London – April 5) The main airports in the UK are planning to ignore a European directive designed to protect those living under flight paths by removing the noisiest jets. This will allow airlines like Ryanair to keep their noisiest airliners in the air for another few years. The disturbance suffered by communities around airports is now expected to worsen after a decade of improvement.
The directive, approved last week by the European Union member states including Britain, gives airports the power to ban certain 20 to 30-year-old jets which are far noisier than modern aircraft.
These aircraft escaped a European Union ban last year after furious protests from US airlines, which would have seen 600 of their aircraft prohibited from landing in Europe. The EU decided instead to implement the ban on an airport by airport basis, giving member states or their airports the right to impose the restrictions, but not making them compulsory.
The noise difference between a 1970s Boeing 737-200 and a modern 737-800 passing overhead has been likened to hearing a lawnmower in the next garden compared with at the end of the street.
Under the noise limits proposed in the directive, airlines would be forced to use quieter jets for more than 1,000 flights a week at airports across Britain. Ryanair would be affected most by the ban as it has 21 737-200s based at Stansted.
Other European airports, including Salzburg in Austria and Schipol in The Netherlands, have already banned the 737-200 and other similarly noisy aircraft such as the 747-200 and the DC10.
BAA, which runs Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted and four regional airports, said that it had no plans to implement the directive. A spokesman said that BAA would wait until the aircraft were ?naturally phased out? by the airlines. This could take a decade.
?We would look to the Government to lead on the interpretation of this EU legislation in the UK as they regulate aviation noise levels in Britain,? a BAA spokesman said.
The Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions said: ?We envisage that airport operators will implement the directive.?
The Government has said that it may take action to combat noise at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted, but there are unlikely to be any proposals until next year.
The Aviation Environment Federation, a coalition of environmental groups, said that the refusal by both BAA and the Government to take responsibility indicated the weakness of the directive.
?It is not binding on either Governments or airports so they are free to ignore it. What is needed is a Europe-wide agreement on phasing out noisy jets,? Tim Johnson, the federation?s director, said.
He said that noise disturbance would steadily increase as air travel increased again after the blip after September 11. The number of flights is expected to double by 2015 but aircraft manufacturers admit that they are already operating near the limits of what technology can do to reduce noise.
Clearskies, a group seeking to limit the environmental impact of aviation, said that BAA was betraying a pledge to help communities plagued by aircraft noise. ?BAA has tried to sell itself as environmentally friendly, but its hypocrisy has now been exposed because it refuses to use the powers granted by the European Union,? John Stewart, the Clearskies chairman, said.
The new directive will apply to a generation of jets, known as ?chapter three? aircraft, which just escaped the restriction on ?chapter two? jets built in the 1960s and early 1970s.
Several airlines, including Ryanair and some charter companies, have converted older aircraft to beat the chapter two ban by fitting ?hush kits? to muffle the noise from engines.
A ban on chapter two jets came into force on Monday. Most airlines, including British Airways, replaced those aircraft affected at least a year ago. The industry has refused to accept any date for phasing out chapter three aircraft. It has also persuaded the International Civil Aviation Organisation to impose only a modest target for the noise levels of future aircraft.
Ryanair hopes to phase out 737-200s by the end of 2005.
Source: The Times
By: EGNM - 9th April 2002 at 21:16
RE: UK Airports ignore ban on noisy jets
yeah this is true at LBA – only aircraft of 733/752 noise levels or below are allowed to operate between 11pm and 6am – thats a gud 7 hours of sound sleep for the locals!
The onlything that they might disagree with would b the 8.30 am sunday morning TU-154 departure!!
By: GZYL - 9th April 2002 at 20:06
RE: UK Airports ignore ban on noisy jets
Having spoken to some people from the AEF, who live under the flightpath at Heathrow, I discovered that when they bought the houses, there was significantly less air traffic than now, and they didn’t forsee the increase which has happened. I’ll bet they are, well lets say not too happy about not banning these noisier aircraft.
How can you compare the noise from a 732 and a 738?
Well, there are monitoring stations around airports which record noise levels. They are certainly around LHR and there are four, I think around Leeds Bradford Airport. I’d say there’d certainly be a noise difference of 10dB, maybe as much as 20dB. It would be interesting to find out!
Of course at LHR, it isn’t the peak noise level which counts. The soundproofing grants are allocated according to a factor which depends on the amount of time an area is subjected to a certain noise level. This isn’t true at LBA, in which areas which experience 90dB or more get a soundproofing grant. Any noise of 90bD or less will not cause sleep disturbance according to the DETR. But every person is different so some will complain while most people won’t because they’d got used to the noise.
By: Hand87_5 - 9th April 2002 at 07:59
RE: UK Airports ignore ban on noisy jets
I guess that’s a bit confusing.
As afr as I know , banned doesn’t mean that those types (DC10 , 727 etc)) can’t use these airports anymore.
It just means that they will have to pay extra fees.
By: Bhoy - 8th April 2002 at 19:45
RE: UK Airports ignore ban on noisy jets
>BAA, which runs Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted and four
>regional airports
WHAT??
Surely that should read Heathrow, Gatwick, Glasgow, Edinburgh and three regional airports.
Anyone who thinks Stansted is a major airport is taking the piss.
Isn’t that just typical of the bloody South-east based media.
By: tenthije - 8th April 2002 at 19:26
RE: UK Airports ignore ban on noisy jets
“Other European airports, including Salzburg in Austria and Schipol in The Netherlands, have already banned the 737-200 and other similarly noisy aircraft such as the 747-200 and the DC10.”
How do you mean Schiphol banned the DC10 and 742. Northwest continues to fly both types to Schiphol. The 742 is used by KLM and several freight companies (for instance El Al, Cargo Air Lines, Atlas(?) ) and the DC10 is also used by several freight companies (for instance Das Air Cargo). Are all these planes hush-kitted or did these airlines get an exemption from the rule?
By: Benair316P - 8th April 2002 at 11:08
RE: UK Airports ignore ban on noisy jets
Yes, thats a fair point Hand87_5. I spose there are many different scenarios where home owners have fallen victim to changes such as the ones you mentioned.
Regards
Ben
By: Hand87_5 - 8th April 2002 at 09:10
RE: UK Airports ignore ban on noisy jets
Benair ,
That’s a good question indeed.
I’m living right on the edge of ORY . My house is located right between the path of the 2 runways , and therefore not under the planes trajectories. When I bought it , I knew that and it was fine.
The problem gets a bit more complicated when the ATC changes the rules.
That is what they did in South of Paris a month ago. Many people now are under the route to and from ORY and they are pissed.
As you may see the problem is not that simple.
When they made CDG , it was in the middle of nowhere. Since an airport is a goldmine in term of job opportunities , it attracts a lot
of peoples , they build their houses around , and the airport 20 years after is in the middle of the city !!!!!!
Amazing!!!
By: T5 - 6th April 2002 at 17:44
RE: UK Airports ignore ban on noisy jets
I’d quite happily offer a measly sum of cash to those living on flight paths! Imagine it – waking up in the morning, pull back the curtains and you’re only metres away from a BA 747… fantastic!
By: Benair316P - 6th April 2002 at 17:35
RE: UK Airports ignore ban on noisy jets
If the people living under flight paths dont like the noise, why did they move there in the first place?!
I, and I think countless others on this forum, would certainly not mind living under the paths of these terribly nosiy aircraft!! lol
I spose if this view was taken though, mass housing areas would become ……empty!
Just a thought
Regards
Ben
By: EGNM - 6th April 2002 at 15:00
RE: UK Airports ignore ban on noisy jets
yeah – how can u compare the noise of a 732 and a 738 :s!!
By: T5 - 6th April 2002 at 14:39
RE: UK Airports ignore ban on noisy jets
The sounds of aircraft are being called ‘noise’? That’s a disgrace!
It’s quite amazing the way the 732 and 738 have been compared to one another and the sound they create.
Sign In
April 6, 2002 at 2:21 pm