Website is new tool to report Brussels Airport noise

[olympicbis]

Unfortunately, I think that once again its is our dummy govenrment who is to blame. When they gave up on the DHL story - without any concern for the employment of the DHL people - they opened the door to further exageration from all these bastards from awacs and similar sites. As others tated in this thread, the airport was there well before all these parasites came to build their houses.

[pascal-air]

Unfortunately, I think that once again its is our dummy govenrment who is to blame. When they gave up on the DHL story - without any concern for the employment of the DHL people - they opened the door to further exageration from all these bastards from awacs and similar sites. As others tated in this thread, the airport was there well before all these parasites came to build their houses.

First, the government made two mistakes. In 1999, it concantreted all flights above noordrand, but without insulation etc... Then complains grow up, but not so high. Last year, the second mistake was done by Anciaux. And the dispersion is the cause of all the complaints, is the cause of DHL lost, and until it will not be broken, it will cause worse and worse effects.

Please do not tell thazt awacss and so on are bastard, or may be you are a bastard yourself. When you change something significantly, you have to assume your reponsability. And waht you are saying about the east of brussels is completly false. East of brussels is flown by planes since the begining, there this concerns takeoff from 25. No most of the pepople of the east of brussels are complaining abour usage of the 02 baan that were not use so often (only used in case of strong winds from east).

So for me there is oly few options:
+ go back to 1999 situations (most of the governements and associations are asking for it)
+ concentrate the flights on fixed route BUT remove all houses from these routes
+ find another airport and close EBBR, and sell all the lands in order to get money to buid a new one

lol

pascal

[sn26567]

Pascal-air, PLEASE use the SpellCheck before posting your messages.

First, the government made two mistakes. In 1999, it concantreted all flights above noordrand

Not correct. The concentration of flights was the normal situation until 1999. Most flights did take off and land on the safest runway, which imposes an extensive use of the 25 runways most of the time.

the second mistake was done by Anciaux. And the dispersion is the cause of all the complaints, is the cause of DHL lost, and until it will not be broken, it will cause worse and worse effects.

Probably true, but the Anciaux plan was only the last try to fix a situation that was already very bad due to action of the previous ministers.

So for me there is oly few options:
+ go back to 1999 situations (most of the governements and associations are asking for it)
+ concentrate the flights on fixed route BUT remove all houses from these routes
+ find another airport and close EBBR, and sell all the lands in order to get money to buid a new one

True. But Minister Landuyt has already said it is unrealistic to go back to pre-1999 situation. Why? In 1999 there were more flights (Sabena) and less claims!

[pascal-air]

Pascal-air, PLEASE use the SpellCheck before posting your messages.

Sorry I wrote it at work and I had not all my time, and the previous post was too @!--@!!!!!!!...

First, the government made two mistakes. In 1999, it concantreted all flights above noordrand

Not correct. The concentration of flights was the normal situation until 1999. Most flights did take off and land on the safest runway, which imposes an extensive use of the 25 runways most of the time.

Before 1999, several flights went over Brussels. In 1999, there were new routes that concentrated all over the noordrand. I don't know in english, but there was "le petit tour du brabant" : for example, to go to east, planes are flying over the noordrand, then go to the south of brussels, and finally go to the east direction. Of course most of the time runway 25 R was in use for takeoff. But before 1999 planes followed the direction of the destination. Not after 1999. If you want more information I have them about the routes.

True. But Minister Landuyt has already said it is unrealistic to go back to pre-1999 situation. Why? In 1999 there were more flights (Sabena) and less claims!

I think that mister Landuyt is not neutral but flemish. If I were minister, I will go back to the 1999 situation for several main reasons:
+ first, this is not a new situation, so you can not complain about it: the stand-still argument can no longer be used
+ there is a dispersion, acceptable. Moreover the dispersion is over brussels area, as well as over the flemish region. The dispersion does not imply a concentration like landing on 02. Most of the takeoffs will occur on 25 runways, all landings on 25L
+ most of the time, this is the safest solution
+ for the airport, this is the best solution that is allowing the highest capacity

But I think this is the pragmatic point of view, not the politician one

[pascal-air]

In the same idea, it was planed to install a new ILS on runways 07 ? (L or R) Anybody heard about it ? Because this is a stupid idea (02 is used in case of east winds, so why to create now a 07 ILS that will make the planes flying over more populated area than the current 02 path ?)

Sometimes I think that Anciaux is malicious in the way he wants to make the airport close : the more you fly over the high density areas, the more complaints you have. At the end, he will obtain that all belgium citizen wants to close the airport !

So may be it is was he is looking for.