15 October 2005: D-day BRU

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 08 Nov 2005, 18:13

It seems that there will be no solution, at this moment, for the airport of BRU. Mister Landuyt decided that he will be work on a juridical base for the dispersion plan. That's the plan he had month's ago.
He decided that because at this moment the Brussels government don't ask any penalty.

Besides that he will talk further with the governments but he don't see a solution in the near future.

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 08 Nov 2005, 19:11

The main reason why Brussels don't want the talk anymore is due to the plan of Landuyt to use the runway 25L Saturday afternoon for takeoff. But it don't can be used by the heavy's and BIAC and Belgocontrol have said that to Landuyt.

The government of Brussels want a signal of the federal government if the are behind the plans of Landuyt.

This week no talks anymore due to the absence of Leterme.

LX-LGX · Post by **LX-LGX** » 08 Nov 2005, 19:36

If the honourable minister of Transport admits that he cannot solve this air transport problem, he admits he's incompetent for his job.

Where does he has to apply for a job as collector of luggage trolleys?

Is Pizza Hut still looking for delivery boys?

pascal-air · Post by **pascal-air** » 08 Nov 2005, 19:41

How my god ! As far it was decided to disperse flights, it is impossible to find an acceptable and suitable solution. So, don't waste your time to find one ! Invest your money and time into a scalable airport. There are some in Belgium, but EBBR is a near dead airport.

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 15 Nov 2005, 19:29

Some actiongroups of the East- and South side of the airport are going to work together to stay stronger in their protest against the dispersion plan of the airport.

The main goal of this group is going back to the situation of 1999 and 2000 and get rid of the dispersion plan. Before that plan there were less complains.

Source: www.vrtnieuws.net

SN_Bigbirdy · Post by **SN_Bigbirdy** » 15 Nov 2005, 21:14

The main goal of this group is going back to the situation of 1999 and 2000 and get rid of the dispersion plan. Before that plan there were less complains.

I believe that the main goal of this group and of other groups is to close EBBR! All those actiongroups still will be complaining if 1 single aircraft passes their backyard. Their main goal is silence in their homes and backyards, but the 60.000 workers (direct AND indirect) they rather like to forget ...

If I were those groups , I should not forget that 'minor' detail because who will feel the extra 60.000 unemployed persons? Indeed, we, the tax-payer. Correct me if I'm wrong but those groups are also tax-payers and what will be their next project if they reache their goals : dispersion plans for taxes??

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 16 Nov 2005, 19:08

In the newspaper of today, Het Nieuwsblad, stood the story that I mentioned two posts above this.

The actiongroups will not melt into one group but they will have a stronger voice. The group exist: AWACCS, Sterrebeek 2000, Wake up Kraainem, Wakker Tervuren, Decibel 25L, Kortenberg, Actiegroep Groot-Bertem, Actiegroep Groot-Herent, Zone S-Steenokkerzeel and Oud-Heverlee.

It's very clear that the main group exist in East Brussels and some groups around Leuven.

pascal-air · Post by **pascal-air** » 16 Nov 2005, 20:45

Atlantis wrote:In the newspaper of today, Het Nieuwsblad, stood the story that I mentioned two posts above this.

The actiongroups will not melt into one group but they will have a stronger voice. The group exist: AWACCS, Sterrebeek 2000, Wake up Kraainem, Wakker Tervuren, Decibel 25L, Kortenberg, Actiegroep Groot-Bertem, Actiegroep Groot-Herent, Zone S-Steenokkerzeel and Oud-Heverlee.

It's very clear that the main group exist in East Brussels and some groups around Leuven.

How long do you think it will take for the government to realise that the only ONE solution, suitable, acceptable and realistic, is to go back to the 1999 situation ?

I am completely disappointed to see some silly guys like anciaux and landuyt trying other solutions, that are born-dead.

SN_Bigbirdy · Post by **SN_Bigbirdy** » 16 Nov 2005, 21:27

Atlantis wrote: It's very clear that the main group exist in East Brussels and some groups around Leuven.

I'm shocked

I live in Leuven and I do not have noisetrouble of plaines passing by at all!!! For me it's a total mystery about what Oud-Heverlee complains 8O 8O .
Herent I might understand; it lies straight under 25L final and sometimes the planes fly over very

low. But hey, like they say : "after 25 years of living there, you don't notice it anymore, you get used to it"... except for those who built there recently.

If you ask me : this problem is getting too hard a sore subject for the government and they can't handle it anymore

Grtz
Simon

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 18 Nov 2005, 20:48

Today in Het Nieuwsblad.

The Noordrand will support mister Landuydt in his plans for the airport and they are against the concentrations above the Noordrand.

This is opposite the requests of the East and South actiongroups who support the Brussels governments.

It's more and more clear that they don't care about the airport but it's a whole group of people against an other group of people.

pascal-air · Post by **pascal-air** » 18 Nov 2005, 21:43

Atlantis wrote:It's more and more clear that they don't care about the airport but it's a whole group of people against an other group of people.

More than a group against another group, it is Brussels VS Flanders.
and the winner is...

hepho84 · Post by **hepho84** » 19 Nov 2005, 12:56

pascal-air wrote:More than a group against another group, it is Brussels VS Flanders.
and the winner is...

...nobody in this case I'm affraid

pascal-air · Post by **pascal-air** » 19 Nov 2005, 19:54

hepho84 wrote:
pascal-air wrote:More than a group against another group, it is Brussels VS Flanders.
and the winner is...
...nobody in this case I'm afraid

No politicians are winner, because Brussels will said they have defended brussels interest, and flemish will say they have defended flemish interests. In fact they are two winners and two loosers: winners are brussels and flemish governments, loosers are zaventem area inhabitants, and zaventem airport. inhabitants because the situation will never get better because no insulation etc, and airport because the situation will be instable and it will probably be forced in a mid term to reduce its traffic, and in a long term to close.

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 23 Nov 2005, 19:21

Premier Verhofstadt is pro the proposals of mister Landuydt about the dispersion plans for the airport of BRU, it means the federal government is behind Landuyt. Verhofstadt says this to Charles Piqué, he was the person who wants to know what the federal government was thinking.

For the moment no negociations any more.

Post by **luchtzak** » 24 Nov 2005, 13:43

This is a very difficult topic to moderate, I had to remove a few very political comments: I suggest to keep this topic aviation-related with a side of political items in it and not vv.

SN_Bigbirdy · Post by **SN_Bigbirdy** » 26 Nov 2005, 16:30

I found this on luchtvaartnieuws.be :

"The Belgian council of ministers has approved last Friday (25-11-2005) the draft-flightregulation. this regulation covers in flightprocedures which guarantees a save, stable en durable exploitation of Brussels Airport. Besides this, there will become a better well-balanced relationship between the social-economical proposals and the interests of the neighbours. The bill first has to be approved by the State Council.

Until now, there was lack of a legal frame and some judges had remarks concerning the legitimacy of the routes in use. The new law uses 3 criteria : security, maximum number of movements in the air and public health (sound, gas etc...). The law also founds an advisory board which will apply the criteria accurately"

source : http://www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl/news/?id=11311

grtz,
Simon

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 28 Nov 2005, 17:41

I saw today an article on the site of the VRT about the problems around the airport of BRU. ( http://www.vrtnieuws.net/nieuwsnet_mast ... ndex.shtml )

Mister Landuyt says tht after 2008 they can talk again about a new dispersion plan. Why after 2008: DHL is moving from Bru to Leipzig.

He says also that there is no cooperation on the sides of Brussels and Flanders. So this means that Landuyt till 2008 everytime can change the dispersion plan and this can be juridical consequenses for the airport. That's why the new law about the airport has received a "go" from the federal part. This means that judges have to respect this law.

But in practice............

SN_fan · Post by **SN_fan** » 28 Nov 2005, 19:19

What was the situation before 1999

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 28 Nov 2005, 19:50

It was also a topic on the evening news of VRT.

The plan of Landuyt is work out the "pro's" of the negociations between the Brussels and Flanders governments. Some of the agreements are the limits of nightflights per year, start up a workgroup with people of BIAC, Belgocontrol till people of airlines who make from Zaventem a big workpool with respect for the socio- and economical environment. This was decided during the START-project for the airport.

If they can reach this step by step they can find a solution for the last 3 problems. This was also the comment of the VRT.

Post by **sn26567** » 04 Dec 2005, 10:53

SN_fan wrote:What was the situation before 1999?

The safest and only intelligent one: the runways were chosen in function of the atmospheric conditions!

Please let's go back to the pre-1999 situation