Brussels region noise regulation

[sean1982]

Well if there is one thing that comes out of this is that Belgium is a case study that confedederalism (power to the regions) does NOT work and in fact brings this country to it's knees. What these politcians do is possibly even worse than those terrorists last year. The damage they bring is irreversible as there will be NO sympathy from foreign CEO's (who all run our "Belgian" airlines) and can cause a socio-economical blood bath with the stroke of a pen. I hope they sleep well, those Brusseleirs!!

[luchtzak]

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

[Acid-drop]

Ryanair will change its schedule from tomorrow
TUI is taking the risk to keep them as before

[Passenger]

Well if there is one thing that comes out of this is that Belgium is a case study that confedederalism (power to the regions) does NOT work and in fact brings this country to it's knees.

Belgium is no confederal state. Belgium is a federal state. It's thus not "confederalism" that fails, but patriotic nationalism.

[Jetter]

The problem with BRU's regulations isn't (a lack off) nationalism, but shortsighted regionalism.

[sn26567]

The problem with BRU's regulations isn't (a lack off) nationalism, but shortsighted regionalism.

The shortsighted regionalism is on both sides. Politicians from both sides want to be re-elected. None of the regions is currently wanting to give up anything. Brussels made a (timid) proposal that was rejected by Flanders, but Flanders didn't make a counter-proposal. So clearly, unless a neutral (preferably foreign) mediator makes a balanced proposal, nothing is going to change.

[Passenger]

[Brussels made a (timid) proposal that was rejected by Flanders, but Flanders didn't make a counter-proposal. So clearly, unless a neutral (preferably foreign) mediator makes a balanced proposal, nothing is going to change.

Nina Verhaeghe (VRT) said about that proposal from Brussels: it's like "ik zal jouw portefeuille niet stelen op voorwaarde dat je mij jouw portefeuille geeft." Translated: "I will not steal your wallet if you give it to me".

A Flemish minister told what the content of the timid proposal is: "Brussels promises not to collect fines when aircraft do not fly above Brussels".

A counter-proposal was rejected. Two meetings were over, even before they started (the chefs de cabinet last Friday, the ministers on Sunday). Flanders wants to negociate, but Brussels says no. Non. Nee. Nein.

[Acid-drop]

Reminder : you don't need a yes of brussels to have a successfull BRU and keep all jobs.
Flanders is fighting against itself.

[lumumba]

Well if there is one thing that comes out of this is that Belgium is a case study that confedederalism (power to the regions) does NOT work and in fact brings this country to it's knees.

Belgium is no confederal state. Belgium is a federal state. It's thus not "confederalism" that fails, but patriotic nationalism.

Sometimes we are agree passenger

[sn26567]

[Brussels made a (timid) proposal that was rejected by Flanders, but Flanders didn't make a counter-proposal. So clearly, unless a neutral (preferably foreign) mediator makes a balanced proposal, nothing is going to change.

Nina Verhaeghe (VRT) said about that proposal from Brussels: it's like "ik zal jouw portefeuille niet stelen op voorwaarde dat je mij jouw portefeuille geeft." Translated: "I will not steal your wallet if you give it to me".

A Flemish minister told what the content of the timid proposal is: "Brussels promises not to collect fines when aircraft do not fly above Brussels".

I heard that too, but you forgot to read the real content of the Brussels proposal. They would not collect fines under three conditions:

1. No more flights on the Canal route.
2. No more flights on the left turn between 6am and 7am
3. Strictly enforce the wind standards (mainly for landings on 01)

It was a step forward, far from steeling a wallet, methinks.

A counter-proposal was rejected.

Now, which was that counter-proposal?

[Passenger]

A counter-proposal was rejected.

Now, which was that counter-proposal?

To accept the invitation/petition that employers and employees from Brussels Airport had given to all three governments involved a few days earlies: let us sit around the table and discuss/negociate a way out, acceptable for all parties. See homepage:
https://www.aviation24.be/airport-action-g ... ction-day/
Flanders thus requested that the Brussels Government would wait a few more days (or weeks) with their fines, because it doens't make sense to negiociate, when at the same time fines are collected. Vervoort and Fremault refused. Hence Flanders (de Vlaamse Gemeenschap) called a conflict of interest.

[Crosswind]

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

I do agree. But to be fully honest, Brussels city supports around, if not even more, 75% of all departure trafic. There is a real imabalance on that matter since years, and I have to admit (although not impacted) : Brussels seems to be right on this : at least a 50/50 concerning the nuisance repartition would give a long term solution.

[Crosswind]

Flanders thus requested that the Brussels Government would wait a few more days (or weeks) with their fines, because it doens't make sense to negiociate,

Flanders gov. knew this noise regulations since many years. There is absolutely no surprise here.

[Passenger]

But to be fully honest, Brussels city supports around, if not even more, 75% of all departure trafic. There is a real imabalance on that matter since years, and I have to admit (although not impacted) : Brussels seems to be right on this : at least a 50/50 concerning the nuisance repartition would give a long term solution.

If I remember good, Bourgeois (Flemish government) said on VRT tonight that Flanders today gets 60% of all traffic, solely. 35% of the traffic affects both Brussels+Flanders. And only 5% Brussels only.

But the most noisy ones, the cargos taking off from 25R, can't avoid Brussels (at least not Haren). Hence the plans to extend 25L.

Flanders gov. knew this noise regulations since many years. There is absolutely no surprise here.

The surprise is that the Brussels government adapted a tolerance for a number of years (ten years?), and suddenly decided not to use that tolerance anymore.

[saratoga]

I heard or read that it had to do with the eurostadion blocked by Dilbeek.

But that is another topic.

[Passenger]

The latest cynical joke "I won't rob you if you give me your wallet" from Céline Fremault:

VRT: "Het Brusselse Gewest lijkt op de valreep nu toch wat water in de wijn te doen inzake de dreiging met boetes voor geluidshinder van vliegtuigen. De boetes zullen zoals aangekondigd vannacht opgelegd worden, maar ze zouden twee maanden lang niet geïnd worden, aldus Brussels minister van Milieu Céline Fremault..."Translated: The Brussels Government is showing its goodwill. Fremault has decided that Brussels will indeed implement the fines as from midnight, but Brussels won't collect the fines during the next two months.
http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws/politiek/1.2898522

What a relief for the airlines involved: they are fined, punished, but they only have to pay today's fines after 22th April 2017.

[Crosswind]

If I remember good, Bourgeois (Flemish government) said on VRT tonight that Flanders today gets 60% of all traffic, solely. 35% of the traffic affects both Brussels+Flanders. And only 5% Brussels only.

What trafic is he talking about ? Did Bourgeois eat some Trump's pills ? DEP trafic out of 25R is mainly axed toward Brussels.

But the most noisy ones, the cargos taking off from 25R, can't avoid Brussels (at least not Haren). Hence the plans to extend 25L.

I think Brussels citizens could accept some of those noisy cargo if the spreading plan is adapted.

The surprise is that the Brussels government adapted a tolerance for a number of years (ten years?), and suddenly decided not to use that tolerance anymore.

"Bonne gouvernance". Not a single belgian politician could ignore, since those long years of conflict, that Brussels is asking for a "mediation". To get a solution is very easy, imho : give numbers reflecting the real economical asset of the airport ; spread according the regio weighted by inhabitants density.

[Airbus330lover]

too simple for politicians

[sn-remember]

Stretching one runway is far from a stupid idea IMO ..
Also it could facilitate the use with tailwinds .. I know ..deemed less safe but can be with a longer runway ..
Excerpt from the attached:
"A five knot tailwind increase take-off distance with 25% and a ten knot tailwind with about 55%.
The main reasons for executing tailwind operations could be airport noise abatement procedures or commercial operations and in case of certain mountain airports where you land up slope and take-off down slope again."
But even with the normal procedures, gaining a few kms is probably an effective solution to lower the noise nuisance .. And far less costly than building a new airport which is not realistic.
http://www.experimentalaircraft.info/fl ... ance-4.php

[Stij]

Of topic, I know...

Sad day for Belgian aviation and a typical example of our times:

Me, me, me, me...
I don't care about other people's jobs, as long as mine is safe.
I don't care about other people's nuisances, as long as I'm not disturbed.
And for (most of) our politicians, I don't care about anything but filling my pockets today, and making sure I'm re-elected so I can overfill them tomorrow...

That's all folks...

Stij

P.S. This isn't about Brussels, Flanders or Belgium, these are the times we're living in... no honor... no respect...

EDIT: Grammatical issue...