Noise News
Below are links to stories about noise in relation to airports and aviation.
Heathrow night flights to continue unchanged despite protests from Richmond & Wandsworth Councils
The government has announced that night flights will continue at Heathrow airport until the airport is expanded, with a 3rd runway. The DfT document says there will be no change to the number of flights allowed between 11.30pm and 6am, until October 2022. The current regime ends in October 2017. Richmond and Wandsworth councils say the government has chosen to gamble with the health of Londoners, rather than challenge the airline industry to change. Richmond Council leader, councillor Paul Hodgins said: “Put plain and simply, the Government consultation was pointless. They were proposing virtually no changes to begin with and it looks like they haven’t listened to people’s feedback at all.” There is increasing scientific evidence that night flights impact adversely on human health, leading to a variety of conditions. Cllr Hodgins says "Heathrow already steps over the [WHO guidance] line when it comes to night noise .... The number of planes that depart and arrive from the airport at night is unacceptable, to protect people’s ears and sleep we need an all-out ban.” Wandsworth Council leader, Cllr Ravi Govindia said: “The Government’s consultation on night flights has been exposed as a sham. Heathrow’s vested interests have been protected while the health and well-being of Londoners living under the flights paths has been sacrificed.”
Click here to view full story...
DfT confirms numbers of night flights – till 2022 – at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted will not be cut
Changes to the night flights regime, at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted have been delayed for several years. The DfT has now produced its Decision Document on the issue. Anyone expecting meaningful cuts in night flights, or noise from night flights will be disappointed. There is no change in numbers, and just some tinkering with noise categories. The DfT says night flights from Heathrow will continue until (if) the airport is expanded, and it just hopes airlines will be using slightly less noisy planes. Pretty much, effectively, "business as usual." Chris Grayling, Transport Secretary, said he had to "strike a balance between the economic benefits of flying and the impact on local residents." The DfT objective is to: "encourage the use of quieter aircraft to limit or reduce the number of people significantly affected by aircraft noise at night, while maintaining the existing benefits of night flights". But it says: "Many industry responses welcomed the recognition by government of the benefits night flights offer and highlighted the importance of night flights to the business models of airlines, for instance by allowing low-cost airlines to operate the necessary minimum amount of rotations a day, or the benefits to the time-sensitive freight sector through enabling next day deliveries. "
Click here to view full story...
GACC finds the DfT’s night flight decision – to make no cuts in Gatwick flights – disappointing
The Government’s long-delayed decision on the night flight rules for the next 5 years - to 2022 - has at last been published. The Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign (GACC) finds it disappointing that there is to be no reduction in the number of night flights. Brendon Sewill, GACC chairman, commented: ‘Many of our members want to see a total ban on all night flights at Gatwick, as has been promised for Heathrow, and we proposed that at least there should be a gradual reduction towards that target. It is alarming that there is to be no change in the number (at Gatwick) permitted in winter [winter/summer is based on when the clocks change] which (since the current quota is not fully used) could permit a 60% increase in the actual number of night flights in winter." GACC welcomes the reduction in the summer noise quotas which will ensure no increase in noise during summer months. GACC had been hoping for a gradual year-by-year reduction in noise quotas. That would put pressure on airlines to buy and use quieter (= slightly less noisy) aircraft. But this has been abandoned - as a result of lobbying by the airlines. GACC says it is "wicked" that the noise quota for the winter will also permit a 60% increase in noise levels at night in the winter. That appears to contradict the Government claim that the aim is to “'Limit or reduce the number of people significantly affected by aircraft noise at night…”
Click here to view full story...
Arora’s plan for a cheaper 3rd Heathrow runway means putting it further east. ie. more noise for London
Surinder Arora, a hotel magnate, wants to get the 3rd Heathrow runway built quickly, and has made some suggestions of how it could be done more easily - and at least £5-6 billion more cheaply. But his scheme, for a shorter northern runway, means there would be even more noise pollution over London than from Heathrow's own £17.6bn proposal. Heathrow airport did not, apparently, know of his plans till he went public with them. If the new runway was shorter (3.2km not 3.5km) and moved a bit east, to Sipson, there would be cost savings. But this could mean noisier flights over London as aircraft may have to fly slightly lower over London by something like 300 feet or so (at a guess). One of Heathrow's reasons for its own location for the runway was to get this 300 ft or so height gain, claiming it would make all the difference to noise levels. The 2009 scheme, by Heathrow, for a much shorter 2.2km runway failed in part because of noise concerns, as did a plan for a 2.8km runway rejected by the Airports Commission. Willie Walsh of IAG, and Craig Keeper of Virgin Atlantic, want the cheapest scheme possible, to keep their costs down, and avoid having to increase the cost of their air fares. Amusingly, the Heathrow airport runway plan involves demolishing one of Mr Arora’s 5 hotels at the airport, two of which are under construction. Mr Arora says he was not informed by Heathrow (Willie Walsh claimed the same, for his head office building).
Click here to view full story...
Stop Stansted Expansion warn people not to be fooled by deceptive displays about airport’s growth plans
Stop Stansted Expansion (SSE) has issued a warning to residents across the region not to be hoodwinked by Stansted Airport's smoke-and-mirror exhibition and biased consultation survey on its further expansion plans. Both appear designed to trick people into thinking that further Stansted expansion in passenger number will be painless and sustainable. They make these claims, even before the environmental impacts have been assessed. The displays are deliberately misleading, and SSE says people should be very sceptical. Brian Ross, SSE's deputy chairman, said the displays are all about spinning the positives and saying nothing about the negatives." People attending the exhibitions need to ask searching questions, like explanations about the proposed increase in flight lights compared to today. And passenger movements compared to the position today. This, say SSE, reveals a very different picture from the one being put forward by Stansted's bosses who have been making the false claim that the extra passenger numbers will only lead to "approximately two extra flights an hour". In reality the proposal would mean an extra 2,000 flights a week compared to today's levels - 285 per day. That means an increase from on average of a plane every 2¼ minutes, to a plane every 85 seconds. Stansted current has permission for 35 million passengers per year, while it currently has about 25 million. But the airport says it 'urgently' needs the cap to be raised to 44.5 million.
Click here to view full story...
Aviation Environment Federation responds to CAA airspace design consultation – with some damning and trenchant comments
The CAA has just closed a 3 month consultation on their guidance to support their new airspace change decision-making process. The consultation is, frankly, impossible for most laypeople to understand or respond to. The AEF has submitted their expert, 8 page, comments. They say, among other things: "The consultation questions focus on the transparency and clarity of the guidance material, rather than on the substance of the proposals." ...but there are gaps left in the regulation of noise management: Some of these are: "... there is no apparent means of redress if people feel that the communication has been inadequate, or if they doubt the accuracy of the information provided." ... "the guidance .... is too complex for use by local communities, who need clear and simple guidance on how to engage with a local airport about noise, how to find out whether an airport has recently implemented airspace changes, and how to participate in the airspace change process if it is ongoing." ... "For as long as the CAA considers its primary duty to be about facilitating aviation growth, it will be unable to make impartial judgments about airspace change that balance the public interest with that of airports and airlines". ... And "The current process is seriously flawed in that it leaves no systematic opportunity for operational restrictions (such as limits on number of aircraft movements) to be imposed if the noise impact of a given airspace change becomes intolerable".
Click here to view full story...
easyJet puts first slightly less noisy A320-neo into service at Luton – campaigners hope for more
Campaigners fighting to stop aircraft noise pollution above St Albans and Harpenden are calling for targets to be set for the introduction of quieter planes. easyJet, based at Luton, has introduced their first neo-engined A320 aircraft, which are a bit quieter than standard planes, and the Luton and District Association for the Control of Aircraft Noise (LADACAN) is calling on airport operators to expand their roll-out of these aircraft to decrease noise pollution. LADACAN spokesman Andrew Lambourne said: “We welcome this long-awaited step, but let’s remember that we were promised quieter aircraft hand-in-hand with significant expansion. We’ve had much faster than anticipated expansion, so now we’re asking for an accelerated roll-out of these quieter aircraft, instead of continuing to add more of the noisiest types to the mix. Let’s hear details of proactive measures to attract quieter planes to Luton by way of reducing landing fees for quieter types and increasing fees for noisier types. Meanwhile we are still calling on the airport operators to tighten their noise controls and raise the penalties for noisy flights as an added incentive to change.” While easyJet makes nice-sounding statements about reducing CO2 and noise impacts per flight, they plan to increase the number of flights as much as possible - negating any improvements.
Click here to view full story...
Follow up study over decade indicates aircraft noise increases risk of heart disease
A study published in the online journal BMJ Occupational & Environmental Medicine indicates that people who live close to an airport and are constantly barraged by the sound of planes are at increased risk of heart disease. A study found that people who were exposed to the highest noise levels, particularly at night, were at greater risk of developing high blood pressure and heart flutter. There is just an association, rather than proof that the aircraft noise was causing health problems, although the scientists took into account socio-economic background and various other predictors of health of the participant. The work builds on a growing body of evidence showing the detrimental health effects of noise exposure. The study followed up, in 2013, the subjects who lived near the Athens International Airport and had participated in the cross-sectional multi-country HYENA study in 2004–2006. In the decade following the study, 71 of the participants were newly diagnosed with high blood pressure and 44 were diagnosed with heart flutter (cardiac arrhythmia). Exposure to aircraft noise, particularly at night, was associated with high blood pressure, with every additional 10dB of night-time aircraft noise translating to a 69% heightened risk of the condition. There was also a link between the risk of heart flutter and night-time aircraft noise.
Click here to view full story...
Homebuyers vote noise to be the biggest turn off – plane noise very high on the list
Some new research indicates that homebuyers take noise pollution very seriously when buying a house. According to a recent survey, 92% of homeowners say noise levels from a nearby pub would influence their decision to buy, with 55% saying they definitely wouldn’t buy it. Other noise sources that homeowners say would deter them completely from buying their dream property include airports (54%), motorways (48%) an airport flight path (45%), electricity pylons (40%) and a train mainline (36%). And 38% of homeowners say noise levels from an A-road would make them reconsider the purchase. After a nearby noisy pub, airports were a close second on the list of noise pollutants that would affect someone's decision to buy. 91% saying they would be influenced and over half (54%) saying noise levels from an airport would put them off completely. Only 9% of homebuyers said they would look beyond the noise levels and buy anyway. 45% of homebuyers said the noise from flight paths would put them off completely. 30% said they would reconsider buying, while 15% said that they would be willing to offer a lower price for an affected property. The advice given is that with the potential expansion to Heathrow, homebuyers would be wise to look at the new flight path before committing to a new home purchase. But that is not possible, as there are not likely to be flight path maps for several more years ...
Click here to view full story...
Enough is enough when it comes to aircraft noise say community groups from across the UK
A large number of community groups, representing hundreds of thousands of UK residents, delivered a statement to Number 10 demanding that the next government takes action to reduce aviation noise and emissions. The groups are seeking a new policy on aircraft noise and tough regulation of the aviation industry that balances the interests of people living near airports and under flight paths with the demands of the industry for more flights. Charles Lloyd of the Aviation Communities Forum said: “Anyone who lives near an airport expects some noise. But the changes caused by new concentrated routes - motorways in the sky - and the growth in flight numbers are having unacceptable affects on people’s lives, up and down the country. ... For far too long the aviation industry has been unaccountable and able to do virtually what it wants in the skies. The industry has little interest in its impact on people on the ground and there’s no proper regulation to hold it to account. The Government’s hands-off attitude needs to change: communities near airports and under flight paths are no longer willing to be ignored. ... Frustration is reaching a boiling point: people can’t sue the industry because its exempt from noise laws, there’s no noise regulator to turn to, the industry plays pass-the-parcel if you try to get things changed and they don’t even have to pay compensation if they destroy your health or the value of your house.” Read the full statement.