Night flights plan requesting take-off

Clipping: thisiskent

THE owners of Manston airport have applied for permission to run regular night flights. The planning application was submitted to Thanet council last Wednesday, seeking the right to run scheduled flights between 11.30pm and 6am. Airport boss Charles Buchanan believes permission, which it needs from Thanet council, is vital to the success of the airport. He said:

"We want to offer clarity for the community and people that use the airport. It is incredibly important because we have to satisfy passenger and freight operating at night but it is equally important that we operate with sensitivity."

The airport is asking for 1,995 quota count (QC) points per year, the equivalent of 500 take-offs or landings of 747s, which are rated QC 4. The airport's application says it will not operate aircraft of "greater than QC 4" between these hours. Thanet council will hold a consultation to assess the views of people living in Thanet in the coming weeks. Council leader Bob Bayford has promised to weight answers for people living directly on the flight paths. He said:

"We know that this is a hugely important issue for local people, especially those living under the flight path, which is why we are making these documents available to the public at the earliest possible opportunity. We want people to have the chance to see what Infratil have submitted to us."

The full application is available at Thanet council's website www.thanet.gov.uk

By saul leese saul.leese@krnmedia.co.uk

TDC Councillors and the flight path

Click for a better look

Questions for TDC for the consultation

Eleven pointed questions

Here's an economy dozen of the finest, freshest questions to come marching in the door, demanding answers.

QUESTION 1
Would you please ask TDC to put the Schedule 106 currently applicable to Kent International/ Manston Airport up on its website so that the electorate can see what it says?

QUESTION 2
I notice that Infratil advises KIACC of the number of passenger and cargo flights each month. Could you please email me Infratil's month by month breakdown of the number of aircraft movements for each of these categories for the period April 2009 to August 2010 or, better still, arrange for them to go up on TDC's website?

QUESTION 3
Could you please ask Infratil to give a month by month breakdown of the number of cargo flights and the number of passenger flights between 23:00 and 7:00 from April 2009 to August 2010 and either email them to me or put them up on TDC's website?

QUESTION 4
Can you assure those under the flight path that there is always air traffic control and RFF [Rescue Fire Fighting] at the airport whenever a plane lands or departs? [Any variation of 'no' in answer to this question is truly alarming for the populations of Ramsgate and Herne Bay.]

QUESTION 5
Does the current Section 106 define 'scheduled'? [I note that Alan Stratford & Assoc raised the question of the definition of 'scheduled' in 6.22 of their Review of the Section 106 in 2005. This report was commissioned by TDC and is still on their website.]

QUESTION 6
For a flight to be 'scheduled', it simply has to be done according to a timetable. Unlike a passenger airline, a cargo airline's timetable might vary considerably especially if it is flying fresh produce. The airport's Geographical and Administrative Data states that Security requires 24 hour advance notice. Customs and Immigration requires notice by 15:00/16:00 hours on the previous day depending on whether it is summer or winter. In other words, these cargo flights which are arriving and departing during the night are not emergency flights; they have a schedule which has to be notified to the airport in advance. They are, therefore, scheduled night flights. Why have the appropriate fines not been collected for the Community Fund?

QUESTION 7
Who are the legal advisers who will be helping TDC through the negotiation process for the new Section 106 and how much relevant aviation experience have they got? I understand under the FOI we are entitled to know.

QUESTION 8
Why have TDC ignored the advice regarding Enforcement and Penalties in the report they commissioned from Alan Stratford & Assoc in 2005 [pps 31, 33]?

QUESTION 9
Could TDC please explain how ignoring Alan Stratford's recommendations benefits the electorate?

QUESTION 10
Except in emergencies, all QC4 aircraft have been banned from Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted between the hours of 23:30 and 6:00am since October 2005. No aircraft over QC4 are allowed to land between 23:00 and 7:00am. There is a movements limit and a noise quota. Could KIACC please explain, therefore, how QC4 aircraft come to be flying in over Ramsgate and Herne Bay at any hour of the night without penalty when this is not allowed at the UK's busiest, noisiest airports? This benefits Infratil but I cannot see how it benefits TDC's electorate.

QUESTION 11
Why has the consultation period on the night flights been reduced from 6 months to 12 weeks? Once again the benefits to Infratil are easier to see than the benefits to the electorate.

Questions, questions

The current owners of Manston Airport want to change the rules that govern night flights. This is a major change in the way the airport is used, so Thanet District Council will be launching a public consultation. Both TDC and Infratil (the airport owners) will probably be doing their best to engineer a "yes" result. Smoke and mirrors, misinformation and partial truths will all play their part.

A lot of people have a lot of good questions that need answering. What we're hoping to do is collect all those good questions in one place. You can add your questions now - use the comments at the bottom, or email us at NoNightFlights@gmail.com You can use the Comments facility at the bottom of the article to:

• add a new heading
• add a new question
• rephrase an existing question
• share any answers you have

As and when (and if) we get answers, we'll add them here, so you'll know where to come for straight answers to the questions that matter.

---

A: CONSULTATION

A1. What area will be covered: selected postcodes, everyone under the flight path... ?
A2. When will the consultation start and finish?
A3. How is TDC going to make sure that everyone knows about the consultation?
A4. What information will be provided before and during the consultation?
A5. Will the information provided be in plain English?
A6. Will there be a "Yes/No" to night flights question?
A7. How are the results going to be assessed and communicated?
A8. What if the majority say "No" to Night Flights?
A9. Will under-18s get the vote?
A10. How much is the consultation costing, and who's paying?
A11. Will the consultation be just on Night Flights, or on a whole new S106?
etc., etc.

---

B: FACTS

B1. How many planes?
B2. How noisy?
B3. What days of the week will they be flying?
B4. What times of day?
B5. What flight paths will they be using for take-offs to the East and West, and landings from the East and West?
B6. Will 2300-0700 (11pm to 7am) remain the working definition of "night"?
etc., etc.

---

C: Old (current) S106

C1. Why risk judicial review by extending S106 without having fully (or even adequately) enforced the existing one?
C2. Who decided not to enforce the existing S106, year after year?
etc., etc.

---

D: New S106

D1. How does TDC propose to monitor the new S106?
D2. How does TDC propose to enforce the new S106?
D3. What sanctions and fines are available to TDC under the new S106?
D4. Will TDC exercise the sanctions and impose fines?
etc., etc.

---

E: NOISE

E1. Why not have more mobile sound monitors?
E2. How much does a mobile sound monitor cost?
E3. Where can we see the latest "sound footprint" maps?
etc., etc.

---

F: POLLUTION

F1. Are there any analyses available to reassure us that the aquifer is clean?
F2. Is there an inspection programme in place to monitor the effects of increasing traffic on aquifer pollution?
etc., etc.

Flight path? What flight path?

Some people think that Infratil is the sole driving force in the untidy, unfolding story of night flights. Not so! Thanet District Council has a democratic mandate to represent the Thanetian multitude, and has the last word on night flights. Catch: some councillors may not have heard what they're voting on.

I can't help feeling that the further-flung TDC councillors may be wondering what the fuss is about. So many of them live so far from the flight path, I would be surprised if they notice even the 3am bone-rattlers. In the map below, the blue line is the flight path - click it for a closer look:

And the other end of the flight path goes over Herne Bay (as if you hadn't noticed):

TDC are thinking of applying some kind of post code weighting to the replies to the public consultation - the nearer you live to the flight path, the more your opinion counts for. Maybe they should consider applying the same weighting to their own votes in Council?

Pilot says planes do not need to fly over Ramsgate from or to Manston

Clipping: thisiskent

Eastcliff Residents' Association has been told by a pilot that flights do not have to go over Ramsgate. An international pilot has told a residents' association that many of the flights over Ramsgate could be avoided, reducing noise pollution over the town. Eastcliff Residents' Association treasurer Chris Welch and Airport Working Party member Peter Campbell agree that the airport and Thanet council could do more to encourage pilots to take off and land from the Herne Bay direction.

Infratil asks pilots to consider taking off away from Ramsgate to "minimise the disturbance caused to the residents" providing there is a wind speed of less than five knots. However pilot instructions conclude "acceptance is at the pilot's discretion" and Mr Campbell believes this could be part of the problem. He said:

"It strikes me that pilots will choose the easy option every time. They should amend the following two areas of guidance. Five knots (7mph) isn't really a wind, it's a breeze and there are rarely wind speeds here of less than this. Taking off away from Ramsgate should be the preferred route unless the pilot deems it as unsafe in any way."

Eastcliff residents regularly complain about low-flying aircraft landing at Manston. The pilot believes many inbound flights over Eastcliff (Ramsgate) could be avoided altogether, providing winds are light, the runway surface is good and subject to aircraft safety and performance. He said:

"It's not normal to have planes taking off and landing in opposite directions because it complicates air traffic control. However it is done at Sydney International Airport (Australia) to reduce noise from night flights over the city."

District councillor for Pegwell and Cliffsend John Kirby said:

"I really can't see why they would compromise safety to bank right. I think it should be re-assessed when flights get heavier."

ERA chairman Paul Warrick said:

"So much local emphasis is being placed on night flights but we feel that the expansion of air traffic in general is going to be more intrusive to residents."

Manston chief executive Charles Buchanan:

"I will look into the possibility of pilots banking hard right when taking off over Ramsgate in winds over five knots and check how many pilots are choosing fly in over Ramsgate and not to use the preferential route in light wind. Safety comes first, rapidly followed by environmental concerns. Planes take-off predominantly away from Ramsgate because the prevailing wind here is westerly."

By saul leese saul.leese@krnmedia.co.uk

Wiggins' routes discovered

A red letter day, dear reader. One of my undercover researchers (codename: Casey) has unearthed a map of the routes agreed between Wiggins and TDC many moons ago. Apparently one of the lead negotiators from the TDC side was Cllr Harrison. These 'people-friendly' routes didn't make it into the Section 106 Agreement due to an oversight by, er, Cllr Harrison. Shame.

These routes were mentioned at a meeting held at Manston, chaired by Cllr Harrison. I got the impression that they had somehow wisped away to nothingness, lost forever to the eyes of mortals. I'm pleased to have sight of them at last. I expect Infratil and TDC will be thrilled, too. Now that they don't have to go through the rigmarole of (re)negotiating effective noise abatement routes, they can use the time they've saved to install fixed noise monitors under the newly agreed routes.

click it to big it

click it to big it

The carefully drawn coloured lines on the map are explained by the accompanying colour-coded key.

The red route labelled 1 is the standard westward instrument departure route: by the time the plane is doubling back on itself and heading south, it's supposed to be at 3,000 feet and climbing. Route 2 is the alternative westward route; route 3 is the standard eastward instrument departure route. All of the other lines and boxes are explained in the key.

What I find interesting about this is that it so clearly shows what is achievable. The planes can fly more people-friendly routes. So what do you think the odds are of anything resembling this appearing in the next S106 Agreement?

Anger as Kent leader stays away from Manston meeting

Paul Carter

Clipping: thisiskent

Paul Carter will be reported to KCC's standards committee after he pulled out of a meeting at Manston airport. The leader of Kent County Council Paul Carter could be reported to the authority’s watchdog on standards after failing to show at a meeting about Manston airport. Cllr Carter was due to attend Friday’s meeting of the Kent International Airport’s Consultative Committee but pulled out at the last minute and did not send a replacement.

The committee, which includes airport bosses and representatives of the surrounding towns and villages, had rearranged its meeting especially to have Cllr Carter attend. Committee chairman Paul Twyman said:

“We were very keen to have him talk to us and deliberately rescheduled the meeting to accommodate him. I am not at all pleased at this development. What I suggest we do is that we raise the matter with the Standards Committee at Kent County Council as I find it inappropriate and actually quite offensive as we have gone to all this trouble to arrange this meeting then we suddenly have the man pull out.”

The group voted to report the matter to the standards committee, which looks into complaints against councillors and assesses whether they have breached the code of conduct. Mr Carter, who has previously expressed his support for the airport’s expansion, claimed he had an unavoidable family engagement which had been rearranged for Friday.

There was heated debate at the meeting, with Ramsgate and Herne Bay residents quizzing airport chief executive Matt Clarke about the flight paths of incoming planes and the airport’s long-term viability. There were also a number of comments made from the public in support of the airport’s expansion. Mr Clarke said he would look into alternative approach routes for planes coming into the airport, which could reduce the noise experienced by those living nearby. At the end of the meeting, a resident handed Mr Clarke a banner bearing the words No Night Flights, which he said he wanted the chief executive to put up in his bedroom.



In a nutshell: airport manners

• The Draft Masterplan for KIA is indicative but insubstantial – it needs to be redrafted, and then put out to consultation properly.
• The Section 106 Agreement should reflect the needs of everyone affected by the operation of the airport, not just Infratil and TDC.
• There is absolutely no need or justification for night flights (other than emergency diversions).
• Flight paths should avoid population centres by overflying the sea, or sparsely populated land.
• If overflying towns is unavoidable, the planes could fly higher for longer, and then descend more steeply.
• These ‘people-friendly’ routes should be agreed and implemented before flight volumes increase.
• Infratil must demonstrate that the routes are being adhered to by recording and reporting what the planes actually do, by installing adequate noise and pollution monitoring equipment and ensuring it is used consistently.
• The readings from all the monitoring equipment must be recorded consistently, and the recorded readings must be published frequently and regularly (e.g. on-line).
• Failure to comply with the S106 agreement must be reported and fined. Any decisions not to fine must be explained.

Night flying fuels fresh Manston airport fight

Clipping: thisiskent

Agreements on night flights cannot be changed until the airport owners make a planning application. An independent group set up to advise on the development of Manston airport has said no to more night flights. Kent International Airport Consultative Committee chairman Paul Twyman told a meeting of Thanet council’s airport working group that while there should be a balance of “economic and environmental interests”, he was against changing current night policy.

An existing section 106 planning agreement restricts flying between 11pm and 7am. Although it expired in 2003 the agreement will remain in effect until a new one is signed by Thanet council and airport owners Infratil. On February 12 Infratil persuaded Thanet council to hold an emergency meeting requesting a temporary extension of flying times to 6am to 11.30pm in a bid to attract a new airline operator. The council was told the reason was so the company could attract British Airways World Cargo which, Infratil said, would create more than 400 jobs. After the council agreed to the changes, BAWC’s move from Stansted Airport was cancelled. Night flights are now supposed to adhere to the original terms.

On Tuesday KIACC vice chairman Nick Cole told working party members that aircraft noise is a problem for residents and raised a question over the whereabouts of noise monitoring equipment. Mr Twyman said:

“On the western take-off route planes should turn at about 1.2 miles to avoid villages but they have not done this. We have had a number of excuses over the years and I now think routes need to be clearly defined. We have to have some mechanism to ensure that these routes are kept to. In a good airport there should be good noise monitoring and we don’t seem to have mobile noise monitoring.”

KIACC committee member Malcolm Kirkaldie said:

“If someone wants to complain about noise or planes not sticking to routes it has to be done within 15 days but Infratil takes an awfully long time and doesn’t have to come back to us in 15 days, 20 days or 30 days.”

Thanet council planning boss Brian White said:

“We get separate complaints from residents about noise. Of course there has been and still is duplication of complaints. We are talking to Infratil about sharing a website with the airport.”

Mr Twyman said:

“The local authority needs a big stick it can wield at Infratil when they don’t behave themselves. I think there have to be steep or steeper penalties for people flying outside the agreed hours. We must try to build noise reduction into our plans.”

After the meeting airport working group chairman Mike Harrison said:

“Infratil has to apply to us for a night-time flying policy which will trigger a six-month consultation process.”

Ramsgate councillor David Green, who was in the audience, said:

“It seems to me to be the same old questions and the same old answers. The existing 106 agreement ran out years ago but there is a clause that enables it to continue until another is created. Talking to KIACC was another stage in the process but nothing can happen to address issues until Infratil applies to extend a building, build a new terminal or for an amendment to night flights because the agreement is attached to a planning decision.”

Steve Higgins, of the Stop Manston Expansion Group, said:

“The council need to engage with the community before they make any changes to the policy on night flying.”