Noise Lobby -Airline Bashing
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The Burrow, N53:48:02 W1:48:57, The Tin Tent - EGBS, EGBO
Posts: 2,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exile, I am aware that the aircraft are considerably higher over CP than they are at Kew, but there is a distinct lack of soundproofing on my caravan. A sparrow taking an early morning stroll across the roof sounds like an emu with clogs on. I was just trying to make the point that the noise is not as bad as is claimed and nowhere near as bad as I had anticipated having heard all the horror stories about the aircraft noise levels in London. Before you ask - I have been to Kew.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There will be no such noise problems at Manchester soon. George Osborne is demanding;
"A ban on all night flights,
Heavy fines for any a/c which deviates from flight path,
A ban on any airline such as Virgin or PIA whose planes, after a fair warning, continue to break noise limits"
(These are direct quotes from his latest newsletter)
"A ban on all night flights,
Heavy fines for any a/c which deviates from flight path,
A ban on any airline such as Virgin or PIA whose planes, after a fair warning, continue to break noise limits"
(These are direct quotes from his latest newsletter)
Keeping Danny in Sandwiches
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately George Osborne MP knows absolutely nothing about aviation. What makes it worse is that he isn’t prepared to learn before he spouts his opinions. His email address is on his website. Take the opportunity to put him right. How about inviting him to a Manchester Bash Danny?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The Burrow, N53:48:02 W1:48:57, The Tin Tent - EGBS, EGBO
Posts: 2,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even better, get him in a flight sim and show him exactly what can happen! I'm sure someone could arrange an interesting and informative incident. Mind you, could he possibly be angling for a trip in a simulator and using noise as an excuse? <img src="wink.gif" border="0">
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The USA has organisations such as the Air Transport Association, National Business Aviation Association, AOPA, National Air Carrier Association etc to lobby on behalf of airlines and business/private aircraft operators. Does the UK not have anyone available for this task?
US airlines (and others) have spent lots of money on engines, in order to comply with Stage 3 noise regs.
There are too many wealthy people in the MSP Twin Cities (not to mention the overabundance of radically left-wing feminist attorneys, who secretly run that sorry state), who either are ignorant of the fact or simply want to use pressure on the Airport Authority and FAA, which results in westerly departures having to comply with the (very non-standard) close-in noise abatement procedure: NADP. This procedure applies to communities such as MSP, (PBI) West Palm Beach, (HPN) White Plains, NY: wealthy areas with too many wealthy SOBs who have the arrogance and ignorance to lean on their politicians (or somehow compensate, indirectly), who lean on the FAA, in order to require us to use entirely different power-reduction/clean-up procedures. Only such pompous types are the cause of this procedure, because we already have Stage 3 engines.
Otherwise, we would use these procedures at all airports which are not in the Special Airport category. Without local "inducements", possibly artificially low real estate options ("early word" on foreclosures...), pilots would not have the extra, highly non-standard bull***t during an already very busy period (anti-icing on, radio switching, altitude call-outs etc).
An FO claimed that a developer is now building houses at the new Denver airport.
[ 29 December 2001: Message edited by: Ignition Override ]</p>
There are too many wealthy people in the MSP Twin Cities (not to mention the overabundance of radically left-wing feminist attorneys, who secretly run that sorry state), who either are ignorant of the fact or simply want to use pressure on the Airport Authority and FAA, which results in westerly departures having to comply with the (very non-standard) close-in noise abatement procedure: NADP. This procedure applies to communities such as MSP, (PBI) West Palm Beach, (HPN) White Plains, NY: wealthy areas with too many wealthy SOBs who have the arrogance and ignorance to lean on their politicians (or somehow compensate, indirectly), who lean on the FAA, in order to require us to use entirely different power-reduction/clean-up procedures. Only such pompous types are the cause of this procedure, because we already have Stage 3 engines.
Otherwise, we would use these procedures at all airports which are not in the Special Airport category. Without local "inducements", possibly artificially low real estate options ("early word" on foreclosures...), pilots would not have the extra, highly non-standard bull***t during an already very busy period (anti-icing on, radio switching, altitude call-outs etc).
An FO claimed that a developer is now building houses at the new Denver airport.
[ 29 December 2001: Message edited by: Ignition Override ]</p>
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't been to DFW for many years but when it was built many around 30 years ago it was out in open country half way between Dallas and Fort Worth, well away from complainers. I read somewhere recently that there are now housing developments surrounding the place and people are complaining.
Would any of our US readers be able to satisfy my curiosity?
Would any of our US readers be able to satisfy my curiosity?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is interesting to hear a US view on this subject. In general I get the impression that the noise lobby in the USA has less of a stranglehold on our industry than it does in europe. At many of our airports it is THE main limiting factor on development. Do you have any tips for us?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Copy of Email to Mr Osborne M.P
Dear Sir,
I have just spent several tens of thousands of pounds training to become an airline pilot, this has been a lifelong ambition of mine probably similar to your passion for politics, I am led to believe that you are involving yourself with a campaign to stop night flights (leading to more day flights and just shifting the problem and more aircraft in the same airspace = more chance of an accident), levy fines on aircraft deviating from set flight paths (increased airfares and reduced pax figures = unemployed aviation workers) and ban noisy aircraft from Manchester Airport (What percentage are overly noisy).
I would just like to point out that if your support of the noise lobbyist's proves fruitful in damaging an already fragile industry post Sept 11th, then I for one shall be extremely disappointed and angry, may I point out that once the ball starts rolling it will prove difficult if not impossible to stop, should we close all our regional airports now and everyone travels from london heathrow not an ideal situation I am sure you will agree.
While I sympathise with people whom are affected by so called noise pollution they should bear in mind two things, firstly flying is a very quick, safe and convenient way to travel while conducting business or going on holiday, secondly even though an airport may have a large amount of arrivals and departures the noise is transitory, and is probably less annoying than a fleet of lawnmowers on sunny sunday afternoon or loud music and noisy teenagers all of which are a fact of life and people live with.
Finally I would like to point out that the result of any successful lobbying of parliament Will I repeat Will lead to further job losses, and if this is the outcome of your support for these anti-aviation groups, then I am sure that I and several thousand of my colleagues, will be queing up at conservative headquarters demanding jobs as civil servants and party officials, or a full refund from conservative party coffers for the cost of our self-funded training.
Yours fathfully
<img src="mad.gif" border="0">
[ 02 January 2002: Message edited by: DoleBoy ]</p>
Dear Sir,
I have just spent several tens of thousands of pounds training to become an airline pilot, this has been a lifelong ambition of mine probably similar to your passion for politics, I am led to believe that you are involving yourself with a campaign to stop night flights (leading to more day flights and just shifting the problem and more aircraft in the same airspace = more chance of an accident), levy fines on aircraft deviating from set flight paths (increased airfares and reduced pax figures = unemployed aviation workers) and ban noisy aircraft from Manchester Airport (What percentage are overly noisy).
I would just like to point out that if your support of the noise lobbyist's proves fruitful in damaging an already fragile industry post Sept 11th, then I for one shall be extremely disappointed and angry, may I point out that once the ball starts rolling it will prove difficult if not impossible to stop, should we close all our regional airports now and everyone travels from london heathrow not an ideal situation I am sure you will agree.
While I sympathise with people whom are affected by so called noise pollution they should bear in mind two things, firstly flying is a very quick, safe and convenient way to travel while conducting business or going on holiday, secondly even though an airport may have a large amount of arrivals and departures the noise is transitory, and is probably less annoying than a fleet of lawnmowers on sunny sunday afternoon or loud music and noisy teenagers all of which are a fact of life and people live with.
Finally I would like to point out that the result of any successful lobbying of parliament Will I repeat Will lead to further job losses, and if this is the outcome of your support for these anti-aviation groups, then I am sure that I and several thousand of my colleagues, will be queing up at conservative headquarters demanding jobs as civil servants and party officials, or a full refund from conservative party coffers for the cost of our self-funded training.
Yours fathfully
<img src="mad.gif" border="0">
[ 02 January 2002: Message edited by: DoleBoy ]</p>
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: JMC
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The sheer density of some people never ceases to amaze me.
As a small child, I still remember the days when I was taken as a "treat" to watch the aircraft t/o and land at Ringway Airport (as it was then called), from the airport hotel pub (which is still there and still used by high-tech annoraks for the same purpose!).
Heald Green housing estate didn't exist.
Knutsford was a virtually unheard of village, known only by virtue of the fact that it had a service station on the M6 named after it.
Aircraft were MUCH, MUCH noisier.
There were no noise abatement procedures.
Aircraft are now MUCH quieter and noise abatement sids prevent low overflight of residential areas (most) of the time.
So what has happened in the last 35 years??
Answer: 10,000 (plus) new residents have intentionally moved into the local area of their own volition, (most of them on the final approach path to rwy24R) KNOWING that there was a big airport there, and have spent the last 10 years complaining about those nasty aeroplanes!!
Did they think an airport was just a big place for parking fire engines??
As a small child, I still remember the days when I was taken as a "treat" to watch the aircraft t/o and land at Ringway Airport (as it was then called), from the airport hotel pub (which is still there and still used by high-tech annoraks for the same purpose!).
Heald Green housing estate didn't exist.
Knutsford was a virtually unheard of village, known only by virtue of the fact that it had a service station on the M6 named after it.
Aircraft were MUCH, MUCH noisier.
There were no noise abatement procedures.
Aircraft are now MUCH quieter and noise abatement sids prevent low overflight of residential areas (most) of the time.
So what has happened in the last 35 years??
Answer: 10,000 (plus) new residents have intentionally moved into the local area of their own volition, (most of them on the final approach path to rwy24R) KNOWING that there was a big airport there, and have spent the last 10 years complaining about those nasty aeroplanes!!
Did they think an airport was just a big place for parking fire engines??
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Inside the M25
Posts: 2,404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doleboy.
Whilst I agree with your sentiments, I would strongly urge you - and anybody else who wishes to write letters to officialdom - to:
<ul type="square">[*]use short sentences;[*]use good grammar;[*]use vocabulary accurately.[/list]
Don't give people the opportunity to ignore what you say because you aren't saying it properly. Have an impact!
If you'd provided an e-mail address, I would have sent this personally rather than in public.
Whilst I agree with your sentiments, I would strongly urge you - and anybody else who wishes to write letters to officialdom - to:
<ul type="square">[*]use short sentences;[*]use good grammar;[*]use vocabulary accurately.[/list]
Don't give people the opportunity to ignore what you say because you aren't saying it properly. Have an impact!
If you'd provided an e-mail address, I would have sent this personally rather than in public.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done, doleboy -it only needs a few hundred other unemployed (and employed) pilots to do the same to get our point over. Oh another bit of advice. No matter how angry you are, don't swear or write anything that could by any stretch be termed abusive. If you do they don't have to respond.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...but having said that, not many pilots ARE lobbying their MP's, and as a result we are being comrehensively defeated in this battle.
Yesterdays press reported a ruling from Strasbourg that homeowners have had their human rights infringed by aircraft noise and will be able to claim compensation which will add up to £2 billion!
Why hasn't this been applied to every other mode of transport which makes noise? More importantly, what about my human right to have a job??
Yesterdays press reported a ruling from Strasbourg that homeowners have had their human rights infringed by aircraft noise and will be able to claim compensation which will add up to £2 billion!
Why hasn't this been applied to every other mode of transport which makes noise? More importantly, what about my human right to have a job??
I agree with virtually everything that has been said here. I live near EMA and the noise lobby has become quite hysterical.
On a lighter note they decided to build a new housing estate a few years ago on the approach to Nottingham airfield where I do some light aircraft flying, despite strenuous objections from the airfield operators at the inquiry. It has now become common practice to commence the climbing turn at circa 200 ft to keep the natives happy - "normal" aviation practice? Not long after someone moved into a new house they rang the flying club to complain about the noise. The Chief Instructor asked them whether they were going to sue their solicitor for not advising them that the house was on the approach to an active airfield! We had not further conmplaints from this individual.
Finally here is an excellent website if you want to contact your local MP - you just enter your postcode and it finds your MP and the system will send a fax to him all for free - suggest we all lobby our local MPs appropriately.
<a href="http://www.faxyourmp.com/" target="_blank">Fax Your MP</a>
On a lighter note they decided to build a new housing estate a few years ago on the approach to Nottingham airfield where I do some light aircraft flying, despite strenuous objections from the airfield operators at the inquiry. It has now become common practice to commence the climbing turn at circa 200 ft to keep the natives happy - "normal" aviation practice? Not long after someone moved into a new house they rang the flying club to complain about the noise. The Chief Instructor asked them whether they were going to sue their solicitor for not advising them that the house was on the approach to an active airfield! We had not further conmplaints from this individual.
Finally here is an excellent website if you want to contact your local MP - you just enter your postcode and it finds your MP and the system will send a fax to him all for free - suggest we all lobby our local MPs appropriately.
<a href="http://www.faxyourmp.com/" target="_blank">Fax Your MP</a>
Mutt, I think the repercussions of such action would be considerable.
No or negligible night operation means that other movements have to be crammed in during the hours when a curfew does not apply. Ever seen LGW/LHR when the night ban ceases in the morning and all the resultant congestion? Not to mention the waste of fuel with aircraft having to hold either in the air or on the ground with APU running etc.
If you are in business you want your shop open as many hours as possible. Whilst night operation may not be popular with aircrew (me included) it means that the aircraft can complete more rotations and/or be positioned strategically for flights later on in the day.
If the mamby pamby social do-gooders succeed in closing the airports at night then what's next? Even more complicated departure/arrival procedures with all the ramifications for flight safety? Just how far do you take this sort of thing?
I have every sympathy for those affected by aircraft noise but if you go and live near an airport please do not complain. Aircraft noise is far less of a problem than it was even a few years ago with modern equipment etc and the noise generated on the roads in many areas is a far bigger issue and little seems to be done about that.
No or negligible night operation means that other movements have to be crammed in during the hours when a curfew does not apply. Ever seen LGW/LHR when the night ban ceases in the morning and all the resultant congestion? Not to mention the waste of fuel with aircraft having to hold either in the air or on the ground with APU running etc.
If you are in business you want your shop open as many hours as possible. Whilst night operation may not be popular with aircrew (me included) it means that the aircraft can complete more rotations and/or be positioned strategically for flights later on in the day.
If the mamby pamby social do-gooders succeed in closing the airports at night then what's next? Even more complicated departure/arrival procedures with all the ramifications for flight safety? Just how far do you take this sort of thing?
I have every sympathy for those affected by aircraft noise but if you go and live near an airport please do not complain. Aircraft noise is far less of a problem than it was even a few years ago with modern equipment etc and the noise generated on the roads in many areas is a far bigger issue and little seems to be done about that.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: The Pointy End
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fireflybob I agree, but the real loser would be the customer.
If you imposed a night ban on all operations, it would mean fewer flights. That would mean less revenue for the companies. That would mean you would have to increase the price of the seats, to recover the loss. That would mean that Mr & Mrs Smith couldn’t afford to take the kids to Disney World this year…or any year for that matter. The privileged few would be the only ones to travel by air. Cheap holidays would vanish. The reduced aircraft movements each year, would mean less airport staff would be needed, so unemployment would rise.
Even from my simplistic position it is obvious that the only viable solution to the noise problem is to stop building bloody houses next to airports. Engines are getting quieter, but I suspect that because of the compensation culture that is beginning to emerge, you will never satisfy the antis.
If you imposed a night ban on all operations, it would mean fewer flights. That would mean less revenue for the companies. That would mean you would have to increase the price of the seats, to recover the loss. That would mean that Mr & Mrs Smith couldn’t afford to take the kids to Disney World this year…or any year for that matter. The privileged few would be the only ones to travel by air. Cheap holidays would vanish. The reduced aircraft movements each year, would mean less airport staff would be needed, so unemployment would rise.
Even from my simplistic position it is obvious that the only viable solution to the noise problem is to stop building bloody houses next to airports. Engines are getting quieter, but I suspect that because of the compensation culture that is beginning to emerge, you will never satisfy the antis.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: ME
Posts: 5,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fireflybob
I would imagine that the average person really doesn’t care about the early morning congestion at LHR/LGW or even flight safety. He is worried about his own little piece of territory. Or in the case of this MP, I would guess that he is trying to keep himself in the news!
So what would Mr Bloggs lose if his local airport banned night flights?
(As a side note, if you are thinking about flight safety Vs Noise, look at the departure for Orange County Airport in LA.)
max_cont
I didn’t think that Ryanair operated that many nighttime flights? If I am correct that would go against your point of having to charge more for daytime flights, Mr and Mrs Bloggs should still be able to afford their summer holidays.
= = = = = = = = =
We really do need to come up with better reasons for wanting to continue flying at night!
Mutt <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
I would imagine that the average person really doesn’t care about the early morning congestion at LHR/LGW or even flight safety. He is worried about his own little piece of territory. Or in the case of this MP, I would guess that he is trying to keep himself in the news!
So what would Mr Bloggs lose if his local airport banned night flights?
(As a side note, if you are thinking about flight safety Vs Noise, look at the departure for Orange County Airport in LA.)
max_cont
I didn’t think that Ryanair operated that many nighttime flights? If I am correct that would go against your point of having to charge more for daytime flights, Mr and Mrs Bloggs should still be able to afford their summer holidays.
= = = = = = = = =
We really do need to come up with better reasons for wanting to continue flying at night!
Mutt <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Join Date: May 2001
Location: The Pointy End
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mutt, Ryanair don’t operate to the USA or any longhaul destination. Ryanair carry hardly any holiday type passengers and operate short-range aircraft only.
I may be wrong, but you seem to have very little knowledge about aircraft movements and the type of operators that use the airports. I suggest you do a little research to enlighten yourself.
Perhaps if the antis had actually bothered to do a little research into the impact that the airport was going to have on their brand new house, it would save a lot of heartache…but then there would be no chance of easy money.
I may be wrong, but you seem to have very little knowledge about aircraft movements and the type of operators that use the airports. I suggest you do a little research to enlighten yourself.
Perhaps if the antis had actually bothered to do a little research into the impact that the airport was going to have on their brand new house, it would save a lot of heartache…but then there would be no chance of easy money.