Minister Anciaux wants to close Brussels Airport at Zaventem

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 25 Jul 2006, 19:59

As expected this idea received a no-go.

Tonight some important people and organisations gave there opinion.

Here are some reactions:

- The minister of Transport, Mister Landuydt: "this idea is a too big financial risk. The airport is one of the two major gateways to enter Belgium. You can not moved it".

- The maire of Zaventem: mister Francis Vermeiren: "this idea is absurd. I expect a constructive proposal from a minister and not a dream or a wish of one person. This is not the time".

- UNISO: an organisation of companies: "You can not play with 60.000 to 70.000 jobs. Its a diffucult time and we made progress. We will not allow that it will be destroyed by one person.

In other words: by, by mister Anciaux.

ehamspotter · Post by **ehamspotter** » 25 Jul 2006, 20:00

Hello;

He probably didn't think about tha fact that:

Bevekom needs to grow

there will be more flights at Bevekom, and the people around there probably will complain too

and i'm wondering about the fact that one minister want to do this without discussing with hes coleages.

rgds:Jeroen

b-west · Post by **b-west** » 25 Jul 2006, 21:24

Hey, and when I started a thread it got closed, not fair

:p

Acid-drop · Post by **Acid-drop** » 25 Jul 2006, 21:32

I think Zaventem is very important in the success of the flemish economy.

Move that south and everything can change ... again.

(If I have to suggest an airport, it would be Liege ... only 40 min away by train from brussels, this is less than in some big international cities. And that airport is ready to grow. but yeah ... it's not in the middle of the country, so not very realistic

)

Post by **sn26567** » 26 Jul 2006, 09:25

LX-LGX wrote:An investment for the future that will benefit Vlaams-Brabant (LX-LGX: that's the minister’s own province)…

Bert Anciaux lives in Neder-over-Heembeek, part of the city of Brussels, not in Vlaams-Brabant...

Only his brother is a lawyer in the Noordrand, i.e. Vlaams Brabant

b720 · Post by **b720** » 26 Jul 2006, 11:24

Why even respond to such stupidity.?...we should not give this "regional" minister of sports and culture the satisfaction..

teddybAIR · Post by **teddybAIR** » 26 Jul 2006, 14:21

Sounds like the idea of a three year old to me: "why don't they move the airport daddy???"

Let's brainstorm around this subject, should be fun no?

- Why not build a tunnel under brussels with a diameter of 200m so planes can fly under brussels?
- Why not make the runway a giant elevator, allowing planes to start their take-off rolls at let's say 5000 ft?
- Why don't we build a roof over Brussels?
- ...

Up to you to apply for a minister job now and post your ideas!

Serious now:

instead of handling with the cause of the problems (ie. the airport being so close to Brussels), why not just tackle the consequences. Otherwise you'll influence the benefits of the airport as well. What I mean is: here in belgium people are able to debate for decades on the location of a flight route and we want to pretend we can just relocate an entire airport

pascal-air · Post by **pascal-air** » 27 Jul 2006, 20:19

For me, delocalisation of Zaventem will happen, soon or late. If not, this will be the end of the airport... Why ? No I am against Zaventem, but that's the natural process of cities, growth and delocalisation. If brussels is growing, Zaventem will be more and more unwelcome. But, like many people said, delocalisation is NOT the short term solution, but at LONG term, and it will happen, and for SURE.

So for short term, we have to minimize the impacts, and the solution to minimize is to minimize the number of impacted people, so the concentration.

For long term, it is for sure that zaventem will be closed or downsized, like many other airports near cities.... That is just good sence

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 27 Jul 2006, 21:21

There we go again and again, its boring fellow.

And put the noise in an other area? How selfish. Everyone would take a part of the problem and go back to the situation before 1999.

Or are we going to start up again the battle.

SN30952 · Post by **SN30952** » 28 Jul 2006, 00:07

Did nobody noticed that the biggest airports are near the coast: there are exceptions ORD, ATL, FRA.

SPL, LAX, SIN, HKG, BOM, new DXB. NRT, JFK.

Seoul. New airport on Yongjong Island, near Inchon

New Sydney offshore airport proposed
Japan builds in the sea.
New Kitakyushu Airport was opened on March 16, 2006.
Kansai/Osaka adding a second runway to airport on artificial island in bay
A new $35 billion airport and land reclamation project for Tokyo.
Chubu Centrair International Airport

HKG has an airport in the sea, built by Belgian-Dutch dragging company.
I suggest they build the same off shore, serving Belgium and the Netherlands, and lets not continue to think in the old pattern.

Zenfookpower · Post by **Zenfookpower** » 28 Jul 2006, 01:27

pascal-air wrote:For me, delocalisation of Zaventem will happen, soon or late. If not, this will be the end of the airport... Why ? No I am against Zaventem, but that's the natural process of cities, growth and delocalisation. If brussels is growing, Zaventem will be more and more unwelcome. But, like many people said, delocalisation is NOT the short term solution, but at LONG term, and it will happen, and for SURE.

So for short term, we have to minimize the impacts, and the solution to minimize is to minimize the number of impacted people, so the concentration.

For long term, it is for sure that zaventem will be closed or downsized, like many other airports near cities.... That is just good sence

I cannot understand you.. If Brussels keeps on growing, so will other regions.. where ever you "inplant" a new airport.. Belgium is so small and has 10 milion plus souls..

So what is your "real" solution.. ??? I seems from your previous postings that you don't like this Zaventem at all....If you live in Belgium.. then I don't understand it at all..

I come back on my suggestion which SN30952 seems to echo.. Build a new airport off the Belgian coast..

pascal-air · Post by **pascal-air** » 28 Jul 2006, 19:20

I think that we must separate from short-term solution and long-term solution. For a long term point of view, we all know that Zaventem will die because this is what happened to every airport near a big city. For this case, we have to find a better solution, may be an offshore airport, or an airport shared with another country etc.

For a short term solution we have to minimize the impact of Brussels Airport. In other words, concentrate the routes other non-populated areas, may be start to delocalize all the fret activities to other airports, to find new schema allowing night operations (some pepople proposed to split nights between arrivals and departure and to use 25 for landing and 07 for takeoffs for nights when possible) etc...

I think that the short term solution will prepare the long term solution. So we have to decide when to start the shorterm and long term solution... But in any cases, we all know that investing into Zaventem is loss of moneyand that this airport ahs already entered into its death cycle. Look at other international airport history. It will be the same...

Zenfookpower wrote:
pascal-air wrote:For me, delocalisation of Zaventem will happen, soon or late. If not, this will be the end of the airport... Why ? No I am against Zaventem, but that's the natural process of cities, growth and delocalisation. If brussels is growing, Zaventem will be more and more unwelcome. But, like many people said, delocalisation is NOT the short term solution, but at LONG term, and it will happen, and for SURE.

So for short term, we have to minimize the impacts, and the solution to minimize is to minimize the number of impacted people, so the concentration.

For long term, it is for sure that zaventem will be closed or downsized, like many other airports near cities.... That is just good sence
I cannot understand you.. If Brussels keeps on growing, so will other regions.. where ever you "inplant" a new airport.. Belgium is so small and has 10 milion plus souls..

So what is your "real" solution.. ??? I seems from your previous postings that you don't like this Zaventem at all....If you live in Belgium.. then I don't understand it at all..

I come back on my suggestion which SN30952 seems to echo.. Build a new airport off the Belgian coast..

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 28 Jul 2006, 19:50

@Pascal-air

Are you a member of BRU Air Libre??

Zenfookpower · Post by **Zenfookpower** » 28 Jul 2006, 20:28

Atlantis wrote:@Pascal-air

Are you a member of BRU Air Libre??

You see this is my problem.. I cannot understand that people answer outsiders questions with a political agenda in mind.. Well I give up on this issue, I guess....

I am/was interested because BRU is a nice airport and I do hope that more USA carriers start flying into BRU s.a NW etc.. BRU is very central and has a very good connection to the Eurorail system.. Lots of Americans I know do like Belgium, the nice cities (Brugge, Gent, Antwerp, Brussels, Bastogne, Ardennes etc.). the "joie de vivre", the very nice restaurants, the beer, pattate frittes, chocolate pralines... should I go on...

People like Pacal-Air want to close this airport..? Let me repeat Pascal-Air, most airports do suffer from the same urbain explosions.. But people understand the business importance of an airport..hence they try to cope with it..

Anyway..It seems, from my readings about the subject and with the prevailing Belgian political "winds", this will never get resolved..so one might then comtemplate how to live with it...

Good Luck...

pascal-air · Post by **pascal-air** » 28 Jul 2006, 21:18

Exactly...

I think we just have different opinion.... I enjoy very much aviation and I like it and, I will admit you, a thing that I never admit there (at the forum before) I am close to aviation in many related ways.

Anyway, I have my POLITICAL opinion on the subject, and may be, for sure, it should be bery different from the others.

I will not accept the basic schema: you are against or pro like many stupid boys do. From my point of view, my opinion is more nuanced. I know that is is freezing many people there, anyway I assume it. And the more those people will say that I am extremist, the more I will say that THEY are. So is the postion of Atlantis

Anyway I respect it but my right is to fight it, because this is a place of freedom and respect.

I will not try to convince Atlantis because I know it is possible, but I will respond to him, argue to him every time he will try to demonstrate a fake opinion.

Zenfookpower wrote:
Atlantis wrote:@Pascal-air

Are you a member of BRU Air Libre??
You see this is my problem.. I cannot understand that people answer outsiders questions with a political agenda in mind.. Well I give up on this issue, I guess....

I am/was interested because BRU is a nice airport and I do hope that more USA carriers start flying into BRU s.a NW etc.. BRU is very central and has a very good connection to the Eurorail system.. Lots of Americans I know do like Belgium, the nice cities (Brugge, Gent, Antwerp, Brussels, Bastogne, Ardennes etc.). the "joie de vivre", the very nice restaurants, the beer, pattate frittes, chocolate pralines... should I go on...

People like Pacal-Air want to close this airport..? Let me repeat Pascal-Air, most airports do suffer from the same urbain explosions.. But people understand the business importance of an airport..hence they try to cope with it..

Anyway..It seems, from my readings about the subject and with the prevailing Belgian political "winds", this will never get resolved..so one might then comtemplate how to live with it...

Good Luck...

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 28 Jul 2006, 21:18

Don't worry Zenfookpower, it's only a very few people who wants to close the airport. We received a very strong signal this week from every kind of polical and industrial corner that they want the best for the airport and for all the 60.000 employees who are working direct or in-direct for the airport. There is still work to do, but that's normal.

Behind the scenes they are working very hard to make again from Zaventem, BRU, a big important airport. And at this stage we are seeing the first results.

Zenfookpower · Post by **Zenfookpower** » 28 Jul 2006, 21:42

Atlantis wrote:Don't worry Zenfookpower, it's only a very few people who wants to close the airport. We received a very strong signal this week from every kind of polical and industrial corner that they want the best for the airport and for all the 60.000 employees who are working direct or in-direct for the airport. There is still work to do, but that's normal.

Behind the scenes they are working very hard to make again from Zaventem, BRU, a big important airport. And at this stage we are seeing the first results.

Thanks for responding.. Indeed I hope "common sense" will prevail..and I also hope that in the short future I can fly from DTW to BRU instead via AMS and the famous KLM puddle jumpers..

p.s Pascal-Air... I have no problem with you having a different opinion..but I also believe that your "political opinion" should stay off the forum as this will only trigger more flaming reactions..

737oli · Post by **737oli** » 28 Jul 2006, 22:14

Hey guy's,

The project is to do a big sport center for Olympic games. But no need to wait 2026, because when you departing from 25R or 25L it's like a hurdle race not to enter in the Bru forbiden zone. Fines of 10.025€ to pay the golden medals.Lol

Oli

b-west · Post by **b-west** » 29 Jul 2006, 09:01

I wonder if people reacted like this when they proposed to build the new Hong Kong airport? Did the Germans say that the minister who proposed radically changing Schönefeld and closing Tempelhof and Tegel was crazy?

People seem to react very emotional, without really thinking the proposal through. It seems that just hearing the name "Anciaux" means that the idea is ridiculous. Sure, at first it may sound crazy, and I don't like the idea of using the terrain to build sport infrastructure, but why couldn't a new airport be succesfull? Their would be room for industry to expand. And with a new airport in a relatively population free area, laws might be put in place to actually prevent people from coming to live underneath the take-off routes.

Aren't we Belgians a bit too pessimistic at times? We are always afraid of new challenges it seems. We're convinced that we *will* fail. Why can't we be a bit more optimistic, a bit more daring... I would almost say, why can't we have a bit of the Dutch arrogancy. A conservative society is one that will eventually fall behind. We should dare to think ahead.

And remember, it wasn't Anciaux who first talked about the new airport. 3 or 4 years ago, the PM mentioned it in his state of the union.

regi · Post by **regi** » 29 Jul 2006, 17:25

I was just gone for some days in the Alps and this happens. Each time that one of the biggest traitors of the flemish interests opens its mouth, we gasp for air , completely surprised. I understand his reasoning. Zaventem is based 100% on flemish soil but the Brussels administration hampers normal operation by forbidding overflying their teritorry. So when the airport is closed , there is no more discussion. The flemish can take the train to Amsterdam or Düsseldorf for international flights. The Brussellians can use the TGV to arrive at terminal 2 of CDG , to find out that they need a survival course to get to Terminal 1.
And who will be the trainer of the cheerleaders at the new sports facility you think? Yep, dear old crying Bert.

Aviation24.be

Minister Anciaux wants to close Brussels Airport at Zaventem

why even respond?