Brussels region noise regulation

[nicopapa]

I haven't read the whole 13 previous pages (but I will catch up), but here is my attempt of a realistic compromise. It doesn't help to comply with the Brussels noise regulation, but I believe it could be seen as an improvement for the communities currently exposed to the aircraft noise around BRU.

FYI and to be transparent, I live in Evere and I grew up in Schaerbeek, enjoying daily low altitude aircraft flying over my parent’s house (greatest memory from my backyard: a glimpse of the NASA 747 carrying the Space Shuttle in the early 80s; just found on Luchtzaak that it was in 1983). I work in an office located in Zaventem, which is affected by aircraft noise whenever the aircraft land on the 01 or take-off from the 19.

Here we go with my proposal.

Each day of western wind, the following communities are exposed to the noise of departing aircraft (correct me if I'm wrong) due to the various departing routes being used concurrently from the 25R:
- Noordrand: affected by right turn route
- Northern part of Brussels Region: affected by the canal route and the "straight" route
- Eastern part of Brussels Region: affected by the left turn route
- Oostrand: affected by the left turn route
- Special cases: Diegem and Haren are exposed by all the routes departing from the 25R

The noise exposure is all day long (6am till 11pm), then I'm not sure what are exactly the prevailing routes at night. I definitely read and heard some people from Brussels complaining about aircraft noise at night, I believe mostly people from the Northern part of Brussels. I remember though that when DHL had its hub in BRU, its aircraft were mainly using the 01/19 for take-off and landing at night (again, correct me if I'm wrong). Overall, I believe that the night time takeoffs are still predominantly operated from the 19.

My proposal is to create 2 distinct operating schemes for the western wind operations:
- Scheme 1 would include the right turn route and the canal and straight route
- Scheme 2 would include the left turn route (probably subdivided in a tight turn route and a wider turn route to avoid the overdose of a single route)

Each scheme would be operated 24 hours in a row, from noon till noon the next day (switch time to be discussed, but I think that mid-day is the most optimum).

At night, all the flights currently operated from the 25R would remain on the 25R and operated according to the relevant scheme, while the operation on the 01/19 would remain unchanged.

The benefit of this approach is that all the communities but the special cases (initially) would benefit from 24 hours of quiet sky at least every other day. That’s where the switch time of the schemes is important. By switching at noon, you ensure that the communities enjoy a quiet evening, a quiet night and a quiet morning. If the switch is at midnight or 6 am, the night or the early morning would be spoiled and I consider that this would diminish the benefits of this proposal.

In the medium term, the proposal can be further improved by the proposed extension of the 25L and especially its connection to a taxiway at its eastern end. This taxiway would allow unrestricted takeoff capacity on this runway, which could then become an alternative to the 25R for takeoff.

The improvement that I propose is that the Scheme 1 would be operated with the 25R active for takeoffs and landings and the 25L active for landing (just like today), while the Scheme 2 would reverse the operations (takeoffs and landings on the 25L and landings only on the 25R). In this way, Diegem and Haren would as well benefit from a quiet sky. There is an issue with this improvement, it is at Zaventem village, which with the current operation schemes isn’t exposed to the takeoff (only on rare case, like this AN-124 that took off from the 25L about year or two ago for a reason that’s not clear to me). This being said, if we take into consideration the proposal from BRU to extend the runway 25L 800 meters eastward, or up to 2000 meters according to other proposal, the fate of Zaventem village would then be equivalent to what Diegem is bearing today.

That’s it about my proposal itself. In a second part, I’ll share a few extra thoughts about the 25L extension, the operation in case of eastern wind and the compliance with the noise regulation of Brussels region.

[Magiktrix]

The so called "canal route" is just a pure political joke, only used during the week-end. The sooner we get rid of it the better.

[nicopapa]

The so called "canal route" is just a pure political joke, only used during the week-end. The sooner we get rid of it the better.

I don't know if you're replying to my post just above, but your input doesn't invalidate my proposal. The fact remains that non of the communities can enjoy a quiet sky any single day when the 25R is in use.

From the post you posted just above, you seem to know pretty well the ATC procedures, could you please comment more widely on my proposal?

[Magiktrix]

I don't need to make a long reply just look what is done in Heathrow

http://www.heathrow.com/noise/heathrow- ... lternation#

[Fairfax]

Jean Marie Dedecker said also not so long ago that all the press is or in Jewish hands or manipulated by them.

He is really not serious he is a populist that's all ,Brussels will never accept money .

I don't really know about that, but what I know is that he may be partly right; politics can be nasty after all. But we need a mature solution for this problem. This is our national airport, and both Flanders and Brussels (and all the expats living in and around Brussels) need the airport. We are all Belgians living in the vicinity of a busy airport and after all, a resident of Brussels doesn't have more privileges/is more worth than a resident of Erps-Kwerps, Grimbergen or Leuven and the other way around. We should just find an equal and fair way of distributing the flights taking into account that we are all equal citizens living around an airport.
I was also thinking along the lines of flying 24 hours above a certain zone (like the post above), so that the other affected zones are noise-free, then another zone, etc ...

[sn26567]

Thank you nicopapa for your in-depth proposal. Maybe you should participate in the consultation group that tries to find a solution.

The so called "canal route" is just a pure political joke, only used during the week-end. The sooner we get rid of it the better.

That canal route was proposed by the Federal Minister in charge some years ago (I don't remember which one), who claimed that during weekends all Brussels people were in their secondary residence in the country and thus that route would not inconvenience anybody

[Passenger]

That canal route was proposed by the Federal Minister in charge some years ago (I don't remember which one)

Wathelet junior. Very junior.

[Boavida]

If the Brussels region continues with its actions to deliberately harm the airport, it can no longer be called "Brussels" Airport. A new name should be proposed.

[lumumba]

If the Brussels region continues with its actions to deliberately harm the airport, it can no longer be called "Brussels" Airport. A new name should be proposed.

Come on stop this simplification we are further than that in this forum...

[Hue]

Brussels rejects the new conflict of interest and wants to start distributing fines starting at midnight (source deredactie.be)

In anticipation, FR didn't have a single departure this morning before 7AM LT. They used to start flying at 6, now they start at 7. In addition to requesting full runway length from 25R for every departure (longer taxi) with a high rate of climb to turn early (while they used to plan for B3 intersection).

[sean1982]

Brussels considers the conflict of trust unlawful and starts charging the fines from midnight.

About a year ago terrorists bombed the airport, now politicians are doing the same. The discussion about the future of SN or any other development of carriers in BRU will be come obsolete very quickly. Thanks god I dont work in this joke of a country.

[Kris]

Brussels considers the conflict of trust unlawful and starts charging the fines from midnight.

About a year ago terrorists bombed the airport, now politicians are doing the same. The discussion about the future of SN or any other development of carriers in BRU will be come obsolete very quickly. Thanks god I dont work in this joke of a country.

If this is really going to happen, I'm wondering how long it will take before the first airline is saying bye-bye to BRU?

[sn26567]

That canal route was proposed by the Federal Minister in charge some years ago (I don't remember which one)

Wathelet junior. Very junior.

Oh no, many years before him. Wathelet implemented the long left turn over Auderghem/Watermaal that was decided by the previous government, which cost him his ministerial function.

[sn26567]

Why should the airlines pay fines when they strictly follow the instructions of Belgocontrol? The latter (thus the Belgian Government) should be the one that pays the fines! And the Belgian Government should be the one to find a solution to the problem. After all, the Council of State, the highest court in the country, validated the claims of the Brussels Region.

And an immediate solution is available: re-route the most noisy flights to existing routes that avoid Brussels.

[sean1982]

Why should the airlines pay fines when they strictly follow the instructions of Belgocontrol? The latter (thus the Belgian Government) should be the one that pays the fines! And the Belgian Government should be the one to find a solution to the problem. After all, the Council of State, the highest court in the country, validated the claims of the Brussels Region.

And an immediate solution is available: re-route the most noisy flights to existing routes that avoid Brussels.

No it's not a solution ... Why should the rand get all the noise above the hautain brusseleirs??

[Passenger]

The thing is escalating.

The Brussels Government rejects the new Conflict of Interest, and Brussels will charge fines as from midnight.

http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws/polit ... =1.2898067

[Magiktrix]

That canal route was proposed by the Federal Minister in charge some years ago (I don't remember which one)

Wathelet junior. Very junior.

No. The first one was Jos Chabbert and the route was called the "Chabbert route". Then Laurette Onkelinx modify it slightly and it was called the "Onkelinx route". And now we call it the "canal route".

I fully agree with the last comment of sn26567. Airlines just do what is published by Belgocontrol. As i said above its the Job of Belgocontrol to bring us the solution.

[Fairfax]

And an immediate solution is available: re-route the most noisy flights to existing routes that avoid Brussels.

Dear André,
Let me rephrase my previous comment:
"We are all Belgians living in the vicinity of a busy airport and after all, a resident of Brussels doesn't have more privileges/is more worth than a resident of Erps-Kwerps, Grimbergen or Leuven and the other way around. We should just find an equal and fair way of distributing the flights taking into account that we are all equal citizens living around an airport."

Right no?

[sn26567]

Why should the airlines pay fines when they strictly follow the instructions of Belgocontrol? The latter (thus the Belgian Government) should be the one that pays the fines! And the Belgian Government should be the one to find a solution to the problem. After all, the Council of State, the highest court in the country, validated the claims of the Brussels Region.

And an immediate solution is available: re-route the most noisy flights to existing routes that avoid Brussels.

No it's not a solution ... Why should the rand get all the noise above the hautain brusseleirs??

Now let's be fair, Sean. Flanders has most of the jobs at the airport (WAL: 2400, BRU: 3000, VL:14600, data from Brussels Airport); Flanders has most of the economic benefits; Flanders represents probably also most of the Belgian travellers. Why wouldn't Flanders have most of the noise as well, in proportion with the benefits? The "hautain" Brusseleirs have also the right to have a quiet night.

[Tompompier]

Speaking of 'hautain', with a reaction like the one above.

From a well respected member as André, I'd expected something else...