I do not understand how bringing the SAMPTON and MID tracks much closer together to the point where they are almost on the same track on leaving LHR can increase departure rates or resiliency and that there are many better ways of achieving the stated objectives by using a combination of improved navigation performance with good judgement and flexibility and neither do many other people I have spoken to in the real world and on here
Exactly, as I said yesterday, all the information explaining WHY the current trials DO make an impact and improvement is contained here in this thread, you are just not digesting or understanding it. The combination of improved navigation with good judgement has exhausted its limits, perfect navigation alongside further perfect navigation (I hesitate using 'perfect' but its the only word for now that improves what you think is acceptable) is the future. There will be plenty of opportunity in the new system for earlier directs to be given so the aircraft will not always follow the SIDs completely, however, in a trial, they must ALWAYS to gain the results needed. If ATC say "no delay" to an inbound, they can expect up to 20 minutes holding. Likewise a set time is built into departure taxi times allowing for time at the holding point. During "rush hour" this is all pushed to the limit, with the new routes "rush hour" can be eased and improved, saving huge amounts of fuel, CO2s & ultimately excess noise for the immediate surrounding areas. So the environmental issue is a huge driver behind these trials.This also includes those areas where the new proposed routes are now planned as aircraft are more likely to get continuous climb so will get higher earlier & avoid noisy "level-offs" both in and outbound. There are so many variables to operating an aircraft, change may look bad but the overall effect can be hugely beneficial.