Inquiry is on going after LBC gave itself planning approval to increase passengers by 1m. Fast forward to 2 hours and 47 min and then spend the next 10 minutes or so listening. Absolute bombshell!! Respondent must live directly under the MATCH RNAV SID.

https://aisapps.sonicfoundry.com/Aud...addf7db015241d

Remarkable that the airport management insisted that complaints regarding aircraft noise had to be individually submitted for each individual noisy aircraft rather than grouped in a single email. When this rule was followed, airport management arranged for an individual to be arrested for harassment, which resulted in him having his tablet, mobile phone and laptop seized. After 9 months the items were returned with the police saying there was no case to answer.

Seems like a despicable act to waste police time and ruin a life in the hope to reduce complaint numbers.

He says he lives in Harpenden, I was brought up there when aircraft did go directly over Harpenden 1-11s, 737-200 etc.
26 departures then, via MATCH now goes South of Harpenden.
I do remember when buying my first property in 1995 it stated that aircraft noise might be an issue. Did his Estate Agent lie about this fact (assuming he bought that is and knowing property prices in the AL5 postcode )? And if noise is an issue every 2 mins, he must have spent 30 secs before making the decision to move to AL5 four years ago.
He obviously works from home, strange location to live as Harpenden is such a London commuter town via railway or M1/M25.
He wants zero flights - I must say sometimes LHR departures caused more noise than LTN ones being heavy 747-200s in the day.
Checking playback of flights on TraVis for the period 00:00 to 06:00 on 27th Sept only one DHL used this departure route so he is making misinformation. Get your facts right mate and your case about being blocked for submitting multiple complaints might have more weight. I'm sure the QCs will check this which weakens his case about 24x7x365. I think it has been stated before that those are the rules on submissions. Hasn't this been highlight before that a single or low digit persons complainants were the vast majority of all complaints??

I'm sorry no time for this guy whereas some of the other points raised by some of the other speakers before him were more interesting.

All this where planes are getting bigger A321s & Max's (quieter I might add than the A319/320CEO 737-800s they are replacing and less CO2).~10-20% more seats so 18M add say 15% = 20.7M. Oh to stand still at 18M would actually involve a reduction in movements, no more investment and no chance of recovering any Debts.
Hey, might be good for Cargo and BizJets though, more slots available! Now remind me, when does Cargo like to fly?

You’re missing the point. Whether you agree with him or not he followed the rules, as laid down by the airport. Nowhere does it say that complaints have to be limited to a set number otherwise the airport management will arrange for people to be arrested. This is shameful abuse by LLAOL to silence people while it ruins lives with noise. Maybe management should be arrested for deliberately breaking night noise limits 3 years in a row? Arresting people on false accusations is what happens in Russia.

I don't know the exact nature of the complaint but if he sent repeated emails direct to directors then that could be valid. He can find lawyers who specialise in such things and there are procedures if he is unhappy about police procedures.

The police stated he did nothing wrong so the complaint was invalid and false.

After listening to yesterdays link and watching some of todays live broadcast it is obvious why the council decided to spend £600,000 of residents money hiring a KC due its conflict of interest in being the planning authority and owner of the airport.

Going back to yesterday’s proceedings the KC’s for the applicant and the council remained silent and didn’t challenge a single word the arrested man said. Maybe silence speaks a thousand words? I found it quite shocking actually that a company or was it the council could get a man arrested for its own self interest.

Just one point from the Aircraft Noise Enquiries & Complaints Policy document at HOW TO MAKE A NOISE ENQUIRY OR COMPLAINT
2.2 Abusive or threatening correspondence
Our staff will not respond to any correspondence that could be considered of an abusive, discourteous, or threatening nature. Where we deem it necessary, such complaints will be handed to the police for investigation. It is also our policy not to respond to a complaint where we deem there to be an misuse of our complaints service, for example by use of alias names.
Sections 6.0 & 7.0 seem to also apply but as the document is dated Aug 2022 it might have been recently amended.

A check on how LHR does things shows similar procedures "such complaints will be handed to the police for investigation."

The whole document is geared around flights which have deviated from agreed flight paths or outside agreed hours so his grievance that everything goes over his house maybe party valid if he happens to live directly under a flight path agreed with CAA & NATS. If an aircraft is going outside an agreed flightpath without good reason LLACC can action. If it is not then this is outside the scope of this complaint procedure.

So the bottom line is that they will not tolerate too many complaints while happy to ignore binding noise limits. As stated 3 times now the police investigation found no evidence of any wrong doing after examination of various devices. This was a malicious attempt to do harm to an individual who was asked to report by email individual noise concerns rather than putting the complaints into a single email, as that would be considered to be a single general complaint.

It may be written in a way where every single aircraft should be reported seperately, but it is hardly in the spirit of the rules, I'm sure you'd concede that. Surely that specific complaints line is designed for specific aircraft that come in and cause a clear disturbance for many people so they can pin-point a trend. Not for one individual to write in 100s of times every day making a mockery of that.

This isn't exclusive to Luton - I'm pretty sure there is a retiree who spends all his days writing to Gatwick about each individual aircraft that passes over his head.

As for the specific instance, I really don't understand how his life can be made impossible to live. I've just logged onto FR24 to see what's going on - straight away I see RYR8AL routing in the gap between Harpenden and St Albans up at around 5,000 feet. This isn't going to make that much noise. Routing in between towns and cities to try and minimise the number of people affected by aircraft noise.

For over 25 years I lived around 2 miles from the end of runway 07, admittedly not under the flight path directly. Aircraft noise was a fact of life and I could see departures from my back garden. I was never woken up by a noisy A300 or anything else. Occasionally in the old days I was woken up by night engine runs.

I agree if I lived in Harpenden it wouldn’t really bother me too much. The guy was clearly articulate and put across his points well but it bothered him because the track has changed and now aircraft fly over his house. The inference is that if an aircraft is on track then that removes the right to complain. Why?

Nothing would make the airport happier than to show a reduction in noise complaints and this guy is helping to spoil the party. Yes he is trying to skew the figures just like LLAOL does by removing them.

That doesn’t mean he should have been arrested, which is actually an outrage.

The police should be asked to explain why this was a criminal matter not civil.

Not the right to complain but who he can complain to and what he is complaining about. If the aircraft are following agreed and internationally published routings, then there it is not a lot the airport can do about it, and he neeeds to be taking it up with the CAA and the like.

If an aircraft is failling to follow the agreed routings, then the airport can do something about it.

It's like a new road being built at the back of your house and you complaining every time a car goes past.

Correct on the last two posts. If planes are travelling within agreed parameters he has no recourse to complain via the medium used.
There is a question on whether the complaint to the Police was via the proper email address or via direct emails to individuals?
Being no legal expert but do not the police decide whether it is in the public interest to pursue to the courts. If it is not in the public interest then they will just stop any preceeding. Bit like a neighbours dispute over noise. They might arrest you but without evidence or in the public interest drop any proceedings. The Police do not judge innocent or not, only whether it is worth bringing to courts.

On a positive note for skilled jobs https://www.adsadvance.co.uk/aviatio...n-airport.html
Good to see the old Monarch offices being used for something productive.

Nope - Police don't decide on prosecution, that's the Crown Prosecution Service.

There's clearly more to this than meets the eye, and he's not above playing games..

He claims to be disturbed 'up to' every 2 minutes 24x7x365, clearly anticipating that most people will miss the 'up to' bit. Picked up by the lady at the end of the video who queries the frequency of night flights.

From a quickly look at FR24, flights are at 5,000ft plus over Harpenden - its not like he's under short finals, I'm in a similar position and while I can hear a/c, he seems to be overstressing the impact (I understand that noise can impact people differently)

There is something odd about somebody who makes this volume of complaints without any response, and who doesn't then try any alternative actions. He only seems to have complained to the airport from his evidence. The airport seem to have hugely over-reacted - would love to hear the other side of the story.....

Strange story as the training facility was already open in 2020 as per the street view map dated the same year.

https://i.imgur.com/dcVPCjl.png

Blue Air resuming after 10 October looks to be rather more doubtful than before
https://amp.torinotoday.it/attualita...i-ottobre.html

Only recently a You Tuber was incarcerated for committing the crime of ‘stalking’ individuals via email. He wanted answers to his questions / enquiries and complaints. Is it reasonable for one person to send email after email after email after email to any person or any organisation because they claim the aircraft noise is too much. Around the airport is a population of approximately 450,000 residents (within 10 miles) whereby in my view 98 percent of them don’t complain. In my personal opinion: Year in and year out it is mostly members of anti airport protest groups who complain and coincidently it’s people who tend to live in exclusive locations! It is interesting to note that I am familiar with several of those mentioned or have contributed in the Inquiry so far and what they have in common is that they moved to the area in the last 12 to 15 years with a thriving airport that generates thousands of jobs. And don’t get me started on to the man who is a guardian of a forest, or on the man who contradicts his own figures regarding job growth!

The biggest anti expansion group with over 3000 local residents is based right next to the airport in Luton.