Noise News
Below are links to stories about noise in relation to airports and aviation.
Airports Commission “Senior Delivery Group” report – on implementing (unpopular?) airspace changes
The Airports Commission's Senior Delivery Group - for implementation of airspace changes - was set up in the summer of 2014, by Patrick McLoughlin, on the suggestion of the Commission. It is led by the CAA. It produced its first report in July 2014 when it stated “the SDG will encourage the gathering of evidence to help strike the right balance between operational benefits and the impact on local communities affected by aircraft noise.” It has now produced its second report, a technical paper on the "Implementation of Performance-Based Navigation in the UK." This says: "The measures included in FAS are a pre-requisite for accommodating future growth in demand for aviation, regardless of whether there is a decision to build new runway capacity." It aims to ensure "local communities have a say in how the modernisation programme is delivered. Effective engagement with those that may be impacted by the changes is critical to the development of a modern, sustainable air transport route network." And "Before an airspace trial commences, there should always be a consideration of what level of consultation is appropriate and proportionate to the objectives of the trial and in view of its likely impact". The presumption throughout is that there will be more air travel, more flight paths, and these will be concentrated. Consultation with affected communities should be enough to solve the problem.... ?
Click here to view full story...
Uncertainties about if, and how comprehensively, Gatwick is logging aircraft noise complaints
Gatwick airport (and Heathrow too) were inundated with noise complaint since trialling new concentrated flight paths last year. However, there remains uncertainty about how the Gatwick process for counting and recording complaints. People who have felt the need to complain about numerous noisy flights have been informed that they can log no more than one complaint per day. People have been told they cannot use a "template" for their complaints, even though the airport's own reporting form is a template. The airport has now been asked to explain just what constitutes a "template" is, in their opinion. And how does this differ from being a bone fide 'enquiry' via email or letter? People are asking what has happened to the numerous complaints they have made over the past year or so, since the flight paths were altered. How many of these have been recorded, and how many have been dismissed? The lack of clarity means yet further reduction in trust in the airport by affected communities. There is concern that Gatwick gets to self regulate on the matter of collation of complaint data, which is seen as flawed. Gatwick downplays the extent of the problem saying "Complaint statistics can be extremely difficult to interpret as a large proportion of all our complaints originate from a very small group of individuals."
Click here to view full story...
Chairman of Gatwick GATCOM writes to Stewart Wingate, on withdrawal of routes with “detrimental effect”
The Chairman of GATCOM (the Gatwick Airport Consultative Committee) has written to Stewart Wingate, to try to get some clarification for his committee, on PRNAV departure SID implementation at Gatwick. GAL had undertaken to revert to conventional navigation and the withdrawal of P-RNAV where there has been a "detrimental effect" on local communities. GATCOM is disappointed that GAL does not appear to be honouring this undertaking and many members and local communities feel badly let down, particularly in view of the negative effects some of them are now experiencing. GATCOM is asking Gatwick Airport to withdraw a/any P-RNAV SID where it is deemed that there has been a detrimental effect on local communities and revert to conventional navigation at the earliest opportunity. They are asking Mr Wingate quite how such "detrimental effect" has been quantified in the CAA’s airspace change process. GATCOM says it is important that the way in which the Government’s policy of minimising the number of people impacted by aircraft overflight and noise is fully understood and measures put in place to fully compensate those suffering significant disturbance as a result of changes for loss of property value. Also GATCOM want the CEO of the CAA, Andrew Haines, to attend a meeting of GATCOM to explain his interpretation of the present position to members.
Click here to view full story...
Caroline Spelman says Birmingham Airport’s introduction of trial flight paths has risked permanently damaging relations with nearby residents
Caroline Spelman, MP for Meriden, has said that Birmingham Airport's poor handling of the introduction of new flight paths has risked permanently damaging relations with nearby residents. After the runway extension was completed, new flight paths were tested from May 2014 and people newly overflown were not treated well; they were not listened to and their suggestions were ignored. More than 2,000 residents living near the airport signed a petition, saying their lives were being made a misery by the aircraft noise. People around the airport have now lost trust in it, and this will take a lot to restore. Mrs Spelman said many in the local community had traditionally supported the airport, but this was changing due to the bad feeling created by the introduction of new flight paths. Transport Minister Robert Goodwill told the Commons: “I hope that the airport will listen to the concerns raised tonight and will act on them.” Birmingham airport has now announced its preferred flight path, which will involve planes turning so that they minimise noise levels over the village of Hampton-in-Arden. However, there needs to be a trial period to ensure this route does indeed minimise the level of noise experienced by residents. The airport will submit its preferred Option to the CAA in May for approval by the CAA in September.”
Click here to view full story...
City Airport wants to press ahead with controversial flight changes despite only 3% support in recent consultation
London City Airport wants to press ahead with controversial plans to concentrate flight paths despite only 3% of people backing them in the recent consultation. Its consultation ended in November 2014, and the airport produced a report report on the consultation on 13th February. The report now goes to the CAA for approval. London City Airport’s consultation was widely criticized in 2014. The airport had refused to leaflet or hold meetings in the areas that would be worst affected by the new concentrated flight paths. It justified its minimal consultation on the grounds that the changes it was proposing were not significant. Despite criticism from MPs, local authorities, residents’ groups and members of the Greater London Authority, London City has defended its consultation in its report to the CAA. It is also refusing to withdraw or modify its original plans. Residents’ organisation HACAN East, which coordinated much of the opposition to the changes, believes the airport has been typically arrogant and unresponsive - and not given any consideration to the possibility of respite for various areas, at different times of day. London City Airport expresses very little concern for its neighbouring communities. HACAN East say the fight by residents will continue, and they will be pressing the CAA to order the airport to carry out a fresh consultation.
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow’s improved offer of £700 million for noise compensation, if there was a 3rd runway, wouldn’t help residents in many areas
On the last day of the Airports Commission consultation about its 3 short-listed runway schemes, Heathrow Airport came up with a new, more widespread and more generous offer of compensation against aircraft noise, IF it got a new runway. However, this offer is not to be offered to residents in many affected areas, including Bracknell, Ascot or Wokingham. The £700 million that Heathrow says it would spend on noise insulation etc would only be for homes judged the worst affected by noise - with no homes south of Wraysbury included. The number of homes eligible for offered compensation will depend on the final design of flight paths from an expanded Heathrow, and those are not yet known. Residents in Bracknell and Ascot, who have been incensed by the aircraft noise to which they have been subjected this year, say that even if they were offered compensation it still would not be enough, and it would not solve the problem. Heathrow claims that flight paths and use of airspace in the area has reverted to its pre-trail state, but residents believe it has not. People are now much more aware of aircraft noise, and their tolerance for it has declined - and they know that no amount of money would be enough to keep the level of noise outside the house down, in gardens, parks, playgrounds and streets. Many believe the increased Heathrow offer, and its timing, is merely a PR stunt.
Click here to view full story...
National Trust claims Gatwick expansion would harm Wakehurst Place – and other historic properties
Wakehurst Place is a beautiful stately home in Sussex, owned by the National Trust. It is the country part of Kew Gardens botanical garden, with the world's largest seed conservation project. The wonderful old house has been used in many films. It is now one of the 13 historic properties that the National Trust says could be affected by a new Gatwick runway. These also include Penshurst Place in Kent, which was used as a location for current BBC Tudor drama "Wolf Hall." The National Trust said it was “highly sceptical” about proposed expansions to either Gatwick or Heathrow in its submission to the Airports Commission. The NT believes any airport expansion at either Heathrow or Gatwick would increase noise impact to residents and affect how people spend their leisure time. It has an impact on visitors to these historic and unique buildings. It also said it could affect filming possibilities at the venues because of increased aircraft noise. Hever Castle (former home of Anne Bolyen) is also very badly affected by noise from Gatwick landings, with real fears of reduced visitor numbers, if the amount of aircraft noise prevents the visit being a pleasant and peaceful experience.
Click here to view full story...
Bromley Council consultation on Biggin Hill Airport’s plans to greatly increase operating hours, especially at weekends
Biggin Hill airport is predominantly used by light aviation and business jets. It has operating hours at present of 6.30am to 10pm on weekdays, and 9am to 8pm on Saturdays and Sundays. However, the airport is now hoping to extend these significantly, by one hour more on weekdays, five and a half hours on Saturdays and four hours on Sundays. That would be a total of 114 hours per week. Local residents are very unhappy about this, and the local group, BRAAD (Bromley Residents Against Airport Development) is urging people to oppose this expansion, in the current consultation - which ends on on 13th March. BRAAD says Bromley is a peaceful residential borough, which attracts families from noisier environments because of the quality of life it has so far offered. However, Biggin Hill Airport has now expanded to the point of threatening the delicate balance between its business aspirations and the residents' rights to their amenities. The 114 hours proposed by Biggin Hill is much more than its rival private jet airports (London City, Farnborough, or Northolt - an the increase is largely at weekends, early in the morning and late at night, when people may find the noise even more intrusive.
Click here to view full story...
London City Airport expansion plan gets go-ahead but campaigners say it will create ‘noise ghettos and misery’
Newham Council has granted planning approval London City Airport's plans for an extended terminal, a new taxi-way and additional parking stands for larger aircraft. A new six-storey four-star hotel with up to 260 bedrooms will also be built on site. The expansion will increase the number of take-offs and landings at the airport from 70,000 a year to 111,000 and will almost double the number of passengers to 6 million a year by 2023. The number of aircraft stands will increase from 18 to 25, and the newer, larger planes they will accommodate will expand the airport’s reach from destinations in western Europe to Russia and North Africa. It has been described as a boost for London’s aviation capacity, while the arguments for and against a new runway at Heathrow or Gatwick (or neither) continue. There are claims for a large number of jobs, and Newham believes many will be for their residents - and there are claims of huge economic benefit for the local and UK economy. The expansion involves the tripling of the size of the terminal to 51,800 ft square and will see the number of flights increase from 38 to 45 during peak morning and evening rush hour times. Building work, subject to final planning approval being given by Boris, is expected to start by the end of 2015, with the first new aircraft seen on the runway in 2016.
Click here to view full story...
Gaping holes in Airports Commission’s analysis of airport expansion conceal potential environmental disaster
The Aviation Environment Federation, in their response to the Airports Commission consultation, says there are gaping holes in the Airports Commission's analysis of airport expansion. These conceal a potential environmental disaster. AEF says the Commission ran out of time to complete key pieces of research on greenhouse gas emissions and on air quality. AEF is calling on political parties not to accept the Commission's recommendations until all relevant evidence has been gathered and made available for public scrutiny. The gaps in the Commission's analysis include not completing local air quality modelling in time for the consultation, despite the Commission's assessment objective being "to improve air quality in line with EU air quality laws". Also not following the Committee on Climate Change's recommendation that the economic impact assessment of expansion must include the costs associated with meeting UK aviation emissions targets (which a nrw runway would probably breach); and not providing any analysis of how noise impacts would vary if different assumptions were made about the location of flight paths.