Originally Posted by
stewyb
You are well respected on this thread so what alternatives do you suggest?
Thank you for your kind comment. As indicated by cavokblues the current Section 106 can be amended but could be a very costly exercise with no guarantee of success for AGS.
From what I recollect from the original, which I have no evidence to show that it has been amended, despite making several requests to EBC for a copy, it is overdue for a review, but in the current financial climate no doubt the question is "who pays?".
There is no longer a need for the Section 106 to ban Concorde or B747s from using the airport. Albeit we did get both within a few hundred feet of the runway on a number of occasions!
The main focus of the original Section 106 was noise, which with the advent of the A320 Neos and others is a fraction of what we had when it was first written.
Due to the night movement restrictions specified in the 106 the ATC manning was/is tailored to it, with little or no flexibility (due to duty time limitations) to cover delayed arrivals. These I believe are in fact permitted under the current agreement, the requirement being that they are not originally scheduled after 2300HR. It was/is inevitably the non-availability of ATC staff that has caused diversions of late arrivals..