Brussels region noise regulation

[sn26567]

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

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

Tom, I respect everyone's opinion and I try to make a balance between the wishes of the ones and the other. I do of course want a development of Brussels Airport. The problem stems from the fact that the airport is badly located, and there are few alternatives.

Hence a solution that is proposed by member b-west (who is not posting on Luchtzak these days, but with whom I'm still in contact): Let an autonomous body decide how the planes should fly, instead of populist politicians. Safer for all involved.

In my view, that autonomous body should be exclusively made of foreigners and its findings should be binding.

You cannot rely on politicians to find a solution. If they want to be re-elected, they have to relay the opinions of their constituents, which will always lead to conflicts.

You cannot either rely on the people directly affected or involved: they will always react with a NIMBY attitude. An independent body of foreign experts should be set up to decide on a final solution.

[Fairfax]

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.

Noise perception is subjective, but when I read in between the lines, I must conclude that a resident of Brussels is more worth than a resident of Erps-Kwerps, Leuven, Tervuren or Grimbergen?

[Passenger]

Belgium (= the federal state) has a 25% stake in Brussels Airport Company nv/sa. All Belgians therefore benefit from the profit the airport makes, so all Belgians therefore should accept de lusten en de lasten: the good things and the bad things.

[Passenger]

Noise perception is subjective, but when I read in between the lines, I must conclude that a resident of Brussels is more worth than a resident of Erps-Kwerps, Leuven, Tervuren or Grimbergen?

Indeed. Airport noise should be disperted over as much different areas as possible. And not, like some here suggest, over as many people as possible. If we only consider the number of inhabitants, those living in Wezenbeek-Oppem should accept all aircraft during 40 days. Then it's above Brussels for just 1 day, then 40 days above Meise/Grimbergen, then 50 days above Sterrebeek, then again just 1 day over Brussels, then 40 days Wezenbeek-Oppem, ...

The solution should be a combined dispertion plan LHR + AMS. Change the runway use frequently during day time, example every half hour, and change the general direction once a week.Allways weather permitting of course.

[sn26567]

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.

Noise perception is subjective, but when I read in between the lines, I must conclude that a resident of Brussels is more worth than a resident of Erps-Kwerps, Leuven, Tervuren or Grimbergen?

This is not what I wrote. What I mean is that you should compare the number of people affected by each route. It is evident that the canal route will affect a lot more people than the ring route. But I am not against letting a certain number of flights over Brussels. There should be a balance.

Of course, Liege has found a solution that will be difficult to implement in Brussels: expropriate the houses that are under the main air routes and insulate the other houses affected by strong noise. Some people around Brussels Airport have bought their houses knowing that there would be noise. But this is not the case for most inhabitants of the Brussels region.

[Fairfax]

Sorry André; don't agree. The solution that passenger proposes makes perfect sense: spread the flights over regions. After all, that is indeed what bigger airports do. No region/area should be advantaged.

[sn26567]

Let's agree to disagree. As long as the discussion remains fair.

I try to take into account the opinions of every region, and not to stick to the arguments of a single region.

And in a solution, whatever it is, every region will have to take some and leave some.

[Magiktrix]

Its exactly the same around every major airport. No citizen as more or less value than another. What is done in other countries is simply to reduce the number of impacted citizens. Spreading mean that you impact as much citizens possible, its not done like that anywhere.
The problem in belgium is that we have two tribes that cannot understand that and are just trying to piss off the other. Maybe a solution would be to bring some foreign ATCO expert.

[Fairfax]

Let's agree to disagree. As long as the discussion remains fair.

I try to take into account the opinions of every region, and not to stick to the arguments of a single region.

And in a solution, whatever it is, every region will have to take some and leave some.

I work at the airport, and live under the departure routes. I will always defend "my airport". It is nevertheless strange to see that some people on this forum use the same rhetoric as the Brussels government.

[Passenger]

Its exactly the same around every major airport. No citizen as more or less value than another. What is done in other countries is simply to reduce the number of impacted citizens.

This means that 95% of the flights should be sent over the less populated areas = Meise, Grimbergen, Sterrebeek, Wezenbeek-Oppem, Tervuren. And 5% over Brussels.

The problem in belgium is that we have two tribes that cannot understand that and are just trying to piss off the other. Maybe a solution would be to bring some foreign ATCO expert.

If so, a Belgian department or a Belgian institution has to give them basic instructions. Do those foreign ATCO experts have to execute your plan above = keep flights away from Brussels? Because that's the city with the most inhabitants? Or do they have to do like it's done at LHR= everyone has to accept flights every now and then?

[saratoga]

I always say: Brussels has always been a dirty barrel without bottom, i would even say: pandora's box. In that way Trump has a point. It is hell.... If you touch them you always get shit. Time to get some action. They want all the flights over Flemish territory??? Fine, then also all the jobs going to the Flemish. And all the revenue going to Flemish institutions. Boycot al the jobseekers coming from that hellhole area and point them out how it comes. Being nice has reached its limits.

[luchtzak]

Can someone remind me the fines that must be paid from midnight?

I will make a simulation for flights tomorrow before 0700am.

[lumumba]

I always say: Brussels has always been a dirty barrel without bottom, i would even say: pandora's box. In that way Trump has a point. It is hell.... If you touch them you always get shit. Time to get some action. They want all the flights over Flemish territory??? Fine, then also all the jobs going to the Flemish. And all the revenue going to Flemish institutions. Boycot al the jobseekers coming from that hellhole area and point them out how it comes. Being nice has reached its limits.

Come on saratoga let's not go this way if you go over this treat you will see that we can be disagree but it's not black or white...

Let's stay constructive here.

[saratoga]

I understand your opinion lumumba but i feel that, without being nationalist, the flemish had patience enough with the "brussels-i-dont-know-what". You remember late 2004 the DHL story? Who was here again the troublemaker??

[Fairfax]

The reactions on this issue in Le Soir are staggering:
http://www.lesoir.be/1445181/article/ac ... -d-interet

"les emplois sont à 90% flamand, les bénefs aussi, alors ils peuvent bien en supporter les nuisances égalemment nondediou!"

These people are really enjoying themselves it seems. Sad, really sad ... Even when a minority of the jobs goes to Brussels residents, these people also risk to loose their jobs ... (most of them - baggagistes/cargo - being part of vulnerable groups ...)

[lumumba]

I understand your opinion lumumba but i feel that, without being nationalist, the flemish had patience enough with the "brussels-i-dont-know-what". You remember late 2004 the DHL story? Who was here again the troublemaker??

Hey saratoga

Not only Brussels it was everybody at the time if I remember well.

Anyway today I don't understand the move of Brussels.
I don't like mister Weyts but when he is saying that it's the Belgian model to give time to discuss I'm agree with him.(And this from a Flemish Nationalists)

Also Brussels is in a strong position I don't understand why it has to go so fast now it's a sign of weakness.

[sn26567]

Could you all please try to open your mind and listen to the arguments of both sides? Nobody has the privilege of having the only truth. Both sides have valid arguments. And there will be no solution if everybody sticks staunchly to his position. You give some and you take some: the only way out!

[Fairfax]

Could you all please try to open your mind and listen to the arguments of both sides? Nobody has the privilege of having the only truth. Both sides have valid arguments. And there will be no solution if everybody sticks staunchly to his position. You give some and you take some: the only way out!

Don't you think that, as employees and aviation enthusiasts, we should, stick together and defend the airport and the jobs against Nimby's?

[sn26567]

Don't you think that, as employees and aviation enthusiasts, we should, stick together and defend the ariport and the jobs against Nimby's?

That's exactly what I do. But the airport will survive (with its jobs) only if it is accepted all over the country. Putting one community against another one could have dire consequences.

I am sure that there is a solution that will more or less be acceptable for everybody and that will save the airport and all its jobs. But not with ukases and NIMBY attitudes.

[sn26567]

My Luchtzak colleagues are laughing at me for taking all the headwind, but I don't see them trying to moderate this difficult discussion