SInGAPORE_AIR
Posts: 11619
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2000 4:06 am

UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Thu Jul 27, 2006 2:39 am

Government in night flight U-turn

Plans that would have boosted night flights at three major UK airports have been dropped by the government.

The government had wanted to replace the current limits on the number of planes that can land between midnight and 6am with a noise quota.

It had argued that quieter modern planes meant more stringent noise limits could be set.

This averages out at about 16 a night.

More at BBC NEWS Online




How ridiculous. Passengers prefer night flights into the UK, especially from Asia and Australasia. For shame on the House of Lords.

[Edited 2006-07-26 19:41:10]
Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Thu Jul 27, 2006 2:49 am

Im with them on this, they have to take into consideration those surrounding the airports.
 
aGreatWayToFly
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2006 9:54 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Thu Jul 27, 2006 3:02 am

But surely, those people knew that there would be noise when they bought a place next to an airport. IMHO, if the airport was there first, it should be able to have as many flights as it wants, whenever it wants.
 
Demoose
Posts: 1891
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2001 8:06 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Thu Jul 27, 2006 3:05 am

This decision has nothing to do with passengers, it's to do with the lives of those who live under the flight paths to major airports.

I can see why they have rejected the decision to go ahead with the noise quota system, though i've always taken the view that people who choose to live around an airport should expect noise disturbance. (I know some people don't have a choice.)

Mark
Take a ride...fly across the sky
 
User avatar
SLCUT2777
Posts: 3407
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:17 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Thu Jul 27, 2006 3:08 am

I guess it is safe to say that NIMBY's live anywhere in the world and not just here in the USA.
DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6086
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Thu Jul 27, 2006 3:13 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 1):
Im with them on this, they have to take into consideration those surrounding the airports.

Watch out, you could be accused of siding with the dreaded NIMBY's (or even being one yuorself)! Oh My!

Seems very few here realize that most people don't think aviation is "all that" and that noise from airplanes is actually annoying.

A strange concept to us, I know.

Tug
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
TuRbUleNc3
Posts: 459
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Thu Jul 27, 2006 3:26 am

Quoting AGreatWayToFly (Reply 2):
But surely, those people knew that there would be noise when they bought a place next to an airport

Exactly.

Why buy a pad very close an airport then complain about noise?
NIMBY's will be partying in their little groups now they have heard that

And yes, id love to live very close to an airport, regardless of the noise
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Thu Jul 27, 2006 3:31 am

Quoting AGreatWayToFly (Reply 2):
But surely, those people knew that there would be noise when they bought a place next to an airport. IMHO, if the airport was there first, it should be able to have as many flights as it wants, whenever it wants.



Quoting Tugger (Reply 5):
Watch out, you could be accused of siding with the dreaded NIMBY's (or even being one yuorself)! Oh My!

I could do, except in this case the NIMBYs purchased their houses (in the vast majority of cases) when there was an agreement in place with Heathrow, Gatwick and Stanstead that there would be no night flights. That has been a public agreement for decades, and now certain people want to change it with no regard for the other side of the table. Are the NIMBYs really so wrong this time?

Yes the airport was there first (well, technically for a lot of these homes it wasnt, the villages surrounding the airports havent suddenly sprung into existence), but so was the law limiting night flights - that was a positive for the NIMBYs and perhaps a reason why they accepted living there, why should it arbitrarily be taken away?
 
eg777er
Posts: 1782
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2000 11:11 pm

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Thu Jul 27, 2006 3:36 am

Well, I live in Clapham and moved here on the understanding that yes, there is aircraft noise, but it varies by time of day and is limited between 11pm-6am. I'd be very pissed off if the latter in particular were to change.
 
Demoose
Posts: 1891
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2001 8:06 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Thu Jul 27, 2006 3:36 am

Reminds me of a funny story a guy I worked with at MAN told me,

Woman from Knutsford rings up Manchester Airport...

"'Yes hello, i've just paid £300,000 for my new house and I don't like the fact that the noise of the aircraft is affecting the price of my property and I want to know what you are going to do about?"

Reply: "Well i've just bought a terrace house in Manchester for £50,000 and I had the sense to check it wasn't near an airport first....bye bye now"

Mark
Take a ride...fly across the sky
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6086
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Thu Jul 27, 2006 4:54 am

The problem is the public can/will win ulitimately because they elect the people who make and change the laws. Piss off enough people for long enough and their voice grows to the point where they elect representatives that are hostile to the airport (or whatever). That is why all airports try to work with the people surrounding them to some degree, whether or not the airport "was there first".

Tug
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Thu Jul 27, 2006 4:56 am

Quoting Tugger (Reply 10):
That is why all airports try to work with the people surrounding them to some degree, whether or not the airport "was there first".

To all intent and purpose tho, with the London airports the people were there first - which is why there are laws on nightflights and limitations on expansion. Promises made by governments past.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6086
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flig

Thu Jul 27, 2006 5:17 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 11):

Agreed.
I am definitely saying that too many in this forum write off the public's complaints about aviation as whining or (my favorite) NIMBY's when for as far as I know the "public" has been here for centuries and flying just marked its centennial.

I think too many think that because somebody moved to an area near an airport they should have no say, when the exact opposite is true: The people who live in the area have the most to say and they say it loudly.

Flying is special to a very limited portion of the population. Most don't care, don't realize that it can be a vital economic engine, can't afford to fly (much), and are sometimes terrified (of flying or having a plane crash into the neighborhood) of it. This may not be sensible to some but I find that quite often humans are not very sensible.

The fortunate thing is that aircraft are getting quieter. Which goes a long way to ameliorating most of the public's concerns.

Tug

[Edited 2006-07-26 22:27:32]
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18261
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Thu Jul 27, 2006 5:44 am

Quoting Singapore_Air (Thread starter):
How ridiculous.

Why is it ridiculous?

Why should airlines be allowed to land or take off when they feel like it, without consideration for the rest of the community?

I can't imagine why anyone would want to arrive at (say) LHR at 3 in the morning.

Most (respectable) hotels don't rent their rooms by the half night.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
SInGAPORE_AIR
Posts: 11619
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2000 4:06 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Thu Jul 27, 2006 7:25 am

I can see where everyone comes from however:

1) I sympathise with those living under flight paths. I would like to see some financial and tangible assistance given to them to move to more appropriate locations to live.

2) No one wants to arrive at LHR at 0300h. However, airlines would like to arrive between 0500 and 0700 from the East and I suppose from the West too. SQ0322 is Singapore Airlines Limited's most popular, lucrative and profitable SIN - LHR service. It is also arguably SIA's most or near most profitable flight in the network. This seems to be down to the time of arrival. An airline based in Hong Kong operates two HKG - LHR services that arrive within 35 minutes of eachother (0545h / 0620h) and I presume they are making good yields because of it with their transit passengers to LHR.

3) It would be interesting to see what financial opportunity cost there is to the economy with regards to the restrictions of night arrivals at LHR.

4) While I wouldn't champion this, it however conceivably an arguable point:

"It is logical. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."



Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
 
donder10
Posts: 6944
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 5:29 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Thu Jul 27, 2006 8:26 am

What about daytime flights affecting night workers?
 
scotron11
Posts: 1181
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 4:54 pm

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flig

Thu Jul 27, 2006 2:08 pm

While respecting folks right to have a good nights sleep, I wonder what would be the outcome if they moved LHR somewhere else, in the middle of nowhere?

I believe some heritage society recently recommended the same so that LHR could become a giant housing estate.

I guarantee, for which I will provide signed copies, that if that was to happen, no matter where it was, you would have people living around it within a year. And within 20 years you would have the same folk shouting for restrictions on movements.

Then again, with the mess that is LHR, maybe they should do just that, creating a truly first class product in half the time versus the consultations on a 3rd runway presently.

Oh, but I forget, this is the UK, not the US, Europe or Asia!
 
CXA330300
Posts: 1258
Joined: Wed May 26, 2004 5:51 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flig

Thu Jul 27, 2006 3:00 pm

While I do feel sorry for the people who live under flight paths, making them move would be very difficult logistically. So would switching the flight times. So maybe the status quo is a good thing.

Speaking of night flights, why does the irrational situation exist where all UK-SA flights are in the evening and so are all but one SA-UK flights? It makes connections a pain in the ar5e from North America and Northern Europe.
AC/AA/UA/DL/B6/WN/US*/CO*/FI/BA/IB/AF/SK/LX/Sabena*/TK/LY/SA/MN/SW/AM/CE*/CX/CA/MU/JL/SQ/TG/MH/KA/5J
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Thu Jul 27, 2006 5:26 pm

Quoting Scotron11 (Reply 16):
While respecting folks right to have a good nights sleep, I wonder what would be the outcome if they moved LHR somewhere else, in the middle of nowhere?

If you find a 'middle of nowhere' in the UK, please let us know.
 
Gr8Circle
Posts: 2387
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:44 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Fri Jul 28, 2006 2:24 am

Quoting TuRbUleNc3 (Reply 6):
Why buy a pad very close an airport then complain about noise?

Remember that people who buy houses near an airport buy them with the understanding that there will be night curfews on flight ops....

Quoting AGreatWayToFly (Reply 2):
IMHO, if the airport was there first, it should be able to have as many flights as it wants, whenever it wants.

How about using the same argument for nuclear power plants or coal/oil fired plants that spew thick smoke over the neighborhood....or garbage dumps, etc.....all these facilities serve a purpose to society, just as airports do....yet, they are often required to move or close down so that people living in the vicinity are not affected.....

Quoting TuRbUleNc3 (Reply 6):
And yes, id love to live very close to an airport, regardless of the noise

Easier said than done....I have lived close to (not even under) the flight path of an airport like BOM, when it was not even half as busy as it is today.....I still remember the deafening noise we would have to encounter all through the night....
 
b6sea
Posts: 358
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 5:44 pm

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Fri Jul 28, 2006 2:37 am

Quoting Tugger (Reply 12):
Agreed.

I think too many think that because somebody moved to an area near an airport they should have no say, when the exact opposite is true: The people who live in the area have the most to say and they say it loudly.


The fortunate thing is that aircraft are getting quieter. Which goes a long way to ameliorating most of the public's concerns.

I agree with you, but not in a blanketing way. I think that it's similar to the government in the sense of checks and balances. The NIMBYs keep the airport in check and the Airport has an obligation to serve its region not just the NIMBYs, so good things happen for both. However, DO NOT buy a house near an airport and complain about how there is airplane noise unless you want to sound like a COMPLETE idiot. Also, in most places I can think of, the area directly surrounding the airport is never very desirable anyway.

-Chans
 
Glom
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Fri Jul 28, 2006 2:47 am

Quoting Gr8Circle (Reply 19):
How about using the same argument for nuclear power plants or coal/oil fired plants that spew thick smoke over the neighborhood....or garbage dumps, etc.....all these facilities serve a purpose to society, just as airports do....yet, they are often required to move or close down so that people living in the vicinity are not affected.....

Well not nuclear power plants since they don't generate noise, smell or air pollution.
 
Ken777
Posts: 9064
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Fri Jul 28, 2006 3:30 am

This is a situation will not be resolved in the short term, but can be improved on over time.

Passenger jets do make noise, but have improved significantly since the days of the 707. The key is to have continued improvements in the future, not only by government decree, but also by motivation - and a chance for increased landings at LHR and other airports with a similar problem can be a strong motivator.

There is also a need to legitimately address the problems faced by people living near the airports. Unfortunately it's rather important that people get a decent night's sleep. Having sleep apnea I know what it's like not to get decent sleep night after night - if nothing else it's a major cause of auto accidents.

To address the community some airports (SYD, I believe, is one) that provided "noise proofing" for homes in the impacted area. New sound reducing windows in the homes are a major aid, as are other forms of noise insulation.

By addressing the problems on both fronts LHR could probably have a reasonable increase in night traffic over time.
 
vv701
Posts: 5783
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Fri Jul 28, 2006 3:53 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 7):
I could do, except in this case the NIMBYs purchased their houses (in the vast majority of cases) when there was an agreement in place with Heathrow, Gatwick and Stanstead that there would be no night flights.

I know that flights into LHR between 2300 and 0600 local are severely restricted in numbers. Currently one is scheduled at 2305 and fourteen between 0500 and 0600. No aircraft arriving early is permitted to land before 0600 and there is a twenty minute gap in scheduled arrivals at this time to allow early arriving aircraft to land. So the restrictions are very strictly enforced. (By the way three of the fourteen flights are from HKG - all 744s - namely BA026 (0505 hrs), BA032 (0535 hrs) and CX251 (0545 hrs) with just two on trans-Atlantic service, namely BA212 from BOS (0515 hrs) and UA958 from DEN/ORD (0555 hrs).

However I did not realise there are night time restrictions at LGW. Certainly there are many arrivals (and departures) during every night there.

I've just checked the ACARS for LGW for 23 July at
http://www.lhr-lgw.co.uk/gatwick/jul06/jullgwmore06/mlgw230706.htm
and I count 50 movements between 0000 and 0600 hrs and they are spread not that unevenly right through the night. Do you know what the restriction is?
 
Demoose
Posts: 1891
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2001 8:06 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Fri Jul 28, 2006 4:00 am

MAN today put its Night Noise Policy out for consultation. Basically from next year 747-200's will be banned from flying between 11pm to 6:30am and 747-400's will be banned too, apart from those scheduled to depart during the day which are running late. So that'll not really affecting much at all, as PIA, Air Atlanta, Cathay and Dragonair are the only regular operators of these aircraft, non of which depart at night (usually).
Take a ride...fly across the sky
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Fri Jul 28, 2006 4:10 am

Quoting VV701 (Reply 23):
Do you know what the restriction is?

Movements restrictions:

Summer -
Heathrow 3250
Gatwick 11200
Stanstead 7000

Winter -
Heathrow 2550
Gatwick 5250
Stansted 5000

Noise restrictions (2003 - 2004, currently still in effect):

Numbers are against a Quota Count number issued to each type of aircraft (QC/16 for largest and loudest, QC/0.5 for smallest, a 777 is QC/1 typical)

Summer -
Heathrow 5610
Gatwick 9000
Stansted 4950

Winter -
Heathrow 4140
Gatwick 6640
Stansted 3550

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/group...ments/page/dft_aviation_503457.pdf
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flig

Fri Jul 28, 2006 4:36 am

Quoting VV701 (Reply 23):
However I did not realise there are night time restrictions at LGW. Do you know what the restriction is?

For S06, Gatwick is restricted to 11200 movements with a QC of 9000.

The biggest restriction kicks in for W06 though where movements are cut from 5200 to 3250 but the QC is totally slashed from 6640 to 2300. This of course was only notified in the week before SC118.  Yeah sure

Furthermore, any aircraft rated QC/4 or higher are banned from operating between 2300 and 0700.

[Edited 2006-07-27 21:41:37]
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
BHXFAOTIPYYC
Posts: 1442
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 5:47 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Fri Jul 28, 2006 5:47 am

I have a couple of friends that live near STN. They have neighbours who are right under a main flight path, which was OK until a couple of years ago before FR and U2 had exponential growth out of the airport. What was noise every couple of hours is now noise every 10 minutes. They'd like to move, but they can't get anywhere near what they would like for their house. I think if people move to places near LHR they can't complain much, but I have sympathy for people near smaller regional airports who didn't see such expansion coming.
Breakfast in BHX, lunch in FAO, dinner in TIP, baggage in YYC.
 
scotron11
Posts: 1181
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 4:54 pm

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Fri Jul 28, 2006 6:29 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 18):

If you find a 'middle of nowhere' in the UK, please let us know.

So, what do you propose? A "no vacancy" sign? Please divert all your traffic to CDG, FRA and AMS because we do not have space to accommodate you?

I must admit that the situation at LHR has benefited regional airports, which carriers like CO have taken full advantage of.
 
vv701
Posts: 5783
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Fri Jul 28, 2006 9:50 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 25):
Movements restrictions:

Many thanks for the data and the link.
 
User avatar
WildcatYXU
Posts: 2611
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 2:05 pm

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Fri Jul 28, 2006 10:03 am

Quoting Glom (Reply 21):
Well not nuclear power plants since they don't generate noise, smell or air pollution.

Well, people in vicinity of a nuclear power plant are trying to do exactly the opposite - conceal it. Few years ago, when I was still living in Pickering, OPG had a plan to build an early warning system. It would consist of an alarm device in every household within 3-km circle from the power plant combined with a grid of sirens, located within a 10 km circle. The whole system would be financed by OPG. The city hall, driven by homeowners, refused the proposal because of possible real-estate price drop.
310, 319, 320, 321, 333, 343, 345, 346, 732, 735, 73G, 738, 744, 752, 762, 763, 77L, 77W, 788, AT4, AT7, BEH, CR2, CRA, CR9, DH1, DH3, DH4, E75, E90, E95, F28, F50, F100, Saab 340, YAK40
 
Gr8Circle
Posts: 2387
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:44 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Fri Jul 28, 2006 10:31 am

Quoting Glom (Reply 21):
Well not nuclear power plants since they don't generate noise, smell or air pollution.

Radiation certainly doesn't cause any of those and it's quite apparent that's what I'm talking about.... sarcastic 
 
Glom
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Fri Jul 28, 2006 8:17 pm

Quoting Gr8Circle (Reply 31):
Radiation certainly doesn't cause any of those and it's quite apparent that's what I'm talking about....

They don't release any of that either. At least not anything remotely important. Coal fired power stations release more.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6691
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Fri Jul 28, 2006 8:38 pm

A previous poster said the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, its simplistic but who are the few and the many?
How important is aviation to the UK economy?
How important is Heathrow?

Presently, slots and landing rights at Heathrow are more precious than gold, also there are only 24hrs in a day, a limited number of runways, spacing between a/c on arrival / departure. A solution to this could be to start de-emphasizing LHR for new entrants to the UK market and "encouraging" others to relocate services to Gatwick, Stanstead, Manchester etc, basically increasing the cap on movements during the day at LHR.
If the thought is that LHR is too important to limit it even further, then where is the expansion going to come from, more runways, terminals etc.? How much money would have to be spent trying to increase it's capacity versus increasing service elsewhere?
Ultimately, the UK people and Govt. determine which airports airlines will use, the airlines can pressure but in the end they either take it or leave it.

An interesting question is how long will it take before airlines start looking elsewhere because of delays at LHR?
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12427
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Fri Jul 28, 2006 9:18 pm

You have people who live 5-10 miles away from major airports, and under the landing/holding patters who complain for years to their politicans about changing the patterns. I live in New Jersey, not far from EWR (hense part of my screen name) and there are constant battles as to flight patterns and their noise, especally south and west to EWR. There a number of night flights in/out of EWR (mainly freighters) and of course they don't want them either.
Many want patterns shifted from them to over waters or over some 'poorer' neighborhood. Problems are that making changes may place aircraft at greater operational and security risks. That can include extremely difficult traffic patterns, wake turbulance problems, areas where if an aircraft were to crash, it could end up in a densely populated area. Then you get the issue of 'enviromental racism' claims, if were to reroute over poorer and mainly non-white neighborhoods. In the post-9/11 era, some preferred flight patterns that affected fewer people had to be changed for security reasons, especially in DC and NY City areas.
For a number of years, people have become hypersensitive to aircraft noise as the prices of real estate have skyrocketed. They fear that their investment in a market overpriced home they can bearly afford will lose money due to the aircraft noise. Yet some of these people want to live reasonably close to their work in the cities near these airports. It is a constant problem that will only get worse.
 
Gr8Circle
Posts: 2387
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:44 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Fri Jul 28, 2006 9:32 pm

Quoting Glom (Reply 32):
Quoting Gr8Circle (Reply 31):
Radiation certainly doesn't cause any of those and it's quite apparent that's what I'm talking about....

They don't release any of that either. At least not anything remotely important. Coal fired power stations release more.

Uh-oh...you're either not getting the point or have decided not to get it!!

I'm referring to the fact that some environmental groups argue that the proximity of nuclear plants pose a threat to nearby residents in the event of an accident....think Chernobyl, Three Mile Is., etc....

The fact that a facility (be it a power plant, nuclear or otherwise, or an airport or a garbage dump or whatever) was there first, cannot be a reason for refusing to look at issues relating to restriction of operations to make life easier for people in the neighborhood....even if they moved in later....
 
Glom
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Sat Jul 29, 2006 12:03 am

Quoting Gr8Circle (Reply 35):
I'm referring to the fact that some environmental groups argue that the proximity of nuclear plants pose a threat to nearby residents in the event of an accident....think Chernobyl, Three Mile Is., etc....

But they're wrong.

Airports do generate noise. Fossil fuel power stations do generate pollution. Dumps do smell and are a contamination risk. In those cases, the NIMBYism has some legitimacy. But not in the case of a nuclear power station.

Must we always endulge the fuddites and fearmongerers?
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Sat Jul 29, 2006 12:57 am

Quoting Par13del (Reply 33):
Presently, slots and landing rights at Heathrow are more precious than gold, also there are only 24hrs in a day, a limited number of runways, spacing between a/c on arrival / departure.

For all those excuses, Heathrow's current constraining factors are artificial in nature - namely the hard cap on movements, the lack of mixed-mode operations and terminal capacity development delays.

The day that Heathrow loses the hard cap, implements mixed-mode and has T5's terminal capacity operational, you can immediately add 10-15% movements into the system.
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
vv701
Posts: 5783
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Sat Jul 29, 2006 11:14 am

Quoting B747-437B (Reply 37):
The day that Heathrow loses the hard cap, implements mixed-mode and has T5's terminal capacity operational, you can immediately add 10-15% movements into the system.

This is accurate and perfectly correct except for one thing, LHR will never loose its 'hard cap' which is 480,000 movements a year (against the current usage level of around 472,000).

The 480,000 limit was imposed by the Inspector at the Public Inquiry for T5. It is a legally binding condition.
 
Leskova
Posts: 5547
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 3:39 pm

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Sat Jul 29, 2006 4:28 pm

Quoting Singapore_Air (Thread starter):
Passengers prefer night flights into the UK, especially from Asia and Australasia.

As you say yourself later...

Quoting Singapore_Air (Reply 14):
No one wants to arrive at LHR at 0300h. However, airlines would like to arrive between 0500 and 0700 from the East and I suppose from the West too. SQ0322 is Singapore Airlines Limited's most popular, lucrative and profitable SIN - LHR service. It is also arguably SIA's most or near most profitable flight in the network. This seems to be down to the time of arrival. An airline based in Hong Kong operates two HKG - LHR services that arrive within 35 minutes of eachother (0545h / 0620h) and I presume they are making good yields because of it with their transit passengers to LHR.

First of all, profitability of airlines serving an airport is not a consideration in these matters, the people living around an airport are: and keep in mind that it's not just people living close to an airport that are affected - in Zürich you'll find communities 20km to the north that are very affected by airport noise, because Zürich was forced to alter its arrival and departure routes; when they bought their houses, there was no airport noise - there is now... do they have a right to complain or not? I think they do...

And this, as you call it, irrationality means the continuation of the status-quo: SQ can continue it's oh-so-profitable flight, just as that "airline based in Hong Kong" (in case you've forgotten their name: it's Cathay Pacific) can continue their flights.

The only thing this really prevents is arrivals at 3am - and, as you've said yourself, no-one wants to arrive then... granted... some probably wouldn't mind, as long as the flight is cheap enough, but that would somewhat negate the whole profitability-issue...

Other airlines and airports live with curfews, and they live quite well: LHR won't take a hit because of this, neither will BA, SQ, CX, VS or whoever else flies there.

Whether or not they'd have preferred the rules to change, they know them and have worked with them for quite a while now - and they'll continue to do just that.
Smile - it confuses people!
 
Gary2880
Posts: 1856
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 8:52 pm

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Sat Jul 29, 2006 5:17 pm

we have this wonderful councilor in Aberdeen. always moaning about the airport, he lives inches from the visitors parking apron.

if i'm not mistaken the airport was probably there way before he decided to move there. unless he didn't view the house before he bought it, or visited in a thick fog (hancock) he would have noticed the airport! and got a cheaper house because of it!

Stop moaning! and let me live there if you hate it so much!

/rant.
Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel :- Samuel Johnson
 
Glom
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Sat Jul 29, 2006 7:03 pm

Quoting Gary2880 (Reply 40):
we have this wonderful councilor in Aberdeen. always moaning about the airport,

But Aberdeen has hardly any activity going on and it's mostly RJs and turboprops.
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Sun Jul 30, 2006 12:20 am

Quoting VV701 (Reply 38):
LHR will never loose its 'hard cap' which is 480,000

"Never" is a rather strong word. It would take another public inquiry for it to be revised or overturned, but it will happen eventually.
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: UK Govt. Bows To Irrationality Over Night Flights

Sun Jul 30, 2006 12:25 am

Personally I think the best thing to do is this:

1. Upgrade LHR LGW and STN to two runways each
2. Install a dedicated highcapacity and highfrequency transport system for free use
3. Operate the three airports as one single one
4. Amend the CAA bill so that under law there is no more expansion at anymore than one site for the next 50 years.

This is doable, and viable when you consider how spread out these airports each already are, moving between them on a dedicated subway or train system would be comparable to some of the movements you currently have to do between LHR terminals anyway.

Yes, it would take longer but thats the price.

This way, no one airport gets a massive increase in traffic AND London gets the upgrade it desperately needs.

Nightflights could be rotated through each of the airports.

Thoughts?