Noise News
Below are links to stories about noise in relation to airports and aviation.
Chicago voters get chance to be heard in public ballot on O’Hare airport noise problem
Chicago O'Hare airport has a new 4th runway that opened in October 2013 as well another new 5th runway that is due to open in late 2015. Others are planned. Since the start of 2014 there has been a distinct change in the flight paths, and huge opposition to the change. The number of complaints to the airport have risen sharply, month after month. However (and how often this has been heard from UK airports too) the authorities claim the numbers are false, as some people complain multiple times. This masks the fact that some don't complain at all, being unsure how to, and being unconvinced that the airport will take any notice whatsoever. There is now a ballot of residents in 7 affected suburbs of Chicago, but all such referendums in Illinois are only "advisory." The questions being asked are on whether the FAA should create and enforce mandatory "fly-quiet" hours around O'Hare. The restrictions would replace the existing voluntary guidelines that ask airlines and pilots to try to reduce noise impacts after 10 pm. Another asks if aircraft noise should be reduced after 7pm, and people are also asked about more noise insulation being available.
Click here to view full story...
US research says claims airports are a city’s “economic engine” are overstated, especially compared to other local infrastructure
An Associate Professor at the University of Illinois, Julie Cidell, has investigated some of the claims made by airports, in the US in particular, that they are important drivers of the economy. And she is not persuaded that any better than other major bits of infrastructure. Julie has looked at the 25 largest US airports, and their benefits, compared to the costs - the latter being very high for airports. Often economic benefits accrue to areas distant from the airport, so those suffering the noise, pollution and traffic congestion get little advantage, but huge disadvantage. She also finds that airports tend to have other economic activity around them, but that is not necessarily connected directly to the airport. Correlation and causation are different. Often the jobs in the vicinity of an airport are due to nearby industry, and good transport links - not due to air travel. Jobs could just as easily be created by these other sectors, causing far less negative local impact, let alone carbon emissions. While for some regional airports, an air link may bring economic growth - for major cities, it is the other way round.
Click here to view full story...
Gatwick gets a study done, showing (surprise!) that another Heathrow runway would be very noisy …
Gatwick has produced yet another study, which it hopes enhances the chances of its runway bid. This one takes a look at the amount of noise that a 3rd Heathrow runway would - undeniably - bring. Gatwick hopes to show that far more people would be affected by a Heathrow runway than by a Gatwick runway, which is true if just the number of homes over-flown is considered. The study somewhat backfires on Gatwick, as it shows clearly just how much noise and environmental damage is done by an airport with two runways (which is what Gatwick is lobbying for). Having found, from their own consultation locally there is very little support for a new runway, Gatwick has taken to getting surveys done of Londoners, who (surprise, surprise) would prefer not to have yet more noise misery from Heathrow. Gatwick appears to completely ignore the very real issue that aircraft noise, in rural or semi-rural areas with low ambient noise, needs to be considered differently.There are separate noise standards for rural places, with noise being regarded as intrusive about 10dB lower. This is predictably just a very self-serving study, ignoring any inconvenient facts for Gatwick
Click here to view full story...
Residents and city officials in Palo Alto area gear up to fight increased San Francisco aircraft noise
People in Palo Alto, California, (about 40 km south east of San Francisco) and surrounding areas have become increasingly concerned about the recent increase in aircraft noise. As for so many areas in Europe, they are being subjected to more concentrated flight paths, as the FAA works to make airspace more efficient, in their programme called NextGen (Next Generation Air Transportation System). People are getting together to oppose the changes, which have significantly increased the perceived noise for many people since NextGen was started across the Bay Area. "Citizens' groups are springing up along the Midpeninsula with the support of their city governments." "The NextGen changes have alarmed communities across the nation where the program has rolled out. Starting in June 2012 over Queens, New York, planes began flying at low altitudes every 20 seconds to a minute from 6 am to midnight...." The SFO Community Roundtable addresses airport noise issues and represents every major city in San Mateo County, just south of San Francisco. There are also concerns that FAA is freeing up airspace, by flight path concentration, for drones that may have economic benefits
Click here to view full story...
Hundreds of villagers from Brockham, Betchworth, Beare Green etc protest over Gatwick flightpath changes
Hundreds of people packed into Beare Green Village Hall to protest against the recent flightpath changes out of Gatwick. The meeting was organised by, and chaired by the recently formed action group "Plane Wrong" which has been set up by people in Beare Green, Betchworth, Brockham, Capel, Coldharbour, the Holmwoods and Dorking, who have all been affected by increased aircraft noise nuisance. The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) approved the flightpath changes in August last year following a much-criticised consultation by Gatwick,which was far too complex and badly written for non-experts to understand. Plane Wrong will be educating communities about what they can do to stand up to the flight path threats, and getting more and more people involved in the fight. Plane Wrong has an online petition to the CAA. People are now increasingly aware of the threat of a 2nd runway. Mole Valley MP Sir Paul Beresford told the meeting: “If you think this is a problem now, wait and see if we get a second runway. We have an enormous battle on our hands ."
Click here to view full story...
New action group, Plane Wrong, fights Gatwick flight path changes north of the airport
A new local action group, "Plane Wrong", opposing changes of Gatwick flight paths, and the sudden increase in plane noise for some areas, has been formed. Changes to a flight path, heading west and north of Gatwick are affecting - and causing annoyance and distress to - thousands of people across parts of Surrey. The flight path is now making a wider turn. Plane Wrong has been established by people in Beare Green, Betchworth, Blackbrook, Brockham, Capel, Coldharbour, the Holmwoods, Leigh, Leith Hill, Redhill and Reigate. The group argues that there have been insufficient trials and consultations about the changes. The increased noise is damaging the environment, especially the AONB surrounding Leith Hill. Plane Wrong has organised two public meetings, on 22nd and 23rd October, to which the CAA was invited to explain its flight path changes. Plane Wrong has a petition to the CAA, asking it to stop the new route. Plane Wrong say that “If this flight path is not reversed, it sets a precedent for airspace changes to be made without proper consideration for the impact it has on the local surrounding areas and population."
Click here to view full story...
Meeting in Bagshot on 10th October does little to reassure or convince those affected by flight path changes
About 200 Windlesham, Lightwater and Bagshot residents attended a meeting in Bagshot on 10th October to get answers on flightpath trials at Heathrow. They heard from their MP, Michael Gove and Heathrow staff (Matt Gorman, Mark Burgess) and Ian Jopson from NATS. The flightpath trials are to end on November 12, two and a half months earlier than first planned, because Heathrow bosses say they have collected enough data - and there has been an unprecedented level of public opposition. Further trials due to begin this month have been postponed until autumn 2015. Matt Gorman admitted there was insufficient notice given to villagers, and not enough information shared about what was happening and why. He said: “There is a concentration of flights over areas that have had fewer in the past. That has caused some concern." Such statements do very little to defuse the anger. He also said the practices during the trials would not become permanent, but needed to be tested to assess noise levels and how the planes turn. It is likely that the level of trust in the airport and the aviation authorities was not increased, following their performance at the meeting.
Click here to view full story...
Over 1,000 attend packed Ascot protest meeting against Heathrow flight path trials
A hostile audience grilled Heathrow officials over trial flight paths at a public meeting in Ascot on 13th October. It was standing room only in the Pavilion at Ascot Racecourse as well over 1,000 people gathered to question the airport about the trials which have affected residents across Bracknell, Ascot and the surrounding villages. The airport has received a deluge of complaints from residents about the 'intolerable' and unacceptable noise caused by aircraft flying over their homes since the trials began in August. Angry residents asked about the level of noise, impact of air pollution and about the data the airport are collecting. They want the trial to stop, and for these flight path plans to be abandoned. Following the protests, Heathrow agreed to shorten the trials. Instead of ending in January, they will now end on November 12. Heathrow officials were stunned by the turnout, and are now in no doubt that they will have to radically reassess the extent of noise misery that people living in the areas affected by Heathrow are prepared to put up with in future.
Click here to view full story...
Luton plans to change flight paths for departing aircraft submitted to CAA for approval
Luton airport held a consultation on changing some of its flight paths, between March and June. The changes involve using precision navigation, RNAV, enabling aircraft to fly more precise routes. In effect this means the flight paths are concentrated, and the the aircraft are all channelled down a specific track. The trial departure route is the one which heads out to the west and then turns left to navigate between Markyate and Flamstead, and left again to navigate between Hemel and St Albans to the south, and Redbourn and Harpenden to the north. Previously, its planes had not made this second turn at all accurately. For people who do not live very close to that track, it’s probably a better way to control wayward flights. But those who live underneath it may get all the flights thundering overhead. Luton has now submitted its proposals to the CAA for approval. The Safety and Airspace Regulation Group (SARG) will analyse the consultation feedback and technical merits behind the proposal against the requirements. Assuming all the necessary information has been provided, the SARG aim to provide a decision within 16 weeks.
Click here to view full story...
Open letter to London City Airport asking that they consult properly on flight path changes, and treat people fairly
London City Airport is proposing to concentrate flight paths, in the same way that other airports have been doing recently. This is how air traffic controllers, NATS and the CAA want airspace to be used in future, in order to fit more aircraft into our already very crowded skies. However, London City Airport decided not go give any prior notice to anyone about the changes, except their Consultative Committee, or any warning about the substantial increase in aircraft noise for those unlucky enough to be under one of the new concentrated routes. It seems even local councils were not notified. Local community group, HACAN East, have now written an open letter to the airport, to complain. HACAN East says the flight path proposals will have a profound effect – for the worse – on the lives of tens of thousands of Londoners. This is deeply inequitable. While the airport makes out that the proposed changes are not significant as the planned flight paths are not noticeably different from the current routes. That is incorrect. There is now a concentrated line. Thousands living in Bow, Leytonstone, Wansted, Catford, Brixton and Vauxhall are very well aware there is a significant change. And that these are seen as unfair.