ABZ 24hr opening-OFFICIAL
Fit like min?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ...
Posts: 2,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ABZ 24hr opening-OFFICIAL
At a full meeting of Aberdeen City Cooncil,councillors voted 21-18 in favour of unrestricted opening hours at ABZ.
The official change to 24hr opening should take approx 8wks from now.
It was a close vote & a contentious issue,however councillors decided to vote for 24hr opening for the greater economic good of the region as a whole.
Just watch those aircraft flood in now...
The official change to 24hr opening should take approx 8wks from now.
It was a close vote & a contentious issue,however councillors decided to vote for 24hr opening for the greater economic good of the region as a whole.
Just watch those aircraft flood in now...
Fit like min?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ...
Posts: 2,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BBC Scotland interviewed ABZ MD Andy Flower at 6.40pm...in the dark...in an ABZ snowstorm!
Then in the pre-recorded piece,they spoke to one of the objectors,only his voice was drowned out by...A TORNADO ON A PRACTICE DIVERSION!
Why do I have the feeling of "serves 'em right"!
Then in the pre-recorded piece,they spoke to one of the objectors,only his voice was drowned out by...A TORNADO ON A PRACTICE DIVERSION!
Why do I have the feeling of "serves 'em right"!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Blairgowrie,Scotland
Age: 75
Posts: 692
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not quite the whole story!
It is to be a maximum of FOUR aircraft per night,on a two year trial basis.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4312677.stm
It is to be a maximum of FOUR aircraft per night,on a two year trial basis.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4312677.stm
Fit like min?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ...
Posts: 2,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correct re the 4 flights to be scheduled outwith the current restrictions,wrong re the trial period.
The Planning Committee voted for a 2yr trial,but the full Council did not place this restriction on the airport in the final decision yesterday.
The BAA made it clear they did not want to see a 2yr trial,& this restriction has not been placed on them.
If it had been,the BAA wouldn't have been so delighted at the outcome.
The Planning Committee voted for a 2yr trial,but the full Council did not place this restriction on the airport in the final decision yesterday.
The BAA made it clear they did not want to see a 2yr trial,& this restriction has not been placed on them.
If it had been,the BAA wouldn't have been so delighted at the outcome.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well i have to say it's about time!!
There was nothing worse than having to divert to EDI or GLA and endure a 3hr bus journey, and i have done it as both a Passanger and Crew.
This is possibly the only decision i have ever agreed with Aberdeen City Council on.
Here is a link from the local rag about a possible new carrier as a result of this decision.
http://www.thisisnorthscotland.co.uk...entPK=11926173
Nice one!
Rooster
There was nothing worse than having to divert to EDI or GLA and endure a 3hr bus journey, and i have done it as both a Passanger and Crew.
This is possibly the only decision i have ever agreed with Aberdeen City Council on.
Here is a link from the local rag about a possible new carrier as a result of this decision.
http://www.thisisnorthscotland.co.uk...entPK=11926173
Nice one!
Rooster
CH3CH2OH
Fantastic, I hope they are all 732's, it would really serve the Nimby's right, it's the first outward looking decision for many years.
There is a particular councillor who has complained for years about airport noise. When Bond Helicopters (Part 1) stopped operating from the East Side he bought a house close by......
Bond Helicopters (Part 2) are now operating from the East Side again... Ho hum!
There is a particular councillor who has complained for years about airport noise. When Bond Helicopters (Part 1) stopped operating from the East Side he bought a house close by......
Bond Helicopters (Part 2) are now operating from the East Side again... Ho hum!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: belfast
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done ABZ - spare a thought for poor BHD over here - they haven't even asked for later opening hours - they simply need the outdated & totally unnecessary passenger number cap lifted to enable expansion.
I have no doubt it will be lifted despite opposition from local NIMBYS and a legal challenge by BFS to stall the planning dept decision.
I have no doubt it will be lifted despite opposition from local NIMBYS and a legal challenge by BFS to stall the planning dept decision.
Fit like min?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ...
Posts: 2,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If airports or their owners simply disregarded restrictions placed upon them by councils & the like(eg.opening hours,limit of passengers),in effect telling those placing these local restrictions to "stuff it",how dire would the consequences be?
Would the councils & other local planners be brave enough to penalise the airports or,indeed close them down?
Surely they wouldn't jeopordize possibly their biggest asset...would they??
Would the councils & other local planners be brave enough to penalise the airports or,indeed close them down?
Surely they wouldn't jeopordize possibly their biggest asset...would they??
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not really sure what the implications would be if an Airport Operator told councils to 'Stuff it'.
I would imagine that they would take some sort of action but i doubt they would go as far as too shut down the airport
! I would say fine and slap on the wrists.
One thing i don't understand about ABZ's particular case is, and someone please correct me if i am wrong; Were those houses that are directly under the flight path over the city not supplied with tripple glazing by the council back in the day? Not that i am suggetsing for a minute that this would eliminate all the noise but surely it would have a significant impact. Plus ABZ is never going to be LHR now is it!?
Anyway now i am ranting. Can't wait for the 'Lets Lengthen Aberdeens runway' debate
Rooster
I would imagine that they would take some sort of action but i doubt they would go as far as too shut down the airport
! I would say fine and slap on the wrists.One thing i don't understand about ABZ's particular case is, and someone please correct me if i am wrong; Were those houses that are directly under the flight path over the city not supplied with tripple glazing by the council back in the day? Not that i am suggetsing for a minute that this would eliminate all the noise but surely it would have a significant impact. Plus ABZ is never going to be LHR now is it!?
Anyway now i am ranting. Can't wait for the 'Lets Lengthen Aberdeens runway' debate
Rooster
CH3CH2OH
Why lengthen the runway? You don't get that much damage when a big TriJet (not that there are many still around) rotates on 16
I'm sure there are some of you who still remember that.
I'm sure there are some of you who still remember that.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I would imagine that they would take some sort of action but i doubt they would go as far as too shut down the airport ! I would say fine and slap on the wrists."
Err, have any of you seen what's been going on here at CVT?
Warwick District Council may claim (according to their chief planning officer) that they are not trying to stop passenger flights, but they are certainly trying very hard with their vindictive enforcement action over the Interim Passenger facility.
I know much of this hinges on a dispute over PDRs, and it is of course not strictly "their" airport, but there are plenty of other cases where councils will do what they can to stop development.
There really needs to be an education lesson for all officials involved over the relative noise emmissions of different aircraft, as even the 732's mentioned above have very different characteristics to other a/c in this family.
How many councillors would know the difference between a 732 and a 735, or between an A319 and an A300???
How often does mitigation get discussed, instead of rant rant rant, and letting the nimbys bleat for Britain?
Err, have any of you seen what's been going on here at CVT?
Warwick District Council may claim (according to their chief planning officer) that they are not trying to stop passenger flights, but they are certainly trying very hard with their vindictive enforcement action over the Interim Passenger facility.
I know much of this hinges on a dispute over PDRs, and it is of course not strictly "their" airport, but there are plenty of other cases where councils will do what they can to stop development.
There really needs to be an education lesson for all officials involved over the relative noise emmissions of different aircraft, as even the 732's mentioned above have very different characteristics to other a/c in this family.
How many councillors would know the difference between a 732 and a 735, or between an A319 and an A300???
How often does mitigation get discussed, instead of rant rant rant, and letting the nimbys bleat for Britain?
