Brussels - rwh 20 for take offs
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brussels - rwh 20 for take offs
We - in Brussels - are facing insane politicians forcing acft to use rwy 20 for T.O.
I am hearing the flying crews saying the same.
Do we need an air crash on a densely populated area to make people think twice?!
I am hearing the flying crews saying the same.
Do we need an air crash on a densely populated area to make people think twice?!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if you are from Brussels ya better check the maps and drive around. Rwy 20 takes you straight into the most populated areas of Brussels and jut check altitude of acft taking off... so low that I could say hi to the captain!!!!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tgdxb
Sounds like you are one of those anti-aviation people more concerned with your back garden than safety, ie ok for the people on the 25(R) departure tracks to have the noise so long as it's not me.
Departures off 20 will be at a higher altitude than arrivals onto 02, which happens I guess about 10% of the time.
Sounds like you are one of those anti-aviation people more concerned with your back garden than safety, ie ok for the people on the 25(R) departure tracks to have the noise so long as it's not me.
Departures off 20 will be at a higher altitude than arrivals onto 02, which happens I guess about 10% of the time.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Topbunk,
you got it wrong, I am actually an aviation fanatic and do exercise a profession in aviation.
Have you been on the ground? Based on your comments I have some doubt. BTW what did happen at LHR when you open the public hearing re. the new T5? How would British citizens react if West Drayton or the Hampshire ATC centre - of which I am forgetting th name now - would disperse landings & T.O. all around London? Hmmmmm....
My view of a cost-effective way to address this and night T.O. disturbance is (1) to concentrate the noise and support people most impacted and (2) to use longer rwy when you have got them.
Just take into account that people under 25R have been there for ages and that any newcomer can't ignore the issue.
When I came to live where I am now, there were no T.O. on rwy 20, no night traffic and I can't find any traffic forecast traffic at BRU pointing out to this as a possibility.
I love aviation but I hate insensible decisions, which is definitely what it is on using rwy 20.
Now it is up to you to believe me or not.
Wish you a nice weekend.
you got it wrong, I am actually an aviation fanatic and do exercise a profession in aviation.
Have you been on the ground? Based on your comments I have some doubt. BTW what did happen at LHR when you open the public hearing re. the new T5? How would British citizens react if West Drayton or the Hampshire ATC centre - of which I am forgetting th name now - would disperse landings & T.O. all around London? Hmmmmm....
My view of a cost-effective way to address this and night T.O. disturbance is (1) to concentrate the noise and support people most impacted and (2) to use longer rwy when you have got them.
Just take into account that people under 25R have been there for ages and that any newcomer can't ignore the issue.
When I came to live where I am now, there were no T.O. on rwy 20, no night traffic and I can't find any traffic forecast traffic at BRU pointing out to this as a possibility.
I love aviation but I hate insensible decisions, which is definitely what it is on using rwy 20.
Now it is up to you to believe me or not.
Wish you a nice weekend.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Avman,
given you know Brussels you should be aware of what I say and describe in my posting.
I do accept you may disagree dependent on where you live but I would love people to prove me wrong in what I am saying.
Anyway thks to all for your open comments which is why I value such a forum. It helps understand why we ar ein such a nightmarish situation around the airport.
BTW Avman are you working for BelgoControl?
given you know Brussels you should be aware of what I say and describe in my posting.
I do accept you may disagree dependent on where you live but I would love people to prove me wrong in what I am saying.
Anyway thks to all for your open comments which is why I value such a forum. It helps understand why we ar ein such a nightmarish situation around the airport.
BTW Avman are you working for BelgoControl?
Rwy 20 is a perfectly adequate runway. Why should there be any additional risk of an a/c crashing on departure because it's using 20? If an aircraft was to crash just after departure on 20 it would indeed come down in a populated area. However, my valid argument is that this would be no different to a departure on 25R or 25L (yes, 25L is sometimes used by US carriers). Many airports around the world are surrounded by highly populated areas. So, I don't see what your point is, other than personal rather than a real concern for your community. If aeroplanes over your house worry you, why did you move in to a house in such close proximity to a runway? Oh, and finally, RWY 02 has been regularly used for arrivals for years, thus overflying the same "populated area". Don't aeroplanes crash on landing too! Yet this has apparently never bothered you. You and many others may not enjoy the noisy consequence, but there is no inherent compromise to safety in a/c using RWY 20 for departure.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Avman - I agree with you. I would ask that 'aviation friendly' tgbxd tells us exactly where he lives in relation to the 20 take off path. One thing is for sure, I bet he doesn't live anywhere near the 25R take off path!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TopBunk,
pls do not be so contentious. Everyone has the right of his opinion, including you. And I do respect it.
Avman,
you didn't answer whether you are working for BelgoControl?
In short, answers tosome of your points:
- I do live just under turning point of widebodies after T.O.
- I moved in in 86 - 02 was only used and to a maximum of 15-20 days/year. We knew it & accepted it, especially because of low noise level at landings.
- this part of Brussels was known to be quiet and pleasant, except for these 20d of 02 use and T.O. overfly from 25L or 25R. They were high enough not to ovely disturb.
- There are no studies available in the 90's forecasting nightly T.O. and such a repeated use of 20.
- 25L & 25R being longer permit higher rotate speed and climb rates provided this rule is enforced by Belgocontrol which I doubt.
- Given the altitude of oveflying widebodies, their rotate point must be quite down 20!!!!!
- why not close the airport 23:00-07:00 as do most of the surrounding airports?
- BRU is a second zone airport anyway given it missed its window of opportunity and is now so happy and dependent on DHL & charter flights (dixit P. Klees recently).
- 02 could not be used for T.O. because it is not long enough & downwind, dixit a BelgoControl executive. I repeat, a,n executive.
- people ruling or applying the rules aren't usually living in the areas affected. So, difficult to believe they understand the consequences of their decision.
- and no, I am not isolated and you will see this more & more. Just ask the airport mediator about the number of complaints files. After all, our part of Brussels get ABSOLUTELY NO benefits from the airport.
pls do not be so contentious. Everyone has the right of his opinion, including you. And I do respect it.
Avman,
you didn't answer whether you are working for BelgoControl?
In short, answers tosome of your points:
- I do live just under turning point of widebodies after T.O.
- I moved in in 86 - 02 was only used and to a maximum of 15-20 days/year. We knew it & accepted it, especially because of low noise level at landings.
- this part of Brussels was known to be quiet and pleasant, except for these 20d of 02 use and T.O. overfly from 25L or 25R. They were high enough not to ovely disturb.
- There are no studies available in the 90's forecasting nightly T.O. and such a repeated use of 20.
- 25L & 25R being longer permit higher rotate speed and climb rates provided this rule is enforced by Belgocontrol which I doubt.
- Given the altitude of oveflying widebodies, their rotate point must be quite down 20!!!!!
- why not close the airport 23:00-07:00 as do most of the surrounding airports?
- BRU is a second zone airport anyway given it missed its window of opportunity and is now so happy and dependent on DHL & charter flights (dixit P. Klees recently).
- 02 could not be used for T.O. because it is not long enough & downwind, dixit a BelgoControl executive. I repeat, a,n executive.
- people ruling or applying the rules aren't usually living in the areas affected. So, difficult to believe they understand the consequences of their decision.
- and no, I am not isolated and you will see this more & more. Just ask the airport mediator about the number of complaints files. After all, our part of Brussels get ABSOLUTELY NO benefits from the airport.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: ME
Posts: 5,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tgdxb,
As a regular cargo operator into BRU, I have to state that you have one of the most annoying set of noise policies that we have to deal with in Europe.
If the rules become any more stringent, we will seriously consider moving our operations to Liege or even Ostend. If a number of other operators followed our lead, just think what it would do to your house prices with the rising unemployment surrounding the airport!
Mutt.
As a regular cargo operator into BRU, I have to state that you have one of the most annoying set of noise policies that we have to deal with in Europe.
If the rules become any more stringent, we will seriously consider moving our operations to Liege or even Ostend. If a number of other operators followed our lead, just think what it would do to your house prices with the rising unemployment surrounding the airport!
Mutt.
Since I don't have a Brussels National (or Zaventem) plan in mind would someone be kind enough and explain me which Communities are affected by the use of Rwy 02/20 and 25R/L
For some reasons the idea o fbasing aeronautical decisions in financial clout and / or political influence crossed my mind.
Yours truly,
Rwy in Sight
For some reasons the idea o fbasing aeronautical decisions in financial clout and / or political influence crossed my mind.
Yours truly,
Rwy in Sight
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Mutt,
re. the value of my real estate - well consider I did try to sell it recently because I had enough of it. Believe it or not but it lost 20% of its value due to recently increased noise disturbance!!!!!! So I am even losing on my own money for things that other people are benefitting from.
Due to my involvement in the aviation business I'll tell you my personal conviction that BRU should be closed and a new airport built elsewhere. Everyone would benefit from it: Brussels & surroundings first, but Belgian economy, as well, through the huge building work and the operators thks to reduced infighting.
If our politicians and all reasonable people could think a bit before taking stupid decisions...
Rwy in Sight,
it is a fact of the matter that BRU benefits most to the Flemish community w/ more than 93% of employees overall, including the operators.
I am French speaking and when I wanted to get a job at SN some while ago I was told about the imbalance in favour of French speaking people and the need to hire more Flemish. Let's think about it. Food for thought...
re. the value of my real estate - well consider I did try to sell it recently because I had enough of it. Believe it or not but it lost 20% of its value due to recently increased noise disturbance!!!!!! So I am even losing on my own money for things that other people are benefitting from.
Due to my involvement in the aviation business I'll tell you my personal conviction that BRU should be closed and a new airport built elsewhere. Everyone would benefit from it: Brussels & surroundings first, but Belgian economy, as well, through the huge building work and the operators thks to reduced infighting.
If our politicians and all reasonable people could think a bit before taking stupid decisions...
Rwy in Sight,
it is a fact of the matter that BRU benefits most to the Flemish community w/ more than 93% of employees overall, including the operators.
I am French speaking and when I wanted to get a job at SN some while ago I was told about the imbalance in favour of French speaking people and the need to hire more Flemish. Let's think about it. Food for thought...
tgdxb the more I read your posts the more I'm convinced that you have one big chip on your shoulder. No, make it chips!
Apart from the fact that 02 has been used for take-off regularly for years (or did you mean to say 20), what absolute tosh! No pilot will accept using a runway if it is outside his aircraft's performance limits.
02 could not be used for T.O. because it is not long enough & downwind
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Avman,
I am accepting your statement.
I would just add that the pilots I have been talking to are speaking differently from you and this is why I wanted some sort of additional feedback.
At least you could not deny that 25L & 25R are longer than 20 and why did we extend 25L if the 20 length was sufficient(ly comfortable)? Remember, the public sector went about expropriating people - or at least buy their ground - to extend 25L.
The more we go on about this thread and the more I am getting concerned.
One thing this all teaches us is that such decisions should not be unilateral and... all... concerned parties should be part of it so as to get their buy-in. We very much feel this wasn't the case and that everything is done to wipe us off. Remember, this is not only my position. I understand that more than 10,000 complaints were filed with the airport mediator, although I reckon I do not know about the specifics of each.
I am accepting your statement.
I would just add that the pilots I have been talking to are speaking differently from you and this is why I wanted some sort of additional feedback.
At least you could not deny that 25L & 25R are longer than 20 and why did we extend 25L if the 20 length was sufficient(ly comfortable)? Remember, the public sector went about expropriating people - or at least buy their ground - to extend 25L.
The more we go on about this thread and the more I am getting concerned.
One thing this all teaches us is that such decisions should not be unilateral and... all... concerned parties should be part of it so as to get their buy-in. We very much feel this wasn't the case and that everything is done to wipe us off. Remember, this is not only my position. I understand that more than 10,000 complaints were filed with the airport mediator, although I reckon I do not know about the specifics of each.
Re the 10,000 petitions, I feel that a petition against the state (central or communal) for reason of noise is seen as an easy way to get some relative quick cash. Zaventem has been there for 40+ year and people just came around realizing how annoying is. SInce enviromental concerns become more important.
Give airline business a break
Rwy in Sight
Give airline business a break
Rwy in Sight
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rwy in Sight,
... because it is getting beyond limits and out of control!!!!!!!
Any clever business management system puts in place measurement and metrics as well as control systems to make decision makers accountable. I'd like to see this in the case of BRU.
Some 'smartly' biased politicians and uncontrolled airport authorities make decisions about airport operations which are not necessarily agreed to by the community surrounding them. Like it or not, we have the right to express our disagreement as much as you do about us. Period.
BTW I would prefer this forum to be a panel for exchanging views and clarifications rather than blames. We might all benefit from better understanding each other's opinion and seeking solutions... together.
... because it is getting beyond limits and out of control!!!!!!!
Any clever business management system puts in place measurement and metrics as well as control systems to make decision makers accountable. I'd like to see this in the case of BRU.
Some 'smartly' biased politicians and uncontrolled airport authorities make decisions about airport operations which are not necessarily agreed to by the community surrounding them. Like it or not, we have the right to express our disagreement as much as you do about us. Period.
BTW I would prefer this forum to be a panel for exchanging views and clarifications rather than blames. We might all benefit from better understanding each other's opinion and seeking solutions... together.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: n/a
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We might all benefit from better understanding each other's opinion and seeking solutions... together.
Again I point out that you do not get NO benifit from the airport. DHL alone provide over 200 million in tax to the Beligian Govt.
As to the location of BRU, plenty of airports around the world are as close to the cities they serve as communities have expanded towards the airports initialy remote location. Why do cities expand TOWARDS airports? Because airports provide JOBS.
And if as you claim safety is your motivation why are we doing turns at 700feet off runway 20 to avoid overflying the local community. It would be much easier for us just to climb straight ahead.
tgdxb
Do you really think that the communes ( those beneath the RW20 departure path)of St Peters Woluwe,Zaventem and Tervuren are <<the most densely populated in Brussels>>?I would be most curious to know the basis for your assertion.
Do you really think that the communes ( those beneath the RW20 departure path)of St Peters Woluwe,Zaventem and Tervuren are <<the most densely populated in Brussels>>?I would be most curious to know the basis for your assertion.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
when you see how quiet BRU is throughout the day I would start filling in these slots before expanding night traffic. I see that many leading European airports are closed at night (see LHR to only name one & I believe FRA may also be one). What makes BRU so different and so critically employment dependent that there is absolutely no other choice but increasing night T.O. on 20. And why is all this T.O. traffic systematically over us on Sundays between 5:12AM and 17:00?
Soddit,
I would say, they are the most densely populated ones for taking off a/c still at low altitude, thus when noise is the highest and most disturbing. The rotate speed will be lower than on 25R and therefore climb rate will be affected. I have been overflown by a/f taking off from 25R since I moved here and have pretty much accepted it, although it may be noisy, as well.
Soddit,
I would say, they are the most densely populated ones for taking off a/c still at low altitude, thus when noise is the highest and most disturbing. The rotate speed will be lower than on 25R and therefore climb rate will be affected. I have been overflown by a/f taking off from 25R since I moved here and have pretty much accepted it, although it may be noisy, as well.