Pages

Aviation Environment Federation short briefing for decision-makers on environmental challenges of a new runway

Thursday, 4 June 2015

The Airports Commission will soon publish its final recommendations on a new runway in the South East.  The Aviation Environment Federation has produced a short, easy to read summary briefing, about the environmental challenges of adding a runway. They are calling for cross-party support for proposals aiming to protect human health and ensure that airport expansion is permitted only once a framework of environmental limits is in place. These limits relate to aircraft noise, air pollution and carbon emissions. AEF also question whether the economic case for a runway stacks up.  They say while there is significant pressure to make a swift decision on airport capacity  the analysis published so far by the Airports Commission contains evidence gaps. Until these gaps are addressed, it will not be possible to reach a robust view on the Commission’s recommendations. Transparent decision-making by government will be paramount. AEF is calling for a full debate once all evidence is produced. They are asking MPs to ensure the government does not make any runway decision until all the evidence has been gathered, a balanced picture of costs and benefits is provided and all environmental tests have been met.
.

 

MP Airport Expansion Briefing

 

New AEF Briefing: Environmental challenges to airport expansion in the South East

We have produced a new briefing on the environmental challenges to a new runway at Gatwick or Heathrow.


The Airports Commission will soon publish its final recommendations on a new runway in the South East, whether at Heathrow or Gatwick. A new runway at either airport would present significant environmental challenges.

Prior to the election, we – along with leading environmental organisations including WWF, RSPB, Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth – called on political parties to adopt a series of sustainable policy proposals for aviation. We continue to call for cross-party support for these proposals, which aim to protect human health and ensure that airport expansion is permitted only once a framework of environmental limits is in place.

There is significant pressure to make a swift decision on airport capacity, but the analysis published so far by the Airports Commission contains evidence gaps. Until these gaps are addressed, it will not be possible to reach a robust view on any recommendations the Commission may make. There is a high level of public interest in this issue and it will be the first major test of environmental policy in this parliamentary term. Transparent decision-making will be paramount. We are calling for a full debate once all evidence has been gathered, and no decision to be made until the following challenges have been overcome:

1) Will the increased aircraft noise be acceptable?

  • All three short-listed schemes would increase noise in the local area and have either an ‘adverse’ or ‘significantly adverse’ effect on the Government’s objective to minimise and where possible reduce noise impacts, according to the Commission. Thousands of people – potentially hundreds of thousands – would be affected by noise for the first time.
  • The Commission’s analysis is based on ‘indicative’ flight paths and assumptions about the introduction of less noisy aircraft. But it does not make clear whether the noise impact could be even worse if the technology improvements are not delivered. Recent trials of flight path changes were highly controversial around Gatwick and Heathrow.
  • As well as causing significant disturbance, aircraft noise directly impacts people’s health which carries significant costs. The Airports Commission’s current analysis does not fully account for the costs of addressing the health impacts of aircraft noise.

2) Could air pollution around airports be brought within legal limits?

  • The Heathrow area has breached the legal limit for NO2 pollution annually for at least the past 10 years. Modelling by the Government’s environment department predicts that the area would still be breaching the legal limits in 2030 with only the current two runways.
  • The Airports Commission’s recent consultation on the air quality impacts of expansion revealed that the increased emissions associated with a third runway at Heathrow would mean the area would have the highest level of air pollution in the UK. In terms of mitigation, Heathrow has argued that it would generate no growth in airport-related traffic on the local road network but the Commission concluded that it is not clear whether this is deliverable.
  • Around Gatwick, contrary to claims by the airport, the Airports Commission notes that there was a breach in legal limits for harmful nitrogen dioxide in 2014. One of the Commission’s models indicated that there would be worse pollution around Gatwick with two runways than Heathrow with three.

3) Would aviation play its part in wider efforts to reduce CO2 emissions?

  • The Airports Commission found that all shortlisted expansion options would, when added to the emissions from other UK airports, result in CO2 increases above the maximum level allowed for under the Climate Change Act.
  • The Commission says that it will be for the next Government to work out how to tackle this problem, for example through large tax increases on aviation to limit demand, or through planning limits on regional airports.

4) Does the economic case for expansion stack up?

  • Advertising by both Heathrow and Gatwick has quoted impressive-sounding figures for the potential wider benefit of airport expansion. However, the Airports Commission notes that these figures should be treated with “some caution”.
  • The figures are not supported by the Government’s recommended approach for cost-benefit analysis, which generates values that are either much more modest or even negative.
  • According to Transport for London, the costs of surface access may have been underestimated by up to £15 billion at Heathrow while the additional road traffic would put the network around Gatwick under stress, suggesting additional infrastructure may be required.
  • The economic assessment does not include the cost of keeping aviation emissions to a level compatible with the Climate Change Act, despite clear advice to do this from the Government’s climate change advisers.

 

http://ift.tt/1FtGYUS

.

.

 

 



via Airportwatch http://ift.tt/1Ga4lGL
Read more ...

Patrick McLoughlin having final talks with Heathrow and Gatwick on their runway plans

Thursday, 4 June 2015

Sky News is reporting that Patrick McLoughlin, the Transport Secretary, is to hold a final round of talks with Gatwick and Heathrow in the next week or so, with the Airports Commission announcement expected around the end of the month. Mr McLoughlin is to visit both London airports to discuss the prospective financing of their multi-billion pound schemes as well as crucial issues such as the environmental impact of new runway capacity. The DfT has already drafted in bankers from Rothschild to help assess the deliverability of the 3 runway schemes. All the runway schemes would mean huge expenses, which are not yet clearly known, for the taxpayer – due to extra infrastructure required. Spokesmen for Gatwick, Heathrow and Heathrow Hub all declined to comment on the meetings with Mr McLoughlin. The date of the Commission’s announcement is not yet known, and there is speculation it could be late June, or possibly on the 8th July, when George Osborne delivers is Emergency (or Summer) Budget. Osborne said in a speech to the CBI last month that the Government would act swiftly to get a new runway built.
.

McLoughlin Set For Talks With Runway Bidders

4.6.2015 (Sky)
By Mark Kleinman, City Editor

Patrick McLoughlin, the Transport Secretary, is to hold a final round of talks with Gatwick and Heathrow airports just days before a recommendation about a new runway that could spark a protracted legal battle.

Sky News has learnt that Mr McLoughlin is to visit both London airports in the coming weeks to discuss the prospective financing of their multibillion pound schemes as well as crucial issues such as the environmental impact of new runway capacity.

The Transport Secretary will also meet the backers of Heathrow Hub, the third shortlisted contender, which is proposing to extend one of the airport’s runways and divide it into two.

Mr McLoughlin’s discussions will take place shortly before the Airports Commission, which is chaired by Sir Howard Davies, publishes its final recommendations about the preferred location for a new runway.

Speculation has gathered pace in recent weeks that Gatwick is emerging as a slight favourite, although people close to the process insist that a decision has yet to be taken.

In a statement issued to Sky News, a Department for Transport (DfT) spokesman said: “The Transport Secretary regularly meets a range of stakeholders from across the aviation industry, including those shortlisted by the Airports Commission.”

Spokesmen for Gatwick, Heathrow and Heathrow Hub all declined to comment on their forthcoming meetings with Mr McLoughlin.

The Government has not set a firm date for the publication of Sir Howard’s report, although some insiders believe that it could take place in the same week as George Osborne’s emergency Budget, which will be delivered on July 8.

The Chancellor said in a speech to the CBI last month that the Government would act swiftly to get a new runway built, pleasing a business audience which has long argued that delays to airport expansion are stifling UK trade growth.

In recent months, Gatwick and Heathrow have intensified their battle to win public support for their respective expansion proposals, spending millions of pounds on advertising and public relations campaigns.

The Airports Commission has costed Heathrow Airports Holdings’ standalone third runway plan at £18.6bn, without factoring in public money for improved road and rail links; Heathrow Hub’s plan would cost £13.5bn; and Gatwick’s expansion is projected to require an outlay of £9.3bn.

Sky News revealed in April that the DfT had drafted in bankers from Rothschild to help assess the deliverability of the three competing proposals.

Heathrow’s expansion is regarded as offering the biggest economic benefits in terms of job creation, while Gatwick argues that the noise impact would be far greater at its rival airport.

A new public consultation relating to the impact of expansion on air quality was launched by the Commission last month and [ended on 29th May].

http://ift.tt/1Qs0ZQR



via Airportwatch http://ift.tt/1ALO1fp
Read more ...

Links to responses to the Airports Commission consultation on air quality

Wednesday, 3 June 2015

The Airports Commission consultation on air quality ended on 29th May.  It lasted only 3 weeks (14 working days) and as well as being technical, it was not in a format that non-experts or lay people could easily understand. Let alone respond to, other than in general terms. However, lots of organisations and individuals did manage to make sense of it, and submit responses. The response by the AEF (Aviation Environment Federation) was one of the most extensive and technical.  Many other organisations responded, making the point that air quality is a key problem for all three runway proposals. Adding a runway could only have the effect of increasing the amount of air pollution, due to substantially increased numbers of road traffic movements. The emissions from diesel powered vehicles have not reduced as much as had been hoped. Models of future air pollution have to make a range of assumptions, such as layout of roads, use of vehicles within the airport, proportion of passengers travelling to and from the airport by rail, and future improvements in vehicle emissions. The health impacts of air pollution are increasingly being recognised, and the judgement by the Supreme Court that the UK must work faster to meet EU air limits has been important. 
.

Links to some of the responses to the air quality consultation are below (in no particular order)

.

Aviation Environment Federation Consultation Response to the Airports Commission

.

Clean Air in London response

.

Air quality response GACC (Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign)

.

RHC (Richmond Heathrow Campaign) Response to Air Quality Consultation 

.

Transport for London response

.

Gatwick Obviously NOT response

.

Comment from HACAN on the air quality consultation

.

Comment from the 2M group of councils in London

.

Surrey Green Party’s response

.

GCG (Gatwick Co-ordination Group of MPs) Response to Airports Commission Air Quality Consultation.pdf

.

Teddington Action Group response

.

CAGNE (Communities Against Gatwick Noise and  Emissions) Response on Air Quality Consultation

.

Heathrow Airport’s response

.

Gatwick Airport’s Response to Airports Commission Consultation on Air Quality 

.

.

 



via Airportwatch http://ift.tt/1SVVmP0
Read more ...

Heathrow Villages ready to submit proposal for Neighbourhood Plan to counter threat from Heathrow

Wednesday, 3 June 2015
Read more ...

Freight Transport Assn writes to David Cameron to push importance of hub for air cargo

Wednesday, 3 June 2015

The Freight Transport Association’s CEO has written to the Prime Minister, to say “the decline of Heathrow [presumably if a Gatwick runway was built] as a viable global cargo hub will increase the costs of freight and logistics across the UK.” He said the importance of air freight should not be overlooked when considering the options for creating new airport capacity in south east England, and outlined the importance of a UK global hub airport. Air freight makes up 40% of UK air cargo by value, but far less by weight. The FTA is “concerned that the importance of air freight is being overlooked.” 80% of freight at Heathrow is carried in the holds of scheduled passenger aircraft. In 2014 Heathrow moved almost 1.5 million tonnes of freight. The FTA wants expansion at Heathrow, and says “Gatwick does not possess the infrastructure to handle the volumes of cargo required.” The FTA says the Government’s decision on a runway should not be based solely on passenger considerations and “passengers are not the sole users of these flights nor the only beneficiaries of the wider choice of routes.”
.

 

 

FTA (Freight Transport Association) reinforces importance of UK global hub airport to Prime Minister

2.6.2015 (Freight Transport Association)

“On behalf of FTA’s members I have written to the Prime Minister telling him that the decline of Heathrow as a viable global cargo hub will increase the costs of freight and logistics across the UK.”

David Wells, FTA’s Chief Executive

The Freight Transport Association has told David Cameron that the importance of air freight should not be overlooked when considering the options for creating new airport capacity in south east England, and outlined the importance of a UK global hub airport.

In a letter to the Prime Minister – sent today (2 June), FTA’s Chief Executive – David Wells, outlined the essential work of air freight which represents over 40% of UK imports and exports by value, and plays a crucial role in the supply chains of many UK businesses.

Mr Wells said:

“FTA is concerned that the importance of air freight is being overlooked. It is a common misconception that air cargo is a minor traffic used only for very high value or urgent items. In actual fact, 80 per cent of freight is carried in the holds of scheduled passenger aircraft using Heathrow airport.”

FTA’s ‘Sky-High Value’ report illustrates that Heathrow is a critical hub for air cargo; it offers 191 destinations, moves 1.5 million tonnes of freight and is vital for UK connectivity to its main overseas markets. Heathrow is currently operating at 98% capacity and needs to be able to expand to meet the needs of industry.

David Wells added:

“On behalf of FTA’s members I have written to the Prime Minister telling him that the decline of Heathrow as a viable global cargo hub will increase the costs of freight and logistics across the UK. Gatwick does not possess the infrastructure to handle the volumes of cargo required.”

A final recommendation on where expansion should take place is scheduled to be issued later this year by the Airports Commission – led by Sir Howard Davies. The options include a third runway at Heathrow, lengthening an existing runway at Heathrow, or a second runway at Gatwick.

Mr Wells also stated that the Government decision should not be based solely on passenger considerations.

Wells concluded:

“We accept the factors driving demand for new airport capacity and the forecast growth in passengers wishing to travel. However, passengers are not the sole users of these flights nor the only beneficiaries of the wider choice of routes. Whereas passengers could be persuaded to use a different airport, the diminution of Heathrow as an international air cargo hub favours neither the country nor the economy.”

http://ift.tt/1ePlr2G

.

.


Earlier articles by the FTA:

Air cargo is crucial to airport capacity debate – FTA reiterates message to Airports Commission

11-Nov-2014 (FTA)

“FTA would like to emphasise to the Airports Commission that air cargo is vitally important to British businesses as importers and exporters, and is a key enabler for growth and the future success of the UK economy.”

Chris Welsh, FTA’s Director – Global and European Policy

As the Airports Commission has said “no decision has been made regarding the best option of a new airport runway in south England” the Freight Transport Association has once again reiterated its message that “air cargo is crucial to the UK economy.”

The Airports Commission today (11 November) published an assessment of the three airport expansion options on its shortlist:

• A new 3,500-metre runway at Heathrow Airport in west London
• An extension of the existing northern runway at Heathrow in a plan put forward by Heathrow Hub, a consortium that includes former Concorde pilot Jock Lowe
• A new runway at Gatwick Airport in West Sussex

Chairman of the Commission, Sir Howard Davies said:

“Since our interim report last year we have undertaken a huge amount of work. We have carried out a thorough assessment, across a comprehensive range of subjects, looking at the benefits and impacts of each proposal. It is important first that we provide an opportunity for this evidence to be examined, challenged and improved. This consultation gives everyone with an interest in the issue of airport expansion that opportunity.”

FTA has previously outlined the importance of air cargo to the freight and logistics industry by writing to Sir Howard Davies, following the interim report in March 2014, and has once again voiced its thoughts today.

FTA’s Director – Global and European Policy, Chris Welsh said:

“FTA would like to emphasise to the Airports Commission that air cargo is vitally important to British businesses as importers and exporters, and is a key enabler for growth and the future success of the UK economy. We believe that London, as the UK hub for freight, is exceptionally important and that this should be recognised alongside passenger traffic. The wider range of services that can be attracted by a major hub with transfer flights makes London the major freight hub for industry. It is critical for UK industry that new services are developed to emerging markets as this is where Heathrow is already falling behind competitors due to lack of capacity.”

The Airports Commission stated that responses to this consultation will be a valuable addition to its evidence base and will directly inform its recommendation to the Government when it publishes its final report in the summer of 2015.

FTA stated that it welcomed the thorough nature of the investigation to ensure that the solutions proposed are implemented for the long-term benefit of the UK, and added that the recognition of the need for additional airport capacity in the south east was also welcome. The Association also stated that it was essential that any future capacity strengthens the existing hub base of the south east of England. This additional capacity would bring not only benefits to the south east of England but to Britain as a whole through enhanced connectivity to the UK’s key overseas markets.

The FTA-commissioned report ‘Sky High Value – The importance of air freight to the UK economy’ was launched in March 2014; the report reflected FTA’s contribution to the Commission’s work and, importantly, raised the importance of air freight in the debate, which had previously focused on passenger and business travel.
http://ift.tt/1FtWNeg

.

 

 


 

Heathrow yes – but we need a decision on future capacity now, says FTA

17-July-2013 (FTA)

“FTA is always open to the possibility of an airport elsewhere in the future, but Heathrow is our main hub airport now, and as it is full, the need for a third runway is obvious.”

Chris Welsh, FTA’s General Manager of Global and European Policy

Responding to Heathrow Airport’s report ‘Heathrow – a new approach’ which details its plans for expansion, published today (Wednesday 17 July), the Freight Transport Association has said that a third runway is badly needed but an ‘accelerated decision’ on enhanced airport capacity to meet existing and future air freight requirements that serve our international trade needs to be made sooner rather than later, and stalling on that decision is detrimental to the UK economy.

Heathrow has submitted new runway proposals to the Airports Commission stating that it will deliver the long-term capacity and connections that the UK economy urgently needs. Recognised in the document is the importance of air freight, pointing out its wider economic benefits to the economy, particularly from international trade and inward investment to the UK, productivity and agglomeration, estimating the effects of a third runway ranging between £32-£137 billion.

Previously (January 2013) FTA had submitted evidence to the Transport Committee regarding the expansion capacity at Heathrow, stating that it was essential to maintain London’s international hub status, keeping UK goods and passengers connected to scores of global destinations and thereby supporting UK trade.

FTA believes that aviation policy can only be effective if freight issues are given full consideration, particularly given that freight carried on board passenger aircraft in many cases makes international airline routes more viable, and that logistics is a vital component of the UK’s route network and overall economy both as an employer and in terms of the economic activity reliant on it.

Chris Welsh, FTA’s General Manager of Global and European Policy, said:

“FTA is always open to the possibility of an airport elsewhere in the future, but Heathrow is our main hub airport now, and as it is full, the need for a third runway is obvious, and we are therefore pleased to welcome the proposal for enhanced investment in capacity by Heathrow. We recognise that in a market led economy it is investors who take the investment risks based on a range of criteria, including customer preferences and obtaining a return on capital investment. For air freight across the UK, maintaining and enhancing our main air freight is vital to the UK economy.

“So much economic activity relies upon air freight across the UK, it is critical to economic recovery that the nation can demonstrate it is open for business with a smooth and reliable journey from our international gateways.

“FTA is concerned about stalling on the decision as to where and when the extra capacity for air freight is going to be accommodated, and feels strongly that an accelerated process is needed in order to make the decision sooner rather than later.”
http://ift.tt/1ePlriV

.

.


 

 

 



via Airportwatch http://ift.tt/1FtWPml
Read more ...

Manchester Airport £1 billion plans to improve airport to compete better with Heathrow on long haul routes

Tuesday, 2 June 2015

The owners of Manchester Airport, MAG, plan to invest £1 billion over 10 years to upgrade Britain’s 3rd largest airport and help it compete harder with Heathrow for passengers. While both Heathrow and Gatwick are hoping to be allowed to add another runway, Manchester has two runways already – the second barely used.  It  has been expanding its long-haul routes, giving passengers an alternative to travelling south to Heathrow, and it plans to add more such routes.  Its CEO, Charlie Cornish said: “Over the next 10 years, the airport will continue to develop as a global gateway for the UK.”  Even if a new runway in the south east is approved (a big IF) it would take at least 10 years to build and in that time other UK airports, such as Birmingham and Manchester will have the chance to add new flights to new destinations – some assisting business travel.  The number of air passengers at Manchester rose last year by 6% and may rise by 5% in 2015-16 period.  Manchester airport expansion fits in with George Osborne’s hopes of improving road and rail links between northern English cities to create a conurbation with the scale and resources to compete with London. A new south east runway would, by contrast, just worsen the north-south divide.
.

 

 

Manchester Airport: £1bn plan to ‘transform’ site launched

2 June 2015 (BBC)
A £1bn programme to “transform” Manchester Airport has been announced.  Manchester Airports Group said it would provide “state-of-the-art facilities”  [The owners of Manchester airport are MAG, the Manchester Airports Group].

The 10-year plan will include the expansion of Terminal 2, self-service check-in facilities and a larger security hall.

Facilities are planned to allow passengers to go through the United States’ immigration process before they board transatlantic flights.

Manchester Airports Group (MAG) said the investment will mean it “continues to thrive as a national asset”.

The work will also include improvements to Terminal 3 as well as create new food and retail outlets.

Airport design

The programme is expected to be completed by 2025

Charlie Cornish, chief executive of MAG, said: “We’re setting out how the airport will contribute to the development of a ‘northern powerhouse’ and demonstrating the dynamic, ‘can-do’ spirit that sums up the region.

“The transformation programme will ensure the airport plays its full part in driving economic growth and develops as a key part of the UK transport infrastructure.”

http://ift.tt/1GhHX01

.

.


 

Some other recent news stories:

 

Manchester Airport hopes to have over 30 million passengers per year by 2025

Manchester Airports Group boss Charlie Cornish says he hopes 30 million people will be using Manchester airport within 10 years. He also hopes it will have 55 million passengers in due course. The airport has finally this year reached its pre-recession level of 22 million passengers and is aiming to have 23.5 million next year. He said: “In three years, Manchester Airport will be vastly different to what it is today and in three years, it will be hugely different.” He hailed the success of Cathay Pacific’s direct route to Hong Kong, launched in December, which may increase to a daily service. He said rail links were very important: “If you have got northern cities linking to Manchester Airport, that allows Manchester Airport to operate more as a true northern gateway and will give people very quick and very efficient access to us….That will lead to the opportunity for more long haul flights and, in turn, the creation of economic wealth….HS2 is an interesting one. Northern cities have to take account of the fact it is a huge opportunity and it is a huge risk, as it will take people both north and south …”

Click here to view full story…

Manchester wants to persuade more in its catchment area not to fly via London airports

Manchester airport, the only UK airport apart from Heathrow to have two runways, had around 22 million passengers per year in 2005 and 2006, but then slumped down to a low point of 17.7 million by 2010. Passenger numbers have now grown, to return to the high point of 2006, and Manchester airport is feeling confident. It chief commercial officer says that their customers – leisure travellers and businesses – say they often prefer flying from Manchester, rather than having to travel to a London airport. However, around 4 million passengers from the airport’s catchment area still make the unnecessary journey to London airports every year. Manchester hopes to encourage more routes and better frequency services, to win these passengers and deter them from using London. He hopes this would help ease congestion at the London airport. Manchester is hoping to win increasing numbers of passengers, and it has its “Airport City” project close to the airport and hopes to “bolster our city’s growing presence as an international business and leisure destination.” The Greater Manchester built up area is the 2nd largest in the UK, after London, with a population of about 2.6 million, compared to about 9.8 million in London. There is logic in using Manchester’s capacity rather than building another south east runway.

Click here to view full story…

Manchester airport hope its first direct flight to Hong Kong will bring business and tourism boost

There is now a new direct Cathay Pacific flight from Manchester to China (Hong Kong), avoiding the need to hub via Heathrow, or any other European airport. This makes Manchester the first airport outside London to offer a non-stop direct route to China – which may be a boost to the region’s economy. There will be 4 flights per week. The airport hopes rich Chinese visitors – as well as business people – will come direct to Manchester, rather than all going to London. Manchester’s “Airport City” has had key investment from the Beijing Construction and Engineering Group. It has taken Charlie Cornish, CEO of Manchester Airports Group, 3 years to secure the link. Mr Cornish has been appealed to the Airports Commission to ensure the country’s future aviation needs are met by a ‘network of regional airports’ – rather than money ploughed solely into Gatwick and Heathrow. The route will be operated by a Boeing 777-300ER, which can carry 300 passengers. From Hong Kong, passengers can connect to 22 cities in mainland China. As they have done successfully from flights from Heathrow for decades – without more direct city links from Heathrow. The UK has always had good links to Hong Kong, for historical reasons.

Click here to view full story…

Qatar Airways to increase Manchester flights

26 Nov 2014

Qatar Airways is to increase capacity on its Doha-Manchester route to make it double-daily service. The airline is currently operating 10 weekly flights on the route but this will increase to twice per day (ie. 14) from February 16, 2015 using Airbus A330-200 aircraft.   Qatar Airways is also planning to increase its Dreamliner service to Edinburgh from five-times weekly to daily (ie. 7)  from May 2015.   As part of its expansion of flights to Europe, the airline will increase Doha to Copenhagen frequencies from 7 to 11 per week, while Doha-Stockholm services will go from 7 to 10 per week. Both changes will take affect from February 2015.

Link 


 

Manchester City chief slams Heathrow’s ‘desperate’ attempt to woo Manchester business leaders

Heathrow has been working hard to try to get support for its 3rd runway from Chambers of Commerce across the country. It has been offering the Chambers in the north west around £3,000 to fund events to pitch their runway case. They want the regions to believe they risk losing their link to Heathrow if there is no new runway. Manchester Chamber of Commerce declined the offer, and Manchester Council leader Sir Richard Leese described Heathrow’s approach as ‘desperate’. He said: “I don’t think we should be supporting the Heathrow expansion plan. I think increasingly, evidence says that we don’t need the hub airport and what we ought to do is make better use of the network airports – including Manchester Airport…. What you see is both Heathrow and Gatwick increasingly losing the argument and getting increasingly desperate – as shown in this case. …. Why do our members want to traipse down to London when they can use the airport round the corner?” 25 Chambers have backed Heathrow, but Sir Richard Leese says of them they are getting an unbalanced view from Heathrow. “Perhaps I ought to write to London Chamber of Commerce to set up a meeting for Manchester Airport.”

Click here to view full story…

Manchester Airports boss deeply critical of likelihood of large public subsidy aiding Heathrow or Gatwick runway

The CEO of Manchester Airports group, Charlie Cornish, has protested about the likelihood of public funds being used to assist a new south east runway. He says:  “Given the private interests at stake, adopting a special set of rules that favours the delivery of new capacity over the use of existing capacity, will have profound adverse consequences for competition and consumers in the long-run.”  More public funds for London airports does not help regional airports. The Commission, in its consultation documents on Heathrow and Gatwick runway plans, does not give specific figures on anticipated public subsidy.  But it comments there “may be a case” for some funding by the public sector. Equally, if the airport benefits from surface transport paid for by the taxpayer “may mean that a contribution from the scheme promoter to these costs is justified.” State aid rules may also require an airport operator to make an appropriate payment, if it benefits from a surface access scheme. “The Government would need to reach its own view on the level of public investment that can be justified.”

http://ift.tt/1FfhZUX

.

.

.

 



via Airportwatch http://ift.tt/1ERSuIh
Read more ...

Correspondence with Carolyn McCall (easyJet) illustrates the desperation caused by Gatwick’s new flight paths

Monday, 1 June 2015

One component of the problem of aircraft noise now being inflicted on people of West Kent and Sussex by newly concentrated Gatwick flight paths, is the “Airbus whine”. This is an unpleasant additional noise, at a particularly annoying frequency, due to air passing over the Fuel Over Pressure Protector (FOPP) cavities. This is relatively cheap and easy to put right. However, easyJet has not taken steps to make the changes, as it would slightly cut profits. Now infuriated residents have asked Ms Carolyn McCall, the CEO of easyJet, to take action on this. She has replied to say: “easyJet will do whatever it can as we take noise and environmental issues very seriously. I am looking into already how we can accelerate our programme to address this issue.”  She has actually been aware of the problem for a long time ….  Below are some emails to her, giving a flavour of the desperation, anger and exasperation of people whose lives have been changed, seriously for the worse, because of altered and concentrated Gatwick flight paths – about which they were not consulted or informed.  Their determination to reverse the deterioration in their quality of life, from the noise intrusion, is palpable.
.

 

Carolyn McCall response:

Carolyn McCall, the CEO of EasyJet, has sent a brief response to someone living in the West Kent area who asked when her airline plans to re-fit its planes with the simple device to prevent the “Airbus whine”.  The initial request, copied to many MPs, staff at Gatwick and Heathrow etc, had expressed the desperation its writer felt.

Dated 1.6.2015

Dear Mr XXXXX

….easyJet will do whatever it can as we take noise and environmental issues very seriously. I am looking into already how we can accelerate our programme to address this issue.

Yours sincerely,

Carolyn


 

Responses to Ms McCall

Several people, among the many thousand who are now adversely affected by newly concentrated flight paths for arrivals to Gatwick airport, have replied to Ms McCall’s email. Below are 3 of the emails, to give an impression of the degree of feeling that the flight path changes have caused:

1.6.2015

Dear Ms McCall,

I don’t know Mr XXXXX but suspect that was a response from a perfectly normal person completely at his wits end. Your company is partly responsible for that I’m afraid – and if you do not know why, which I would be surprised to hear, you should.

You cannot imagine how horrific life in West Kent has become for two years since multiple arrival paths were concentrated into one, sending low flying whining and howling planes over Chiddingstone, Hever and Penshurst, and many other previously unaffected Areas of Outstanding Natural beauty.

This happened with zero permission, consultation or even offer of any material compensation whatsoever.

We are being emotionally and financially terrorised and have seen at least 30%, perhaps 50% of the value of our properties vanish. Someone has literally built a motorway above our properties, properties where one cannot chop a branch off a tree without permission.

And you wonder why people are angry, furious and disgusted? Words cannot express it. We live [12 – 15] miles from the airport and paid a whopping premium to live in a no-through road which, when low flying aircraft are not clipping the trees, is silent – literally.

It is sad that often one only hears from people in responsible positions when such extreme correspondence [referring to the initial email to Ms McCall]  is seen and read.

At least you had the decency to reply which is more than can be said for NATS, the CAA and even [less endearing] Gatwick. The obfuscation created by Gatwick, NATS and the CAA is indeed reflecting very badly on your company and brand.  Indeed you will not be surprised to learn that anyone or any company associated with the one-per-minute horror, 19 hours a day, of Gatwick arrivals overhead, quickly ends up in the ‘reviled’ category.

Perhaps you can help us.

It is not fair, it is certainly not right, and it will not be tolerated that Gatwick and those associated with it can wilfully rape the South East, stealing our health and our wealth. That is effectively what has happened and it is absolutely disgraceful.

You run a successful business and I hope can understand how utterly furious tens of thousands of Kent and Sussex residents are.

I’d be grateful to hear from you on this topic.

The single arrival path is not fair, and it has increased, not decreased Go Arounds. It is destroying previously peaceful villages and causing people who have never complained about anything before to raise an army, to fight against the injustice being perpetrated against their families and communities.

Your planes are willing contributors to what, genuinely, sounds almost like a missile attack. One per minute, 19 hours a day. The economic and emotional damages claim would be in the £ tens of millions, at the very least.

Those responsible should revert to previously acceptable multiple paths with planes as high as possible or purchase affected properties under this ghastly path at prices commensurate with their value before the noise ghetto was created. What do you think about that?

Please take a moment to think about this.

We are being treated abominably by these interested parties. Don’t let EasyJet become, or remain, one of them or it may be your company that humiliates itself.

If you can help, we welcome your assistance.
Yours sincerely,

XXXXXXX (Name given)
Chiddingstone, Hever, Penshurst, West Kent area.

.


.

Another response to Ms McCall

1.6.2015

 

Dear Ms McCall

As the current Councillor for YYYY district] I am disturbed by the platitudes as expressed in your email.

During the lead up to the elections, I was able to talk to a large number of residents in my Ward, and the overwhelming concern, that was expressed, was one of utter frustration over the way that the air management was being dealt with, in our Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

Our residents are extremely proud of our area and have every right to be so: but do not be deluded into thinking that the extreme views expressed by a few are foreign to the many – they are not.  It is just that some people believe that fair play will prevail and are leaving it to the more vociferous to air their concerns.

As time progresses this attitude is becoming less and less tenable.

We are continually being fobbed off by lies, damned lies and statistics. Our residents are reasonable, moderate people – not given to trivial complaining or causing trouble. But before too long the middle road will begin to erode; any trust will be completely undermined. And, yes believe it or not, the residents will hit your organisation hard where it hurts, that is in the market place.

Even icons are susceptible to the public’s fury.

The moderates are beginning to feel abused and nothing that the main players say or do, is doing anything to change their minds.

It is so simple, all you have to do is to listen to the strong concerns, expressed by the majority of the residents in the West Kent, High Weald and adjoining areas, and do something positive about it.

The time for platitudes has gone. and only a figurehead who has the courage to put the people before the pennies, will regain the trust and respect of the residents both now and for the future.  It is time to be proactive in understanding the frustrations of an extremely angry but genuinely fair cohort.

Regards

XXXXXX

Chiddingstone, Hever, Penshurst, West Kent area.

.


.

Another response to Ms McCall

1.6.2015

Dear Carolyn

You will no doubt have received a few emails by now, in the main expressing an exasperated tone of frustration mixed with anger and incomprehension.

There are thousands of residents affected by this illegal and non consultative change in the use of airspace. I have lived in [XXXX] for the last 18 – 22] years. The last few years I have found myself flicking through ‘RightMove’ whenever I get a few minutes in the hope that I can move out of [this area] to escape the continuous bombardment that my family and I are now accustomed to.

It is truly awful, almost soul destroying and definitely unhealthy.

Unfortunately, you have an email address with the ‘word’ easyjet attached, so please allow me to explain why you’ve probably received a bit more email traffic today. I’m now an expert on the airspace above my house because I like thousands of others have to live with this commercial vandalism day in and day out.

The ‘whine’ [Airbus whine, typical of theA320 family, a certain distance from touch down, on landing when it is most acute] starts about 40 seconds out from when the plane eventually passes overhead. The ‘whine’ is an issue that easyjet are aware of and will or won’t be addressed in the UK, depending on a board of assorted directors and a finance director analysing the cost and associated benefits of a retrofit.

We all know that, so I for one won’t hold my breath to any early change in easyjet spending a bit of money to appease a few people who’ve emailed you this evening. That may sound a tad cynical but please stay with me on this one for my last few paragraphs.

Since about 2013, there has been a change in the arrival pattern of aircraft into Gatwick. It’s now a concentrated continuous bombardment, day and night, of low flying aircraft – some below 3,000ft – that is making a large community angry and tired, and yet energised to fight back until this nonsensical operational ‘change in the use of airspace’ is reversed, changed, cancelled…….

It is simply and purely unnecessary. Planes don’t need to fly at this low altitude over areas such as Hever, Penshurst, Chiddingstone, High Weald and many adjoining areas, this far out from Gatwick.

I’m not that interested in the superficial rhetoric of companies’ noise and environmental policies, and following Gatwick Airport’s appalling behaviour, I have lost faith anyway. The world is littered with companies who preach this and then hide when asked awkward questions.

However, I felt your reply to Mr XXXXX sounded sincere and I hope very much that you’ll be able to add value to help find and action a solution.

Ironically, before the toxic companies and organisations dealing with Gatwick airspace flicked a switch that resulted in dropping the height of inbound aircraft into a concentrated motorway above our heads, I barely noticed the ‘whine’ from the ‘easyjets’.

Food for thought perhaps?

Regards

XXXXXXXX

Chiddingstone, Hever, Penshurst, West Kent area.

.


.

Ms McCall has been very much aware of the problem of the “whine” for a long time. This is a letter she was sent about it in November 2013:

Letter to EasyJet

Ms Carolyn McCall
Chief Executive Officer
easyJet
London Luton Airport
Bedfordshire  LU2 9PF

14 November 2013

Dear Ms McCall,

In the towns and villages across West Kent and East Sussex concern is being expressed over the debilitating high pitched whine emanating from the Airbus A318/319/320 etc., series of aircraft. For some time it was thought that this was a fault of the high bypass turbofan engines but this was denied by the manufacturers and in any event Boeings equipped with the same engines do not emit this awful and far reaching noise. It is noticeable on the long low flight path to touchdown apparent at least 20 miles from the airport and across a variable corridor 2 to 3 miles wide.

As your fleet has expanded over the past few years many people’s daily lives have become
intolerable because of this noise nuisance. You can imagine then how they are affected when your wailing sirens fly overhead at night. The World Health Organisation has for many years considered that sleep disturbance can lead to fatigue, hypertension, greater risk of heart and respiratory problems, poor performance at work or in school, greater difficulty in concentrating and thinking clearly, an increased likelihood of accidents, depression, anxiety and drug and alcohol abuse. This is particularly the case if people become annoyed about the impact night flights are having on their health and quality of life. These symptoms can also be found in those people suffering excessive noise disturbance during the day.

Much of the nuisance created by your aircraft from Gatwick Airport is over the High Weald
registered as an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. It is on these hills and in the tranquil river valleys and upper reaches of the rivers Rother, Arun, Medway, Eden and Ouse that are used for holidays and weekend recreations of hiking, boating, bird watching, horse riding, golfing and other quiet and peaceful pursuits. All are now disturbed by this deep and penetrating noise, mostly from your airline. Many of those troubled, apart from local people in towns and villages, are day trippers from London and other built- up areas all seeking their own refuge from the intrusive noise of daily urban life. In the green parks of inner cities there is also no respite where you and other low cost carriers operate these aircraft.

This annoyance, we are now told, by the CAA has been recorded on the Airbus series since 2005 yet it was only announced on the 13 October 2013 that the ERCD had discovered that the fault was an airframe noise caused by Fuel Over Pressure Protector (FOPP) cavities in the wings. They also confirmed that the “Tone is emitted around 500-600Hz, close to peak sensitivity of the human ear, hence it is very perceptible and very noticeable.”

Purely from a humanity point of view ‘Do you care? If you do please tell me what you propose doing about rectifying this unfair and intolerable burden across much of our country and abroad. Your decision will make all the difference to so many people’s lives.

Yours sincerely,
Michael Knowles OBE
cc The Rt Hon Sir Michael Fallon MP

– The Rt Hon Greg Clark MP.

.


.

There is a lot more information about the “whine” and the relatively inexpensive retrofit to prevent it here:

Lufthansa retrofitting A320 planes with simple, inexpensive, noise-reducing device to stop the “Airbus whine”

The Airbus 320 series of aircraft, many of which are used by the low cost carriers – easyJet in particular – have been known for many years (by the CAA since 2005) to have a particularly irritating high pitched whine. This is caused by air rushing across the under-surface of the wing, where there are Fuel Over Pressure Protector (FOPP) cavities. This generates noise, in the same way as blowing air over the mouth of a bottle.Every A320 series aircraft emits a signature howling noise while approaching to land. It is heard most when the plane is travelling at around 160 knots, and the frequency is around 500-600Hz, which is close to peak sensitivity of the  human ear. There is a relatively simple and inexpensive retrofit, to attach a small aluminium “vortex generator” in front of the cavity. Then can be done at routine aircraft maintenance, though the fuel tanks need to be emptied. Lufthansa is in the process of retrofitting all its A320 series planes. Air France will also do so. EasyJet has been reluctant to do much, as it sees no commercial advantage in doing so.

http://ift.tt/1sEFZAD

.

.

.

 

 

 

 

 



via Airportwatch http://ift.tt/1I6R8xS
Read more ...