Move the national airport to Beauvechain? Or add tracks in BRU ?

[jan_olieslagers]

the 367.000 francophones who live in flanders

I am afraid there is not much tolerance left for immigrants who won't integrate

[lumumba]

Why it's not a bad idee ...

Because it is politically inspired and not supported by any business case with positive ROI, that's why

I'm not a politician and I live in Brussels for one year the planes where flying over my house and it was a disaster .
I think it's not a hidden agenda you also have to hear what poeple say.
I think that Brussels Airport has to close at night and needs a restriction for day flights.
And I'm not crazy it's my opinion and 100% of my district which we are in contact with.
Brussels Airport is to close a badly orientated it's a pity but it's like that.
That's why this project could be a solution nothing more for me !!

To make it clear I'm Dutch speaking and from Antwerp and now living in Brussels.

[teddybAIR]

I live in Brussels for one year the planes where flying over my house and it was a disaste

Why don't you relocate then? I lived in Evere for over 20 yeards. Never did I or any of my neighbours complain about the noise levels. We chose to live there, and accepted the inconveniences that come with the advantages of having the second biggest economical driver at 5km of your doorstep.

I moved from Evere...I live even closer to the airport now Loving it! Technological evolution is going so fast that new generation long haul planes (eg 787's) noise signatures are only a fraction of the Avro's aka. 'whisperjets' that were introduced at Sabena. This technological progress is continuing and will make this entire noise debate obsolete for anybody living more than 2km away from the airport. Certainly when current technology will be implemented in medium and short haul designs.

I currently live 600m down RWY25R threshold a little offset to the right. When I get friends at home, they literally ask me how far the airport is, so I take them outside and point my finger. Every single time they thought it was still 10-20km away from my doorstep. So sometimes, noise nuissance is simply a political issue.

[teddybAIR]

Hey Lumumba, just out of curiosity: in which commune did you live and during which period?

[lumumba]

I live in Brussels for one year the planes where flying over my house and it was a disaste

Why don't you relocate then? I lived in Evere for over 20 yeards. Never did I or any of my neighbours complain about the noise levels. We chose to live there, and accepted the inconveniences that come with the advantages of having the second biggest economical driver at 5km of your doorstep.

I moved from Evere...I live even closer to the airport now Loving it! Technological evolution is going so fast that new generation long haul planes (eg 787's) noise signatures are only a fraction of the Avro's aka. 'whisperjets' that were introduced at Sabena. This technological progress is continuing and will make this entire noise debate obsolete for anybody living more than 2km away from the airport. Certainly when current technology will be implemented in medium and short haul designs.

I currently live 600m down RWY25R threshold a little offset to the right. When I get friends at home, they literally ask me how far the airport is, so I take them outside and point my finger. Every single time they thought it was still 10-20km away from my doorstep. So sometimes, noise nuissance is simply a political issue.

I understand your point of view I lived in Evere has wel by the way.
But my point is that when an airport location is so close to a big city and with a very bad orientation you have to put restrictions you can not ask to more than 1 million poeple to think like you.
That's maybe why this project could be a good idee or another.
I remember some project to put a big airport in between Paris an Brussels etc...
I don't say it's the solution but we have to think about.

[lumumba]

Hey Lumumba, just out of curiosity: in which commune did you live and during which period?

Now I live in Oudergem but I lived in Evere and Jette has wel...

And when I moved to there there where no planes flying over and when they changed the routes it became hell .
Everything is back to normal it's not that we don't have planes (Qatar and some others still fly over our house but not much)we have but not just over our house.

[sean1982]

The whole concept off: "the airport makes noise so has to move" it totally wrong. The airport was there first, it has made noise for a long time, it had allowed a lot of people to buy a house cheaper than the normal price, it keeps pur country running. The airport needs to stay exactly where it is and the nimby's have to move.

[teddybAIR]

The real problem is not the noise. When you live in brussels, ambient noise levels are higher than the ones generated by aircraft with the exception of the occasional freighter that has a hard time climbing out.

The real problem is that due to our country's poor political structures, the airport is physically located on flemish territory traffic partly overflies brussels territory. A few people have electoral interest in blowing this out of proportion.

Now, we can discuss it. Someone can make a nice little white paper about it. It can come on the evening prime time news. But i guarantee you that the airport is going to stay where it is. At least, that's where I put my money.

By the way: you didn't react on my point on technological evolition and lower noise signatures of new aircraft, while that is exactly what's relevant for future noise nuissance

[lumumba]

The whole concept off: "the airport makes noise so has to move" it totally wrong. The airport was there first, it has made noise for a long time, it had allowed a lot of people to buy a house cheaper than the normal price, it keeps pur country running. The airport needs to stay exactly where it is and the nimby's have to move.

Hi Sean
We had this discussion already and no Brussels was there first(somewhere around 900 after the Christ)airport was made by the German Army in the 40s...etc

[teddybAIR]

Ever read the article on p21 of the environmental report? It shows the evolution of the 55db Noise level around Brussels airport. You can find it here

In my humble opinion, other initiatives - which are consitently ignored in the press because you cannot politically score with them - are far more impactfull, such as: continuous descent final approaches, approaches in lower drag configurations, noise suppressive constructions on and around the airport, lower noise emissions of new aircraft designs, collaborative desicion making to minimize taxi times, noise abattement procedures, noise insullation initiatives,...just to name a few

And you know what the beauty of those initiatives is? The financial burden is carried by the economical stakeholder that has interest in the activity to continue and often implements it in a way that it is a win-win-win situation for all stakeholders.

[teddybAIR]

We had this discussion already and no Brussels was there first

If being there first becomes the criterion, then why the hell relocate anything?!

[lumumba]

The real problem is not the noise. When you live in brussels, ambient noise levels are higher than the ones generated by aircraft with the exception of the occasional freighter that has a hard time climbing out.

The real problem is that due to our country's poor political structures, the airport is physically located on flemish territory traffic partly overflies brussels territory. A few people have electoral interest in blowing this out of proportion.

Now, we can discuss it. Someone can make a nice little white paper about it. It can come on the evening prime time news. But i guarantee you that the airport is going to stay where it is. At least, that's where I put my money.

By the way: you didn't react on my point on technological evolition and lower noise signatures of new aircraft, while that is exactly what's relevant for future noise nuissance

Hi Teddy
About the noise I feel a difference but it's still a plane it make noise I don't believe it I'll changes much.
Also a plane make much less noise when landing than take off when they land on the 01/19 they fly over our house but it's no problem.
Maybe one solution could be to make from the landing runway also a take off runway for the planes that turns to the left so they avoid a densely populated area...

What I don't understand it's why they wanna change the situation in fact Brussels take already a big part of the noise and it works!!!

[teddybAIR]

Maybe one solution could be to make from the landing runway also a take off runway for the planes that turns to the left so they avoid a densely populated area...

I'm not sure I understand what you are suggesting. Can you elaborate a little?

[Acid-drop]

it's explained in the pdf
if you move the tracks further away it could save a lot of noise

[lumumba]

Maybe one solution could be to make from the landing runway also a take off runway for the planes that turns to the left so they avoid a densely populated area...

I'm not sure I understand what you are suggesting. Can you elaborate a little?

Make the 07R/25L also a take off from north to south like 07R/25R so they can turn left they are already 2 km more to the left and the beginning of runway is more to the north!
So you avoid a big part of the city.

[teddybAIR]

I have no idea why this is not the case today. probably historical evolution (taxi times, taxi infrastructure, geography just behind the runway thresholds, performance requirements, etc.) But a valid suggestion and a good illustration of the fact that there are probably more intelligent and elegant solutions than relocating an entire airport...let's relocate the Port of Antwerp while we are at it

[Acid-drop]

let's relocate the Port of Antwerp while we are at it

Well it's already happening.
The economy of Limburg is clearly dépendent of the harbour of Antwerp.
Just like having multiple airports in Belgium happened because BRU couldn't have all requirements.

[lumumba]

I have no idea why this is not the case today. probably historical evolution (taxi times, taxi infrastructure, geography just behind the runway thresholds, performance requirements, etc.) But a valid suggestion and a good illustration of the fact that there are probably more intelligent and elegant solutions than relocating an entire airport...let's relocate the Port of Antwerp while we are at it

But the port of Antwerp makes no problem it's a very good location for a port inside the country and near good infrastructure and harms nobody...
Airport where already closed for the reason of a bad location.
I repeat I don't now if this is the solution here but things has to move... a better solution is possible .

[teddybAIR]

Another 'solution' is probably the evolution we see today: an increased share of market of the regional airports. Unfortunately for the complainers it does not result in lower traffic volumes at any airport since the industry as a whole structurally grows. I just think we need to come to terms with the fact that if population increases and we all want a job, we need economical hubs such as airports and we need to accept yet minimise the nuissance that they generate. IMHO, Brussels airport is doing a perfect job at just that!

[sean1982]

The whole concept off: "the airport makes noise so has to move" it totally wrong. The airport was there first, it has made noise for a long time, it had allowed a lot of people to buy a house cheaper than the normal price, it keeps pur country running. The airport needs to stay exactly where it is and the nimby's have to move.

Hi Sean
We had this discussion already and no Brussels was there first(somewhere around 900 after the Christ)airport was made by the German Army in the 40s...etc

Yeah, the amount of airplanes taking off around 900 after Christ was relativly small i think
Further more, the majority off the people who complain about the noise havent lived there since 1940!!

The only thing that needs to be done imo is that the noise should be spread as evenly as possible decided by experts NOT politicians!