This website is no longer actively maintained

For up-to-date information on the campaigns it represents please visit:

No Airport Expansion! is a campaign group that aims to provide a rallying point for the many local groups campaigning against airport expansion projects throughout the UK.

Visit No Airport Expansion! website

Noise News

Below are links to stories about noise in relation to airports and aviation.

 

HACAN signs up to a joint statement with Heathrow airport on an Independent Aviation Noise Authority (IANA)

HACAN and Heathrow have set out their support for an Independent Aviation Noise Authority (IANA). The Government has said it would support the introduction of the IANA and will consult on its role and scope in 2017. Before that, Hacan and Heathrow have put out a "summary of common ground" on a joint position on the role and structure of the IANA, at first looking only at Heathrow. They have together written to Chris Grayling, backing the concept of an IANA. They hope it will "oversee efforts to reduce aircraft noise in communities around Heathrow," and that it will "provide an impartial source of expert advice on noise, coordinate independent research, adjudicate on noise complaints that can’t be managed locally and ensure that communities have access to information..." They say IANA should have no enforcement powers, or be part of the CAA or DfT. Hacan and Heathrow say the main role of the IANA should be to provide an impartial source of expert advice, and then take on additional tasks such as to "establish a framework for noise management which is rooted in best practice". It could also take on ombudsman functions, such as to investigate "complaints that have not been resolved locally." John Stewart, Chair of HACAN, hopes an IANA could "bring reassurance to local communities but can also encourage airports to take their noise responsibilities seriously.”

Click here to view full story...

Changes to London City Airport flight paths increase noise pollution, say campaigners

Greenwich and Lewisham residents are urged to contact London City airport and local politicians with their concerns about the NATS (National Air Traffic Services) programme to ‘modernise’ the airspace. Changes to London City Airport’s flight paths might have resulted for increased noise pollution for Greenwich and Lewisham residents. London City has implemented changes by NATS that result in narrower flight paths in the hope of improving "efficiency." This has means more concentrated plane noise over areas like Catford, Lee and Eltham. Campaign group Hacan East has opposed the changes and is trying to get the decision reversed. Greenwich and Lewisham London Assembly member Len Duvall said: “It is vital that residents who are suffering from increased noise pollution make their voices heard on this important issue .... There is technology available on the airport’s website which can help people track which flights are making noise near them." Len Duvall said: “I would urge anybody effected not only to contact the airport but to also get in touch with me, their local council or their MP.” The airport will be reviewing the flight paths in early 2017 and will be taking feedback from residents.

Click here to view full story...

How intense plane noise inflicted on sensitive people can be intolerably cruel. Read the blog

In a blog, written for HACAN, someone who is very badly affected by aircraft noise shares his story. It makes shocking, and very sad, reading. The writer moved somewhere 10 miles from Heathrow, about 10 years ago, and at that time there was no plane noise issue. Now the controllers of airspace have changed the way flight paths are used, so planes leaving Heathrow generally fly on very narrow, concentrated routes. This means that noise which would previously have been spread out over about 3km is now channelled down a track just a few hundreds of metres wide. Plane after plane after plane flies down this one track, causing a level of noise that can be life-changing for those unlucky enough to be below. The author expresses his misery and despair at finding his home now bombarded by intense, almost continuous noise, when the winds are from the east. He has had to leave his job, as the lack of sleep, the depression, the anxiety and the disruption to his life has had too great an impact on him. He says on one day, in utter despair with tears rushing down his face "the only thing that stopped me was my dog had come up to me and pushed my hands away from my face with his nose. I looked at him, gripped his lead, run with him to the car and drove off to the countryside, just to get away from the noise." Industry - take note. The noise from planes at Heathrow can have serious impacts on people. It is time this was properly acknowledged by government, and not conveniently ignored for political convenience.

Click here to view full story...

6 month trial of change to Gatwick Route 4 ends, with widespread criticism and opposition

Route 4 from Gatwick (taking off towards the west, curving north and then going east) was changed in 2013 to fly slightly further to the north. This caused huge upset and opposition from those newly, and intensely, overflown. Finally in May 2016, the route was changed to be further south, but instead of relatively spread out across the NPR, it is concentrated. This has caused further upset and opposition from those now finding they have far worse noise than before. This changed route was "amended" for 6 months, and that ended on 26th November. However, the altered route will continue for another 3 months, while the CAA evaluates their feedback on how the route has performed. The CAA will in due course produce their PIR (Post Implementation Review) of the changed route. Gatwick had more than 15,000 complaints from the public during the consultation. Some of the towns and villages badly affected by high levels of plane noise include Leigh, Salfords, and Horley. The route involves a very tight turn, and to stay within the 3km wide NPR, planes should not be accelerating too fast (to avoid swinging out too far, and being outside the NPR). People say planes are making more noise, as pilots use flaps in order to make the tight turn, and planes are lower than they need to be. An affected resident said "The planes should be flying a shallower turn with a slightly more northerly trajectory afterwards - just as they did with no significant problems for over 20 years up to 2012."

Click here to view full story...

Evidence by Mayor of London to Env Audit Cttee on Heathrow expresses grave concerns on health impacts

The Mayor of London has submitted evidence to the Environmental Audit Committee, on Heathrow's environmental impacts. The Mayor believes Heathrow expansion could have a very detrimental impact on the lives of hundreds of thousands of Londoners. The submission says: "It is regrettable that Government has decided to take forward Heathrow expansion in spite of the clear evidence of its serious environmental impacts in terms of air quality and noise and, perhaps of greatest concern, what it would mean for public health." ... "It is yet to be demonstrated that an expanded Heathrow could operate without exceeding legal limits for NO2." ... "Delivering significant mode shift will be critical to limiting highway traffic and helping tackle air pollution; but no new rail infrastructure is deemed by Government or the Heathrow Airport Limited to be required for expansion, rendering such an aspiration simply not credible.' ... "Little consideration has been given to the impact expansion will have on the growth in highway trips associated with air freight and induced economic activity..." ... "A three-runway Heathrow would result in an increase in the number of people exposed to significant aircraft noise (at 55dBLden) of over 200,000, compared to a two-runway Heathrow..." and "Even with the partial night flights bans being proposed, the proposals are likely to lead to a net increase in flights across the night period (11pm-7am) of at least 30%." ... and there is more ...

Click here to view full story...

Dr Tania Mathias calling for a Bill in Parliament to make aircraft noise a statutory nuisance

In the 1920s aviation was a nascent, struggling industry, and governments gave it a lot of support to get going. One of the benefits it got was in the Air Navigation Act 1920, which provided the basis of the UK's aviation noise regulation regime, by exempting aviation from nuisance sanctions, in order to stimulate the new industry. This was reaffirmed in the Civil Aviation Act 1982, which says citizens have no recourse against aircraft noise nuisance: “No action shall lie in respect of trespass or in respect of nuisance, by reason only of the flight of an aircraft over any property at a height above the ground ....". Unlike almost any other noise nuisance source, there is nothing anyone can do about aircraft noise that disturbs them. Now Dr Tania Mathias, MP for Twickenham, has called for a Bill in Parliament to make aircraft noise a statutory nuisance. She has put down: "That leave be given to bring in a Bill to amend Part 3 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to make noise caused by aircraft a statutory nuisance, and for connected purposes." Tania says an average food blender makes a noise of about 80 decibels, and plane noise in homes in Twickenham can be up to 83 decibels. It is an unacceptable anachronism that while the noise nuisance from model aircraft is recognised in law, the noise of real planes is not. She believes we need the law to provide a means of making it better when noise goes beyond what is reasonable or safe.

Click here to view full story...

Edinburgh airport produces summary of airspace change consultation responses – majority negative

Edinburgh airport's initial findings into the letsgofurther consultation (on airspace change to create new flight paths across a wide swathe of East Central Scotland) are out. There was an overwhelming rejection of their plans to change flight paths. They are refusing to publish the comments in full. Local campaign, Edinburgh Airport Watch comments: "While it is unclear what criteria the airport has used to categorise the responses as Positive, Neutral or Negative, it is obvious from the airport’s own reckoning that the majority of responders were against the proposals to change the airspace. The initial consultation documents contained little detail, yet people across the piece have given an emphatic thumbs down to any further change to the airspace with 70% of Community Councils commenting negatively." ... Since the airport’s disastrous TUTUR trial in 2015, hundreds of thousands of people have woken up to find themselves suddenly and without warning living under a busy and disruptive flight path - with no consultation. ... "We are struck by the number of comments from people clearly stating the importance to them of tranquility." ..."Before embarking on any more proposals for further change, we call on the airport to reverse the changes it has already made to the airspace since 2015 and enter into a proper dialog with those Communities whose lives have been turned upside down by their actions so far."

Click here to view full story...

Environmental Audit Cttee finds Treasury failing to take long-term environmental costs into account

The Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) has done an investigation into the role of the Treasury in relation to sustainable development and environmental protection. The EAC is calling for the Treasury to "green-check" all its decisions, after its major investigation found that the Treasury puts short term priorities over long term sustainability – potentially increasing costs to the economy in the future. [The Treasury has been a key promoter of a new south east runway, with Treasury staff helping the Airports Commission.] EAC Chair, Mary Creagh, said: "The Treasury is highly influential and uniquely placed to ensure the whole of Government works to promote sustainability. But we have seen considerable evidence that it fails to do this.The Treasury tends not to take full account of the long term environmental costs and benefits of decisions which would reduce costs for taxpayers and consumers in the long run. On the carbon capture and storage competition and zero carbon homes we saw the Treasury riding roughshod over departments, cancelling long-established environmental programmes at short notice with no consultation, costing businesses and the taxpayer tens of millions of pounds. With a week to go until the next Autumn Statement, we hope our inquiry will be a wake-up call to the Treasury."

Click here to view full story...

Gatwick now only allows noise complaints by online form (or paper post) – no longer by phone or email

After changing flight paths in 2014, Gatwick made other changes to flight paths that have affected a lot of people. Many who only had the occasional plane over them now find themselves subjected to one every 5 minutes or less, for hours on end, day after day. Gatwick has also slightly increased its numbers of flights. So people complained. The airport found itself inundated with complaints (which it rather charmingly calls "enquiries"). The number rose 6-fold in a year. Gatwick then changed the system so there could only be one noise complaint per household per day. Gatwick has now found a way to cut the complaints. While in the past people could email or phone their complaint, - now the only means of complaint is filling in a relatively long internet form. r sending in a complaint by paper post, which has now been made Freepost. This new system means anyone not able to access the internet is effectively prevented from complaining, unless they want to rack up bills. Under the new system there is no limit on the number of complaints per day but each time the ten lines of required information for the form must be filled in. Why is Gatwick so unhelpful? At least the complaint system at Heathrow allows someone to email, or phone and speak to a person. Gatwick's treatment of its neighbours seems to have taken a further, downward, turn. Not being selected for a new runway, it has given up on any sort of charm offensive with the local residents.

Click here to view full story...

Average of 283 noise complaints to Heathrow per day so far this year, from around 4,280 people

Figures from Heathrow of the number of noise complaints received in the period 1st January 2016 to 24th October 2016 have been released. Heathrow does keep all complaints data. The figures show there were complaints made by a total of 4,282 people over the period, and a total of 87,201 noise complaints. The Telegraph reports that 1,209 people complained only once about plane noise during the period. The BBC reported that since the start of 2016, an average of 72 people complained every day. The total number of complaints received was an average of 283 per day. Much is made by the media of some people who make a very large number of noise complaints each. Heathrow confirmed that these were not computer generated. The highest number of complaints in a day was 673 on 8th June (with 235 people complaining), and 672 on 10th October 2016 (128 people). The lowest number of complaints was 91 on 1st August (87 people). Data sheets here. Many people give up complaining, as it is a futile process, and the airport does nothing about the problem. It takes time and energy to keep complaining. If people are upset by the plane noise, and make repeated complaints they are regarded as eccentric, odd, bored, neurotic, over-sensitive etc. But if there are no complaints, the airport says there is no problem - proved by the fact no-one contacted them. Catch 22. Or win-win for the airport.

Click here to view full story...