says would be equivalent to Band A Council Tax (currently £1000). Gatwick CEO Stewart Wingate said the cash would help negate some of the impact. The airport estimate that 4,100 households would qualify for the money by 2040, using the discredited 57 decibel contour. In reality, the 57dB contour does not accurately reflect the areas where noise is annoying or causes disturbance - even the 54dB contour, as used in Europe, is an inaccurate measure. Many thousands more people - perhaps 48,000 - would need to be compensated if the 54dB contour was used. The £1,000 is a derisory figure, not even slightly compensating for loss of house value, or for loss of local amenity and quality of life. This is a very small bribe.
Click here to view full story...
Analysis by NATS for Airports Commission shows a 4th Heathrow runway would cut flight path capacity elsewhere
An article in the Times says a submission by NATS, the air traffic control service to the Airports Commission warns of the problems that would be caused if a 4th (not only a 3rd) runway was built. The Airports Commission said in its interim report, that it considers another new runway might be "needed" by 2050, if the first new runway capacity has been filled by then. Even one new runway is marginal, at best, for carbon emissions. [A 2nd new runway cannot be built and used, keeping within UK carbon targets]. There are fears that if Heathrow was allowed a 3rd runway, it would effectively become a Trojan Horse for a 4th runway - Heathrow airport has said that from 2030 a decision would have to be taken on a 4th. The effect on flight paths would mean fewer planes could use the other London airports. The Times says a 4th runway at Heathrow would reduce the combined capacity of Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted, Luton, Birmingham, City and Southend airports by 9%. It would cut capacity relative to a 3-runway Heathrow by 18% due to the disruption to flight paths to the other main airports.
Click here to view full story...
A new runway at Heathrow or Gatwick would mean big increases in passenger fees – New report
The Aviation Environment Federation (AEF) has submitted a new report to the Airports Commission which casts doubt on the feasibility of building a new runway at either Gatwick or Heathrow. So far there has been little realistic discussion about who will actually pay for the proposed runways. The new study, “Who Would Pay for a New Runway” by Brendon Sewill, shows that a new runway at Heathrow would be likely to mean an increase in landing fees and other airport charges from £19 per passenger now, up to £31. At Gatwick there would be a larger increase, up from £8 now to £33.60. The study points out that with all the London airports separately owned, unlike in the days of BAA, the cost will have to fall only on the passengers using that airport. If an expensive runway (and terminal) is built, the options are either that the passengers pay for it - or that it has to have public subsidy. A report for the Airports Commission, by KPMG, concluded that a new Heathrow runway would need a subsidy of around £11 billion, and a new Gatwick runway a subsidy of nearly £18 billion. However, the Government is reluctant to commit public funds, and new EU guidelines ruling out subsidies to major airports. That leaves landing charges - will passengers put up with that, or vote with their feet by using cheaper airports?
Click here to view full story...
Government wants new runway pushed through in next Parliament, with no chance to vote against it
Interview with Patrick McLoughlin, in the Spectator, by James Forsyth. It states: “But McLoughlin has a plan that may stop airport expansion being dragged into the next general election campaign. In opposition, David Cameron was against expanding Heathrow. But in 2012, the government asked Howard Davies, an economist, to do a report on what runways Britain needs. He has been told not to publish his final conclusions until after the general election. So I ask McLoughlin: does that mean there’ll be no general election between the report and the beginning of the building process? “Sitting here now, that would be what I would hope.” Residents who’ll have to put up with a new runway, or even a new airport, will thus never get a chance to vote against it.”
Click here to view full story...
British Airways Heathrow flight suffered ‘engine surge’ on take-off so returned for emergency landing
A British Airways plane was forced to turn back shortly after taking off at Heathrow Airport after an "engine surge" in the air. A witness said flames were "spitting out of the engine" as the aircraft took off at 20.54 GMT on Thursday 6th March. British Airways said flight BA0364 to Lyon, France, touched down safely, and the aircraft would be "thoroughly checked over by engineers". The southern runway was closed for about 16 minutes. A local resident who saw it said: "I was in the petrol station opposite the airport, which is when I heard the bang, so I turned around and the plane had flames spitting out of the engine with a spluttering noise as it was still taking off. I then watched it continue to climb and the engine was still emitting flames intermittently." BA said "A flight experienced what's known as an 'engine surge' as it took off from Heathrow" So the plane limped back into Heathrow. Webtrak shows it circling over Cobham etc for some 25 minutes before joining the northern runway approach path at around Brixton and landing at about 21.37 - so it flew for miles over densely populated areas of London. The last incident of a plane having to make an emergency landing, and flying across London with a burning engine, was in May 2013, when the engine cowls had not been closed properly.
Click here to view full story...
Allegedly “full” Heathrow now promotes BA weekend day trips to European cities
Heathrow Airport makes much of the fact that it is "full" and there is no space for any other new routes, to all those destinations in emerging economies, to which, according to Heathrow, new air links are absolutely vital. But as Heathrow is so full, (so the theory goes) these links cannot be set up, and so UK plc will languish .... without direct routes to a range of second or third tier cities. So it is something of a surprise to find that BA now has space among its Heathrow slots for some new low-cost day return fares to European cities, for day trips at weekends. BA is offering what it claims to be “affordable day trip” tickets for anyone wanting to fly to popular city break destinations (Rome, Dublin, Geneva, Vienna, Munich) and back on the same day. BA said it could not reveal how many day trip tickets were set aside for each destination, due to commercially sensitivity. The Telegraph says:"Encouraging travellers to fly twice in a day might anger environmentalists. When asked to comment on the effect of such short trips, a spokesman said: “It’s the customer’s choice and they can offset their carbon emissions on the BA website if they wish to.” " What can one say? One comment below the article mentions the "mindless hedonist" ......
Click here to view full story...
Concerns about the effectiveness of a new aviation noise authority – and the public’s trust in it
In its interim report published on 17th December 2013, the Airports Commission recommended to government "... the establishment of an Independent Noise Authority to provide expert and impartial advice about the noise impacts of aviation and to facilitate the delivery of future improvements to airspace operations." GACC - the Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign - has responded to this suggestion with a lot of caveats. GACC would welcome the authority if its main purpose is to reduce aircraft noise, but not if its main purpose is to persuade local residents to relax their opposition to a new runway at Gatwick. Residents want the noise to be reduced, not ‘mitigating’, and not ‘reducing the number of people affected’ if that means merely making noise worse for fewer people. . There have been years of unsatisfactory complaints mechanisms on aircraft noise, and also of broken assurances from the aviation industry. "A single point for complaints, an aircraft noise ombudsman with power to order improvement or compensation, would be welcome. But we do not see this in the recommendations of the Commission’s Interim Report." There are fears that the new body will be "long grass into which difficult issues could be consigned." A body designed to smooth the path of a new runway, whether at Gatwick or elsewhere would be vigorously opposed.
Click here to view full story...
NGOs urge EU governments to take action over EU ETS enforcement against non-compliant foreign airlines
European environmental NGOs have formally requested German, Dutch and British authorities responsible for administering the Aviation EU ETS to take necessary action against airlines that failed to comply with the carbon scheme in 2012. The NGOs name airlines Air China, China Eastern, China Southern, Air India, Jet Airways, Saudia and Aeroflot as not having submitted carbon permits to cover their intra-European flights that year by the 30 April 2013 deadline. Facing international opposition, the EU temporarily suspended a requirement for airlines to report emissions from intercontinental flights to and from Europe in 2012 under the ‘Stop the Clock’ derogation. Carriers regardless of nationality were still required to comply with the scheme for flights carried out within Europe. The NGOs point out that offenders gain a competitive advantage over compliant airlines if the regulations are not enforced equally and consistently. The NGOs say “It makes no sense and undermines the EU’s position internationally to enforce the ETS partially or in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner." EU countries must enforce compliance with the ETS in a consistent and fair manner.
Click here to view full story...
£25,000 of Heathrow airport “Community Fund” – much of it from passengers’ spare change – for local flood victims
Heathrow airport has a "Community Fund" which makes donations to community projects local to the airport, in Ealing , Hillingdon , Hounslow , Richmond, Runnymede, South Bucks, Slough, Spelthorne, Windsor and Maidenhead. They say they focus on projects linked to education and youth development, the environment and employment/skills development. In 2014 around £500,000 will be available through 3 distinct grant programmes.They have now announced that they are donating £25,000 for flood-stricken community groups in surrounding boroughs of the airport, to help them recover from the damage caused by the storms and flooding. Some areas only 3 - 4 miles from Heathrow have been badly flooded to a depth of many feet. The Heathrow Community Fund donations will be made towards those with no help available from insurance or statutory funding. The funds come from 3 sources – fines imposed on aircraft that breach noise limits, an annual donation from Heathrow and spare change from airport passengers. The noise fines are only for departing, not arriving planes, and this source of funds is used only for the "Communities for Tomorrow" activities.