Cargo airlines such as Singapore Airlines and Saudia threaten to leave Brussels Airport if there is no quick solution is found to the issue of noise regulations imposed by the Brussels region, said Brussels Airport CEO Arnaud Feist at a press conference this Friday.
Since many years the Brussels region imposes fines to airlines exceeding maximum regional noise levels.
"The aeroplanes fly according to instructions from Belgocontrol, an official organisation, and the regional fines come afterwards", said Mr. Feist. These fines are also a deterrent for companies wanting to come to Brussels, added Mr. Feist.
Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fines
Moderator: Latest news team
Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fines
André
ex Sabena #26567
ex Sabena #26567
Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
if they wanted to leave, they would have done it already.
there are plenty of decent cargo airport in a 500km radius
this is blackmail for changing the rules they (or the airport mgmt ?) dont like.
but the govs ave probably clever enough to see that themselves.
the same noise rules for both regions would help a lot though
there are plenty of decent cargo airport in a 500km radius
this is blackmail for changing the rules they (or the airport mgmt ?) dont like.
but the govs ave probably clever enough to see that themselves.
the same noise rules for both regions would help a lot though
Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
One thing can be said about it, Belgium would better become a bit more Aviation minded like we used to be instead of we-want-to-please-the-people-so-we-fine-airlines method.. I despise every single human being that bought their house around the airport at a very reduced price and then started to complain about noise. You already knew that when you went living there.
When somebody buys a house around the airport, a agreement should be signed that they acknowledge to know that they've bought a house at reduced price due to the noise that is caused by airplanes and that they CANNOT complain about this to any instance.
When somebody buys a house around the airport, a agreement should be signed that they acknowledge to know that they've bought a house at reduced price due to the noise that is caused by airplanes and that they CANNOT complain about this to any instance.
Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
I agree, in my opinion the only people allowed to complain about the noise are those that lived there before the airport was built, or before a significant expansion took place (I mean things like an extra terminal or runway being built, a new airline setting up a major hub, etc).
I mean, if you buy a house near an airport relatively cheaply, you're going to know you'll hear the planes.
Then again, it's a well known fact that in Belgium every man and his dog (or NIMBY to use the correct term) can start some kind of protest group and people will actually listen to them, which in itself isn't a bad thing, however when you start listening to the protest groups too much, you'll end up shooting yourself in the foot in the long run.
I mean, if you buy a house near an airport relatively cheaply, you're going to know you'll hear the planes.
Then again, it's a well known fact that in Belgium every man and his dog (or NIMBY to use the correct term) can start some kind of protest group and people will actually listen to them, which in itself isn't a bad thing, however when you start listening to the protest groups too much, you'll end up shooting yourself in the foot in the long run.
Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
Exactly, the only ones allowed to complain are probably the people that have passed the age of 60 now and funny enough, they do not complain.WC_EEND wrote:I agree, in my opinion the only people allowed to complain about the noise are those that lived there before the airport was built, or before a significant expansion took place (I mean things like an extra terminal or runway being built, a new airline setting up a major hub, etc).
I mean, if you buy a house near an airport relatively cheaply, you're going to know you'll hear the planes.
Then again, it's a well known fact that in Belgium every man and his dog (or NIMBY to use the correct term) can start some kind of protest group and people will actually listen to them, which in itself isn't a bad thing, however when you start listening to the protest groups too much, you'll end up shooting yourself in the foot in the long run.
NIMBY indeed. It's a typical belgian way of commiting fraude in a legal way.Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
Two very recent court decisions by a Suppreme Justice Court of Belgium (Raad van State / Conseil D’Etat) have confirmed that the noise restrictions from the Brussels Capital Region are legal and that the imposed fines are therefore also legal.
See Case 21st June 2012 (NL):
http://www.raadvst-consetat.be/Arresten ... 219901.pdf
See Case 3 May 2012 (FR):
http://www.raadvst-consetat.be/Arrets/2 ... 219156.pdf
After the Rule by the Raad van State / Conseil D'Etat from 21st June 2012, the Brussels Capital Region has decided to claim the outstanding fines. Total amount has risen meanwhile to 11,000,000 Euro (yep, 11 mio). Until now, the visits of the bailiff to EAT and other airlines have been restricted to the handover of injunctions. However, next juridical step by the bailiff will now be the seizure of (bank) assets.
Foreign airlines allways thought that common sense would prevail in Belgium. They now understand that Belgian law allows ambivalent official orders. Example: Belgocontrol allowing a landing, Brussels Capital Region forbitting that same landing.
Although the green party Ecolo / Agalev / Groen is a strict minority party in Belgium, they are represented in the government of the Brussels Capital Region. And more important: they rule the Brussels Environment Department. What’s now happening, is a major success for Ecolo/Groen: per definition, they hate aviation and airports (unless they need them for own leisure, but that’s not relevant now). Chasing away cargo carriers and airline passengers is part of their party ideology. Proof: public transport, international public railways, cargo railway transport and even trucks on the road also infract the severe night noise restrictions from the Brussels Capital Region, but the Environment Department does not prosecute them.
Hope the webmaster will allow my party political conclusions:
Although Ecolo/Groen is the driven force behind the noise restrictions, all political parties represented in the Brussels Capital Region are accomplices because they did not opposed them. And surely those parties who impose other noise restrictions for the other airports they manage.
And for the political parties from my language district: “omwille van het smeer likt de kat de kandeleer”. Highly paid official functions for party officials prevail to community interests. Indeed Mr Vanhengel and Mrs Grouwels: you are both ministers in this Brussels government, so if you continue to allow what’s going on, you are accomplices of the destruction of Brussels Airport.
See Case 21st June 2012 (NL):
http://www.raadvst-consetat.be/Arresten ... 219901.pdf
See Case 3 May 2012 (FR):
http://www.raadvst-consetat.be/Arrets/2 ... 219156.pdf
After the Rule by the Raad van State / Conseil D'Etat from 21st June 2012, the Brussels Capital Region has decided to claim the outstanding fines. Total amount has risen meanwhile to 11,000,000 Euro (yep, 11 mio). Until now, the visits of the bailiff to EAT and other airlines have been restricted to the handover of injunctions. However, next juridical step by the bailiff will now be the seizure of (bank) assets.
Foreign airlines allways thought that common sense would prevail in Belgium. They now understand that Belgian law allows ambivalent official orders. Example: Belgocontrol allowing a landing, Brussels Capital Region forbitting that same landing.
Although the green party Ecolo / Agalev / Groen is a strict minority party in Belgium, they are represented in the government of the Brussels Capital Region. And more important: they rule the Brussels Environment Department. What’s now happening, is a major success for Ecolo/Groen: per definition, they hate aviation and airports (unless they need them for own leisure, but that’s not relevant now). Chasing away cargo carriers and airline passengers is part of their party ideology. Proof: public transport, international public railways, cargo railway transport and even trucks on the road also infract the severe night noise restrictions from the Brussels Capital Region, but the Environment Department does not prosecute them.
Hope the webmaster will allow my party political conclusions:
Although Ecolo/Groen is the driven force behind the noise restrictions, all political parties represented in the Brussels Capital Region are accomplices because they did not opposed them. And surely those parties who impose other noise restrictions for the other airports they manage.
And for the political parties from my language district: “omwille van het smeer likt de kat de kandeleer”. Highly paid official functions for party officials prevail to community interests. Indeed Mr Vanhengel and Mrs Grouwels: you are both ministers in this Brussels government, so if you continue to allow what’s going on, you are accomplices of the destruction of Brussels Airport.
-
tolipanebas
- Posts: 2442
- Joined: 12 May 2004, 00:00
Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
I have to agree with Passenger here: If you think this is bluff, better think again.
No foreign airline in his right mind will continue to operate at an airport where they are constantly and heavily fined for sticking to all of the procedures as imposed by the country's own Civil Aviation Authorities! :wtf:
Besides, these are not just speeding tickets of a few euro we're talking about, these are fines of several thousand euro per infraction and when occuring on a regular basis -which they do due to insane discrepancies between the officially published procedures from the federal Civil Aviation Authorities on one hand and the regionally decided environmental rules on the other- are more than enough to make any route structurally loss making and ready to be axed.
Think about it for a minute:
if an airline of ours were to be lured into serving some far away country by an impressive trade mission of officials led by the Crown Prince and accompanied by a bunch of ministers and after operating to that country for a while, our airline starts to get harrested by let's say a provincial official for simply respecting the operating rules from the country's Civil Aviation Authorities, what would we expect to see happen?
To see the federal government swiftly step in to settle this internal problem so as to make sure that in the end all of their commitments made during the trade mission are fully honoured?
Or to see a legal battle over technicalities unfold over issues like for instance which of the many federated governments is competent over exactly what, with as eyepopping verdict that all of them are entirely and solely competent in their own fields and that if they issue contradicting rules and laws, then so be it?
I tell you, if the latter was to happen in Africa, we'd all be saying that's exactly what you can expect when doing business there; however, we're not talking about some banana republic, but about the host nation to the EU and NATO here, or does the latter status not exclude the first?
No foreign airline in his right mind will continue to operate at an airport where they are constantly and heavily fined for sticking to all of the procedures as imposed by the country's own Civil Aviation Authorities! :wtf:
Besides, these are not just speeding tickets of a few euro we're talking about, these are fines of several thousand euro per infraction and when occuring on a regular basis -which they do due to insane discrepancies between the officially published procedures from the federal Civil Aviation Authorities on one hand and the regionally decided environmental rules on the other- are more than enough to make any route structurally loss making and ready to be axed.
Think about it for a minute:
if an airline of ours were to be lured into serving some far away country by an impressive trade mission of officials led by the Crown Prince and accompanied by a bunch of ministers and after operating to that country for a while, our airline starts to get harrested by let's say a provincial official for simply respecting the operating rules from the country's Civil Aviation Authorities, what would we expect to see happen?
To see the federal government swiftly step in to settle this internal problem so as to make sure that in the end all of their commitments made during the trade mission are fully honoured?
Or to see a legal battle over technicalities unfold over issues like for instance which of the many federated governments is competent over exactly what, with as eyepopping verdict that all of them are entirely and solely competent in their own fields and that if they issue contradicting rules and laws, then so be it?
I tell you, if the latter was to happen in Africa, we'd all be saying that's exactly what you can expect when doing business there; however, we're not talking about some banana republic, but about the host nation to the EU and NATO here, or does the latter status not exclude the first?
Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
They could send the bill to Belgocontrol as they direct the pilots to flightpaths which is not taken into account the local environmental laws.tolipanebas wrote:No foreign airline in his right mind will continue to operate at an airport where they are constantly and heavily fined for sticking to all of the procedures as imposed by the country's own Civil Aviation Authorities!
Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
that is actually a very good idea. i'll keep it in mindLJ wrote: They could send the bill to Belgocontrol as they direct the pilots to flightpaths which is not taken into account the local environmental laws.
Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
Yep, and you know what, Belgocontrol is probably not able to change the SID's out of Brussels Airport without Authorisation of the political parties.
So the circle is round...
So the circle is round...
Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
I agree,
If Belgocontrol could decide which route the a/c are flying on dep., it would probably not be those ones...
Noise is perhaps not the 1st concern when designing SID's...
If Belgocontrol could decide which route the a/c are flying on dep., it would probably not be those ones...
Noise is perhaps not the 1st concern when designing SID's...
Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
it shouldn't be
Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
²bravomike wrote:it shouldn't be
Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
This is not about an invoice that one can protest in a trade court. It’s about extremely heavy fines that have been protested, but that now have been declared legal by the highest court. The next step by the Brussels Capital Region is the last one: seizure of bank assets by the bailiff.LJ wrote: They could send the bill to Belgocontrol as they direct the pilots to flightpaths which is not taken into account the local environmental laws.
The CEO from the airport hasn’t organized a press conference, just to say that there could be a problem. Some airlines (mainly cargo) will leave if the fines are indeed collected.
Furthermore to the noise regulations, there are rumours that Wathelet, federal secretary for Environment and Transport, wants to cancel the actual dispertion plan from 2010. Rumours are that Wathelet wants to reduce the 100 routes into 10. And according to action group Noordrand, most of these 10 will lead flights above Flemish towns.
(contrary to other action groups near BRU, NoordRand is not opposed to the airport as such, and NoordRand accepts the 2010 dispertion plan).
Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
No need to stereotype all people that live in the neighbourhood of the airport. I myself live under the extended centerline of RWY 20 and the airport noise really does not bother me. None of my neighbours is really suffering from the noise of landing aircraft and I don't have the impression that a lot of people in my town are member of a pressure group.
On the contrary: the one occasion that my roof was damaged by a landing aircraft, I simply called the airport authorities who fully repaired the damage within 24 hrs...excellent service and a good illustration that according to me the airport truly cares about the viability of her environment.
And people who state that houses near the airport are cheap in comparison to other regions in Belgium should think again: just have a look in Sterrebeek, Kampenhout, Berg, Perk, Steenokkerzeel, Melsbroek,...I'm not convinced that real estate comes cheap in these towns, but then again: that is totally irrelevant in this discussion.
On the contrary: the one occasion that my roof was damaged by a landing aircraft, I simply called the airport authorities who fully repaired the damage within 24 hrs...excellent service and a good illustration that according to me the airport truly cares about the viability of her environment.
And people who state that houses near the airport are cheap in comparison to other regions in Belgium should think again: just have a look in Sterrebeek, Kampenhout, Berg, Perk, Steenokkerzeel, Melsbroek,...I'm not convinced that real estate comes cheap in these towns, but then again: that is totally irrelevant in this discussion.
Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
Indeed. But we don't have to stereotype all action groups either. Action group Noordrand accepts that an airport benefits to the whole community, and they accept the fact that aircraft make noise. Quote from their website:teddybAIR wrote:No need to stereotype all people that live in the neighbourhood of the airport...
1. de veiligheid is prioritair;
2. de capaciteit van de luchthaven moet gegarandeerd;
3. men kiest voor rechtdoor vliegen via de kortste vliegroutes om evidente ecologische en economische redenen;
4. men vermijdt concentratie van vliegverkeer over bevolkt gebied;
5. men kiest voor de eenvoud (zoveel mogelijk dezelfde procedures dag, nacht, week en weekend).
Translated:
1. safety is the priority;
2. capacity of the airport must remain guarantueed;
3. fly streight on, shortest routes for ecological and economical reasons;
4. avoid concentration above populated area's;
5. simplicity (same routes day & night, weekdays & weekend).
This looks very reasonable, isn't it? So why wants Wathelet to change the dispertion plan from 2010? His new plan is not a dispertion plan, but a concentration of departing flights above the Noordrand: Diegem, Machelen, Vilvoorde, Grimbergen, Strombeek, Meise, Wemmel, Merchtem, Brussegem, Asse.
Wathelet will not eliminate the fines, imposed by the Brussels Capital Region. But his new plan will surely lead to new protests and new lawsuits, and this is not in the interest of the airport nor the airlines.
Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
I think it's not really a problem of nimby's ...
The communication of BRU is that the problem is only for cargo airlines ... pax airlines don't seem to complain.
So if I extrapolate a bit, I may understand that the opening hours are not wide enough, they may even get fines only because they are one hour too early or one hour too late depending the region ... or it's because they use much larger (or older) planes ... or a combination of both.
Both can be solved by using LGG (or OST), only 50 min away. It would not be the first time that flemish based companies are using LGG for their business, doing everything from their office in Zaventem. A truck company doesn't make less money if it's using one highway or another, there is only a slight difference in fees. After all, what's important for Zaventem is not what land there, it's the companies that are based there.
The communication of BRU is that the problem is only for cargo airlines ... pax airlines don't seem to complain.
So if I extrapolate a bit, I may understand that the opening hours are not wide enough, they may even get fines only because they are one hour too early or one hour too late depending the region ... or it's because they use much larger (or older) planes ... or a combination of both.
Both can be solved by using LGG (or OST), only 50 min away. It would not be the first time that flemish based companies are using LGG for their business, doing everything from their office in Zaventem. A truck company doesn't make less money if it's using one highway or another, there is only a slight difference in fees. After all, what's important for Zaventem is not what land there, it's the companies that are based there.
Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
Very simple:
make a blacklist of all concerned people , and all the peoples who live on those addresses. Try to get their IP addresses as well. Sorry for collateral damage.
Distribute those blacklists worldwide.
The moment that a person tries to make a booking, tries to check inn somewhere in the workd , he receives "sorry , you are considered a thread for general aviation" BLEEP.
I suppose that such a blacklist would be illegal according some softies' rules under the umbrella of human rights and democracy. Wrong. That small minority of the Brussels Region ( is not Wallonie or Flanders !) has found a way to put the knife on the throat of general aviation .
Time for pay back. I am sure that there are many countries where those rich go ,who cannot stand the noise above their villa's in Uccle, can apply those non fly restrictions for possibly obnoctious passengers.
So the best would be: let those apparatsjiks first visit the Zambezi waterfalls or Halong Bay ( check that out , picture available on internet of a famous Ecolo figure ) and pass them the message on a local small airport: "You no fly"
Result: we don't hear them for 6 months while they enjoy a marvellous travelling experience overland with a minimal carbon footprint.
When they are finally back, they are overwhelmed by complaints of relatives who cannot fly for work or leisure.
I launched this idea before using very simply the postal codes. That would include many Eurocrats as well ! So no more income for unusual rich bourgeois home owners who rent out appartments.
Belgium has always been a country of compromises. If this program of large fines goes ahead, it breaks our way of life. So we can expect a reaction even harsher than that local legislation.
My program will never be applied or even presented, I am realistic enough.
But reality will be much harder than my day dreaming. Bye Bye Zaventem. 
make a blacklist of all concerned people , and all the peoples who live on those addresses. Try to get their IP addresses as well. Sorry for collateral damage.
Distribute those blacklists worldwide.
The moment that a person tries to make a booking, tries to check inn somewhere in the workd , he receives "sorry , you are considered a thread for general aviation" BLEEP.
I suppose that such a blacklist would be illegal according some softies' rules under the umbrella of human rights and democracy. Wrong. That small minority of the Brussels Region ( is not Wallonie or Flanders !) has found a way to put the knife on the throat of general aviation .
Time for pay back. I am sure that there are many countries where those rich go ,who cannot stand the noise above their villa's in Uccle, can apply those non fly restrictions for possibly obnoctious passengers.
So the best would be: let those apparatsjiks first visit the Zambezi waterfalls or Halong Bay ( check that out , picture available on internet of a famous Ecolo figure ) and pass them the message on a local small airport: "You no fly"
Result: we don't hear them for 6 months while they enjoy a marvellous travelling experience overland with a minimal carbon footprint.
When they are finally back, they are overwhelmed by complaints of relatives who cannot fly for work or leisure.
I launched this idea before using very simply the postal codes. That would include many Eurocrats as well ! So no more income for unusual rich bourgeois home owners who rent out appartments.
Belgium has always been a country of compromises. If this program of large fines goes ahead, it breaks our way of life. So we can expect a reaction even harsher than that local legislation.
My program will never be applied or even presented, I am realistic enough.
But reality will be much harder than my day dreaming. Bye Bye Zaventem. Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
first of all its not just the cargo airlines!Acid-drop wrote:I think it's not really a problem of nimby's ...
The communication of BRU is that the problem is only for cargo airlines ... pax airlines don't seem to complain.
So if I extrapolate a bit, I may understand that the opening hours are not wide enough, they may even get fines only because they are one hour too early or one hour too late depending the region ... or it's because they use much larger (or older) planes ... or a combination of both.
Both can be solved by using LGG (or OST), only 50 min away. It would not be the first time that flemish based companies are using LGG for their business, doing everything from their office in Zaventem. A truck company doesn't make less money if it's using one highway or another, there is only a slight difference in fees. After all, what's important for Zaventem is not what land there, it's the companies that are based there.
secondly moving to LGG or OST shouldn't even be on your mind
-
liege-bierset
- Posts: 292
- Joined: 26 Nov 2009, 19:44
- Location: belgium
- Contact:
Re: Cargo airlines threaten to leave Brussels over noise fin
"Chasser le naturel, il revient au galop"secondly moving to LGG or OST shouldn't even be on your mind
(The leopard can't change its spots !)