Noise Nuisance Under-stated

Manston's night flying application was backed up by a report on noise nuisance from Bickerdike Allen Partners (BAP). The BAP report assumes that house windows are closed all year, thus understating the decibels heard by residents by 27dB.

The Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) report picks up on this:

[p11] This of course fails to consider the partially open window situation described in both WHO guidelines and PPG24, which might be expected in the late spring, summer and early autumn months of the year. This corresponds to the months of year covered by the summer timetable in which the bulk of activity occurs at most airports in the UK.

The PB report also correctly identifies the obvious flaw with Manston’s proposal to exclude parts of the night from the night quota period. This would inevitably result in a late-night and early morning rush hour:

[p11] In relation to the proposed QC quota, the exclusion of the shoulder hours from the night time period is out of step with other airports, and would result in a “cramming” of movements into the shoulder hours, times in which most of the UK population is attempting to get to sleep, or before they would normally wake.

(The night quota period is when they propose to monitor and limit aircraft noise - 2330 to 0600. The so-called shoulder periods - 2300 to 2330 and 0600 to 0700 - would be treated as normal daytime, and would not be included.)

The PB report says the assessment of noise impact completely under-estimates the noise impact - under any other circumstances this would be an unacceptable proposal:

[p11] ... the failure to consider the impacts with windows open, coupled with a mitigation scheme that potentially may not reflect the noise risks from larger aircraft movements at night, may not be as favourable to protecting the local amenity for nearby residents. Had the council been considering a planning application for night operations with 5338 properties above 48 dB, and 312 exposed to the 95 dB Single Event Level, it is unlikely that the application would be seen favourably unless there was a substantive economic argument for its approval.

The PB report says in summary:

[p12] The analysis of the noise impacts have, in our opinion, resulted in an underestimation of the potential adverse impacts on residents in the area.

---

Next installment: York Aviation

---

Planning Problems

As mentioned before, TDC wasted their (our) money in asking Parsons Brinckerhoff’s (PB's) opinion on planning, given that PB conclude “Dunno, ask a pro”. However, they do describe the shambolic background to Manton’s current planning status, and mention in passing some interesting omissions on TDC’s part.

The airfield at Manston does not have “proper” planning permission - it has Certificates of Lawfulness (once known as Lawful Development Certificates or LDCs). These were obtained :

[p13] … by the Ministry of Defence the Ministry of Defence, in anticipation of the transfer of the site from the MoD to new owners who would operate it wholly as a civilian airport. The purpose of the LDCs sought by the MoD was to confirm that the anticipated use of the whole of the land as a civilian airport would be lawful and that it would not require planning permission to undertake the use.

The PB report says that two LDCs were issued in 1998, and another two in 1999, and that all four related to the use of land and buildings, but have no other specified details or conditions/restrictions relating to the operation of the Airport. Mind you, they haven’t actually seen the certificates, so nobody can be sure.

The S106 agreement was negotiated in September 2000, and is what my grandfather would have called “a right royal cock-up”.

It specifies that there will be:

[p14] … no night flying until such time as a night time flying policy has been prepared and lodged with the Council.

Note the wording - “prepared and lodged” - there’s no suggestion that anyone needs to agree to it…

[p14] The schedule sets out that the owners will consult with the Council, who in turn will be allowed time to consult on the proposed policy.  It is important to note that the wording of the S106 makes it clear that whilst the Council will be consulted and their views will be assessed, if the airport decides not to adhere to any views or suggestions as to changes to the policy, they are under no obligation to do so.

The PB report spells out the shocking implications:

[p14] In simple terms if the airport owners issue a policy and consult with the Council on it, they can choose to ignore any views set out by the Council and begin carrying out night time flying in accordance with the policy.  There is nothing in the S106 of itself that would enable the Council to prevent night time flying in this instance.

This is a demonstration of breath-taking stupidity and negligence on the part of the Council’s negotiators.

Another cause for concern is that TDC did not provide PB with several key documents:

[p13] It should be notes [sic] that in preparing this Report we have not seen copies of the original Certificates, although the Court judgements provided did make extensive reference to them. We have also sought clarification of any other planning permissions or Agreements issued post the Certificates by Thanet Council to confirm whether any such permissions or Agreements place any restrictions or conditions on the activities of the Airport.  This clarification is awaited at the time of drafting this Report.

Thus blindfolded by the Council, it is perhaps less surprising that PB couldn’t reach a clear conclusion on the planning status of the airfield and its application for night flights.

Nonetheless, PB do seem to be surprisingly certain about the contents of the LDCs that they haven’t seen:

[p14] The LDCs issued in relation to the airport contain no restrictions on night time flying, so no planning application or variation of condition etc is required to fly at night.  Similarly the S106 is written in such a way that the airport is not required to apply through the planning process to undertake night time flying.

In fact, the LDCs do restrict night-time use of the airport, but all this will come out when this goes to the High Court.

TDC have been seeking legal advice  - hopefully their barrister will be fully informed of the background. If not, TDC lays itself open to accusations of incompetence and worse.

---

Next installment: back to the Introduction

---

Possible hitch at TDC

Here's a bit of a puzzle. There's a press release from TDC (below) that the splendid Michael Child has picked up. I can't find it on the TDC website, but that's probably because it's a rather odd and unreliable site.

The press release states that the eagerly awaited Parsons Brinckerhoff report hasn't appeared as promised on the TDC website because of "a technical problem with our external e-mails".

The puzzle is that they don't need to use external emails to post stuff on their own website, so what's the problem? Surely they're not sending the report to outside bodies for correction or approval...

---

Update on night-time flying: Independent assessment

Unfortunately we have not been able to provide a copy of the independent assessment report on the council's website today as we had hoped due to a technical problem with our external e-mails.

We will be dealing with this as a matter of urgency to ensure that the report can be published as soon as possible tomorrow.  I will e-mail a link direct to the report as soon as this is available.

Please accept our apologies.

Michael Child 23rd Jan 2012

Night flights do not mean jobs, says report

Night flights from Manston Airport will not create the 3,000 jobs promised by operators Infratil, an independent report says. The final document, compiled by specialists Parsons Brinckerhoff Ltd, was submitted to the council's Community Services Manager Madeline Homer on Thursday (19th Jan).

As exclusively revealed by the IoT Gazette on Friday 20th Jan, the report cast doubt on the economic argument for an average eight flights a night and claimed the environmental impact had been understated. The report said that if a night flying ban was to remain, the airport would only be excluded from 9 per cent of the scheduled freight market. It went on:

"Given that Manston Airport currently employs a proportionately large workforce for a small throughput, growth of passengers and freight in the short term may not necessarily lead to a significant employment and hence economic impact.

The report also said the analysis of the noise generated by airport had "resulted in an underestimation of the potential impacts on residents in the area".

The reported also recommended that Infratil's night flight proposal not be treated as a planning application meaning the decision on whether to adopt them could go before a full council.

thisiskent 23rd Jan 2012

---

Full details and analysis on this website when the report is made public.

---

44 flights a night at Manston?

On the bright side, these figures are for the upper limits allowed - it's unlikely that Manston will actually take this many, simply because it's in an inconvenient location.

However, if it gets anything like this number, it would be a useful "experiment" to show everyone what full-time scheduled night flights would be like. Perhaps it would be a good idea to hold the public consultation on night flights after the Olympics...

---

Hundreds of flights will be allowed to take off and land at Kent's airports every day during this summer's Olympics. Manston, Lydd and Rochester have been asked to take a share of the 500,000 international visitors expected during the Games. In total, the airports will have to accept up to around 370 flights a day, as all three will be regulated between July 21 and August 15 to prevent overcrowding at Heathrow.

Manston will operate round the clock to accommodate up to 192 arrivals and departures every day. A maximum of 44 aircraft will use the airport between 10pm and 7am.

As many as 126 planes will take off and land every day at Lydd, 20 of which will leave or arrive at night.

Rochester's requirement is 56 aircraft a day, although no flights will operate between midnight and 6am.

Airport Coordination Limited, the company responsible for landing slots and schedules, says the majority of visitors will travel on scheduled flights. However, it expects 700 extra charter flights and 3,000 more business jets during July and August, as VIPs make their way to the Games. An estimated 240 state flights will bring political leaders from around the world to London.

kentonline 20th Jan 2012

TDC's update on night-time flying proposal

The findings of an independent assessment of the proposals and technical details for night time flying at Manston Airport have been received by the council.

The final report was submitted to the council’s Community Services Manager, Madeline Homer on Thursday 19 January and was completed by specialists, Parsons Brinckerhoff Ltd.

Before starting any public consultation on the proposals, the council had committed to carry out an independent assessment of the information it received from airport owners Infratil. 

This was so that the council could review the technical detail supplied by the airport and so that we could consider the environmental and economic impacts in the proposal.

A copy of the full report will be available to view from Monday 23 January.

from the TDC website

---

As soon as it's available, you'll be able to download your copy from this site.

Soon after that, you'll be able to read our "Readers Digest" summary of the key points and what it means for you.

Flybe, Manston, night flights and the truth

We wondered whether night flights would have made a difference to Flybe's decision to quit Manston.

After all, Charles Buchanan's constant message in the media is that night flights are essential to the airport's long-term commercial success, and Flybe is exactly the kind of high volume passenger carrier that Manston wants to attract (and keep).

So had the lack of scheduled night flights made Manston less attractive? Would scheduled night flights have persuaded Flybe to stay?

So we asked them...

---

Hi Flybe,

Nice to talk to you just now, and thanks for offering to get me an answer to my question about Flybe leaving Manston airport.

I'd like to know if it would have made a difference to Flybe's decision to leave if the local authority, Thanet District Council, had agreed to allow night-time flying at Manston.

What was the main reason for Flybe deciding to pull out of Manston?

Best wishes,

NNF

---

Hi NNF,

Thanks for your email.

Please see below for the statement available from Flybe regarding Manston Airport.

Best Wishes,

Flybe

Simon Lilley, Flybe’s Director of Marketing, comments:

“It is with regret that Flybe can confirm it will cease its operations from Manston International Airport with effect from the end of IATA Winter season on March 25th, 2012.

“Flybe carefully reviews the viability of all our 200 plus routes on a regular basis looking not only at passenger numbers but also at external cost pressures. This is done not only to monitor where we can offer increased regularity on a given route but also where passenger numbers make a flight uneconomic.

“Our ongoing commitment to Manston has been reliant on the success of the Edinburgh service that we launched in May 2010.  Despite extensive marketing of this route both in Scotland and throughout SE England, the challenging economic environment with which we are all faced has meant passenger numbers remain at unsustainable levels, and are insufficient to financially justify its continued operation.

“All passengers who have booked flights online for next summer will be contacted by Flybe and offered a full refund or re-accommodated on alternate flights; and in the interim we look forward to welcoming on board those passengers who continue to book and use our Edinburgh service from now through to the end of March.”

-Ends-

Issued by Flybe press office

T: 0845 675 0681

E: pressoffice@flybe.com

---

Hi Flybe,

I still need to know about Flybe's attitude to night flights. If Thanet Council had agreed to all night flying would Flybe have stayed at Manston? This is what some of the councillors are asserting and I need to know how much truth there is in it.

It looks from your statement that Flybe went for wider economic reasons than just the night flights but I do need you to state something about it!

So the direct question is: if there had been more night flights allowed at Manston Airport would Flybe have stayed there? Yes or No?

Best wishes,

NNF

---

Hi NNF,

Thanks for your note – the answer would be no.

Kind Regards,

Flybe

Manston villagers only got half the story

NEWSFLASH: the real reasons Flybe quit Manston - click HERE

---

It makes sense to hear both sides of the story, and to hear some of the facts that Mr Buchanan might not tell you. If any other parish councils, residents associations, or other community groups are thinking of discussing night flights, do please feel free to invite the NoNightFlights group to send along someone to speak.

The parishioners of Manston voted in favour of night flights having heard one side of the story from Charles Buchanan. I have no idea why the parish Council didn't let the parishioners hear a balanced view.

Manston airport is not proposing "as many as eight flights at night", they are proposing unlimited night flights. The future of Manston airport is not dependent on night flights, it is dependent on sheer volume of traffic, be it passenger or freight. During the last 11 years, while it has been in private hands, operating without restrictions on its daytime activities Manston airport has failed to attract the necessary volume of traffic.

Infratil have not "invested" £40 million in the airport, they have lost £40 million on a bad investment. Cllr Dearing tells me that the parishioners were presented with the choice of vote for night flights or lose the airport – disingenuous to say the least.

---

Villagers from Manston have voiced support for the airport's new night-time flying policy. Those attending an extraordinary meeting of Manston Parish Council last Friday (11th Nov) voted 36 to 7 in favour of supporting proposals to have as many as eight flights a night.

Airport chief executive Charles Buchanan attended the meeting to give a presentation and to take questions from the public, for the first time since Infratil submitted a request for a new policy and lifting of the ban on scheduled night flights to Thanet council last month. Mr Buchanan said:

"This noise policy is important because it will allow the airport to develop and allow the airport to bring economic value to the area."

He told the meeting that the adoption of the new policy was "fundamental" to the success of the airport, and said more nights flights would create as many as 3,000 local jobs and bring £650,000 into the economy every year. Mr Buchanan warned that if the policy was rejected it could have detrimental affect on the airport's future. He said:

"We have invested £40 million in this airport, and a large part of that is funding losses. If we don't see any prospect of more night flights, then we have a big issue."

After his presentation he took questions from the villagers representing both sides of the debate on night flights. The only parish councillor to dispute the proposals was John Dearing, who cast doubt on whether night flights would bring as many passengers and jobs as the master plan of airport owner Infratil claims.

Mr Dearing said the prediction that passengers numbers will increase to 2.2 million a year by 2018 was "desperately optimistic and deeply flawed". He said:

"This is against a backdrop of rising fuel charges, financial crisis in Europe, and the growing evidence now that people are cutting back on oversea holidays. The master plan forecast was based on vastly out-of-date information, and is not an honest basis on which to press for night flights at Manston."

Explaining the majority support for the airport, Manston Parish Council vice-chairman Bill Bell said:

"I suppose people feel as if they are part of the airport, it is a part of their history. Personally I live right by Manston airport and I haven't got a problem with the proposals. I am ex-RAF and the sound of planes doesn't effect me whatsoever."

Mr Buchanan said he was pleased with the support from the village. He said:

"The airport shares its name with the village, so our relationship must be close. People have lived with the airport all their lives, they have grown up with the airport and they want to see it succeed and develop."

thisiskent 18th Nov 2012

Trevor wants a Parkway

NEWSFLASH: the real reasons Flybe quit Manston - click HERE

---

Kent Online's business editor Trevor Sturgess argues for a Parkway station and high speed rail links, but I think he's missed a few relevant points [my comments are bracketed in italics].

---

Flybe’s decision to pull out of Manston is another blow to the airport, especially disappointing at the turn of the year. However attractive we in Kent think Manston is, it seems that not enough people agree.

Flybe’s bold experiment to run flights to Edinburgh, Manchester and Belfast was welcomed, but once again it ends in disappointment. The Manchester service was pulled some time ago, and the Belfast operation was grounded at the end of the summer. Edinburgh has been popular with leisure flyers, students, servicemen and women, and some business folk. But the lack of a day round trip made it inconvenient for business. It was a similar disappointment a few years ago when the Irish-based airline EUjet went belly-up after stretching itself over too many services.

[Business sense, and common sense, meant that Flybe reserved its prime slots at Manchester, Edinburgh and Belfast for the flights that they knew were going to be full. This meant that flights offering same day turnaround were not available for Manston. This is simply another example of success breeding success, and the devil take the hindmost. This is a problem that Manston will always face - they will have to make the most of the scraps and crumbs offered to them, at least to start with.]

So despite the smiles on the ebullient airport CEO Charles Buchanan, Manston has a problem with scheduled passenger services. What message does Flybe's decision send to other would-be operators? Manston has no difficulty with freight - including horses through its new equine centre - and charter flights to holiday places in the summer do pretty well. Car parking is a breeze. Two minutes after unloading the boot, you are in the terminal.

[Manston has the same difficulty with freight as it does with passengers – not enough. The holiday charter flights are seasonal, and few in number. The ease of parking and rapid access to the terminal are both a direct result of Manston being a tiny airport. If Manston does grow in line with its business plan, to the point where it's handling 3 million passengers in 2018, the car park will have to be larger, the walk will be longer, and checking in will be take longer. This is the downside of growth.]

Yet there just doesn’t seem to be a big enough market for scheduled services. Why is this? OK, the downturn has not helped but there must surely be something more fundamental than that. One factor is constrained night-time flying. Thanet council should back the airport's modest demands, despite opposition from some residents. It would, after all, be good for jobs and local people desperately need them. Manston ought to be the solution to over-crowding at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted. But the Kent terminal with one of the longest runways in the UK has been largely overlooked in official reports, even though senior Kent people are always talking up its credentials.

[The long-standing ban on scheduled night flights is not what prevents the airport being a success. Easyjet went to Southend airport – which doesn't have night flights. London City airport and Belfast airport, both very successful, are shut overnight.

The airport's demands are not modest – they are asking for an unlimited number of flights between 11pm and 7am. The only restriction they are suggesting is between 11:30pm and 6am.

There is no evidence that night flights would be good for jobs – quite the reverse. The 3,000 jobs that Manston says it will create by 2018 is an absurd overestimate. The few hundred jobs that it might create will be easily exceeded by the number of jobs lost in the local tourism industry.

Incidentally, the length of Manston runway is no longer the advantage that it once was, as more efficient modern planes can take off and land in shorter distances.]

Manston’s disadvantage is that it’s more than 60 miles from London. At the eastern end of the UK, It is not surrounded by chimney pots.  But remote airports are not seen as a disadvantage by the likes of Ryanair and EasyJet who bus people miles from a cheap out-of-town terminal.

[Now at last we get to the heart of the matter. Location, location, location.

Ryanair and easyJet can take advantage of "remote airports" if and only if they are the closest airports to the passengers' ultimate destination. East Kent is not a popular destination for air passengers, London is. The huge number of passengers London attracts will inevitably and understandably use the airports that are more convenient.

So Manston loses out as an airport for arrivals, and it also loses out as an airport for departures. Again it's down to location. If you draw a 30 mile circle around any successful passenger airport, you will find that the circle is full of people. If you draw a 30 mile circle around Manston, you will find that 75% of it is full of seawater. There aren't enough people living near enough Manston for it to succeed.

To be a successful passenger airport, you don't need night flights, you need passengers.]

Roads like the Thanet Way are pretty good but potential customers from South East London probably think they are worse than they are. So make it easy.  A Manston Parkway station and dedicated high-speed railway –a “Manston Express?” – would make a huge difference. The Regional Growth Fund allocated some welcome cash for a track upgrade. For a fraction of the cost of a Boris Island or Foster's Grain proposal, upgraded links would transform Manston's image. It would be great to see politicians "getting it" in 2012.

[Manston airport and KCC applied to the Regional Growth Fund for £10 million to build a Parkway station (and a £600,000 sweetener to persuade KLM to use the airport). They were turned down flat. The government decided that the forecast number of passengers did not justify a station, and in any case the spur to Manston airport would slow down the trains on the recently upgraded line to Ramsgate.]

But the sad truth at the moment is that investors - and other scheduled operators - will be wary of committing to a terminal that keeps suffering setbacks.

The Business Blog, Trevor Sturgess 28th Dec 2011

Man moves house, Manston issues press release

This seems to be another fine example of PR puffery in action. It appears that Mr McQuarrie was already "Group Manager Freight Development for both airports" - so it's unclear what he'll be doing that wasn't already in his job description. The only bit of news appears to be that is moving house from Scotland to Margate. Rather poignantly, he is another employee who tries to play up Manston's lack of business as an advantage: "no congestion".

---

Manston Airport’s ability to attract freight operators has been given a boost with the appointment of an experienced freight development manager - Allan McQuarrie, 46, joined Infratil in 2007 and until recently, has been based at their airport in Prestwick, Glasgow.

Having moved to Margate, Allan will now be based at Manston, Kent, full time, concentrating on encouraging cargo operators to use the airport for chartered and scheduled flights. Allan McQuarrie, Group Manager Freight Development for both airports, said:

“I see a huge future for Manston which was part of my reason for moving here. Many freight carriers are looking for an airport that is near to London and Manston has some key selling points that are difficult to rival. There is no congestion so there will never be a situation where an aircraft is circling for an hour. Our dedicated team on the ground can turn a 747 round in around 90 minutes with freight being loaded straight into a lorry rather than a warehouse to be moved at a later date – this can often add an extra day to a product’s shelf life. At some airports, including Heathrow and Gatwick, the turn around time can be up to four hours which is obviously less attractive for operators.”

Originally from Zimbabwe but UK-based since 1984, Allan has worked in air cargo since leaving school and has experience as a freight forwarder, as well as working for airlines such as Air UK and now airports.

“Having had experience in all areas of air cargo I have a very good idea of what the customer is looking for. Manston’s proximity to London with easy access to the UK’s motorway network is a huge selling point. Being based within easy reach of the Channel ports, and therefore Europe, is also an advantage.”

Manston’s Master Plan shows the airport handling 167,000 tonnes of freight by 2018. Recent independent research by York Aviation, a leading aviation consultancy, shows that these levels are achievable, provided a managed and limited Night-time Flying Policy is implemented as submitted to Thanet District Council recently.

Charles Buchanan, Chief Executive Officer of Manston, said:

“Our investment in Allan’s role is a very important one for the airport as its long term success depends on attracting airlines here. As well as researching prospective customers, he will attend trade shows around the world to speak to anyone that could make use of Manston and spreading the message of the economic potential of East Kent.”

onlykent 1st Dec 2011