Brussels region noise regulation

[Passenger]

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

Indeed. Some people seems to forget that this is not Brussels government versus Flanders government, but the Brussels government versus Brussels Airport.

[Homo Aeroportus]

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 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, this is the times we're living in... no honor... no respect...

+ 1

King Leopold II may have misspelled it but he was right : Un pays n'est jamais petit lorsqu'il touche à ... l'amer !

Flew SN this morning. Departure on time at 06:25, using B1 rolling take off. Light load but apparently still flex and we were airborne by passing B6. This is within the eastern half of the A Pier !
Bank left at crossing RWY end, heading 130 so we never entered the Brussels Holy City airspace hence no toll.
Et voila.

H.A.

[brusselsairlinesfan]

Unbelievable... sad politics theater... There is no such debate @ AMS although this is also a high density populated area!

[Crosswind]

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

Indeed. Some people seems to forget that this is not Brussels government versus Flanders government, but the Brussels government versus Brussels Airport.

No, it's gov vs gov. (vs gov !) Brussels Airport has nothing to do here. Absolutely nothing. The question is, precisely : honest spread of DEP and ARR trafic at Brussels Airport. Flanders regio must support his part of nuisance. Simple logic.

Unbelievable... sad politics theater... There is no such debate @ AMS although this is also a high density populated area!

Of course not, because AMS is situated in a "normal" country where nobody can complain on the fact that one community abuses the other. Lucky there...

[Passenger]

The question is, precisely : honest spread of DEP and ARR trafic at Brussels Airport. Flanders regio must support his part of nuisance. Simple logic.

Flanders has 70%, Brussels 30%. I will post the source a bit later. And the source is not Flanders government.

[Crosswind]

I bed you include then all the arrival trafic ?

[Fairfax]

The question is, precisely : honest spread of DEP and ARR trafic at Brussels Airport. Flanders regio must support his part of nuisance. Simple logic.

Flanders has 70%, Brussels 30%. I will post the source a bit later. And the source is not Flanders government.

Research U Gent
http://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20170221_02744090
In de omgeving van Brussels Airport woonden in 2015 meer dan 96.000 mensen binnen een gebied dat, gemeten over een periode van 24 uur, is blootgesteld aan geluid van gemiddeld meer dan 55 decibel. Dat leert onderzoek van de UGent. Van die 96.000 mensen woont meer dan zeventig procent in de provincie Vlaams-Brabant, tegenover zo’n 28.000 mensen in het Brussels Gewest

[lumumba]

The question is, precisely : honest spread of DEP and ARR trafic at Brussels Airport. Flanders regio must support his part of nuisance. Simple logic.

Flanders has 70%, Brussels 30%. I will post the source a bit later. And the source is not Flanders government.

The 70% versus the 30% is about the 55 decibels and above.
I'm a bit disappointed by the De Standaard because it's just one piece of the puzzle and with this they put oil on the fire not very smart from a quality paper...

Now I don't now the numbers under the 55 decibels but I think it's a lot more in numbers in Brussels and don't believe that under 55 it's a good quality of life.

I grew up in Evere and I now how it's there...

Another point is that nobody said Vlaams Brabant did not suffer they are.

That's why in densely populated area than this one and with a very bad location of the airport because that's the biggest problem the location.

It has to close at night and stay a medium airport in my opinion...

[Passenger]

The 70% versus the 30% is about the 55 decibels and above. I'm a bit disappointed by the De Standaard because it's just one piece of the puzzle and with this they put oil onthe fire not very smart from a quality paper... Now I don't now the numbers under the 55 decibels but I think it's a lot more in numbers in Brussels and don't believe that under 55 it's a good quality of life.

May I kindly suggest you read the article again? It's not "De Standaard says...", but "University Ghent says...". And University Ghent did a research for "severe noise nuisance" (ernstige geluidshinder), based upon the noise level as described in the European Directive about it.

[Stij]

It has to close at night and stay a medium airport in my opinion...

As long as you have a job and you're not disturbed... life is beautiful, isn't it?

Stij

[lumumba]

The 70% versus the 30% is about the 55 decibels and above. I'm a bit disappointed by the De Standaard because it's just one piece of the puzzle and with this they put oil onthe fire not very smart from a quality paper... Now I don't now the numbers under the 55 decibels but I think it's a lot more in numbers in Brussels and don't believe that under 55 it's a good quality of life.

May I kindly suggest you read the article again? It's not "De Standaard says...", but "University Ghent says...". And University Ghent did a research for "severe noise nuisance" (ernstige geluidshinder), based upon the noise level as described in the European Directive about it.

I understand but it's still one piece of the puzzle like the university them self are saying...

But the De Standaard open there news this morning with:Flanders contributes most harmful noise!

Still it just one piece of the puzzle...

[Crosswind]

Come on. First there are clear exaggeration about the job threat. Second, a simple politic decision can save the soup : prevent the noisy cargo to overfly the city, night and day.

Concerning the UGent study, there is a counter-study done by Coeur-Europe. Very interesting...

[lumumba]

It has to close at night and stay a medium airport in my opinion...

As long as you have a job and you're not disturbed... life is beautiful, isn't it?

Stij

I understand your opinion Stij but this airport is the worst for night flights.

Believe me my father live in Jette and he suffers a lot from night flights.

I don't now the solution but I hope like you there is one.

I think if the night flights follow the ring route it could be a solution it's on the border of Brussels and Vlaams Brabant ...

[Fairfax]

Come on. First there are clear exaggeration about the job threat. Second, a simple politic decision can save the soup : prevent the noisy cargo to overfly the city, night and day.

Concerning the UGent study, there is a counter-study done by Coeur-Europe. Very interesting...

But Coeur-Europe is a nimby organization. I do trust the objectivity of the Ghent university more than a biased "study" by people that became residents of Brussels long after the airport was already there.

[Crosswind]

No, you cannot sweep away a study by that kind of argument. What coeur-europe says about UGent study is cmpletely valid. They really used the EU method combined with relevant real data form sonometers and they came to a conclusion. But you can still deny, it's your right. As well as Brussels REgio has the right to fine all aircraft overflying his terriroty (the dB limit is really soft, by the way). But is this a solution ?

[Passenger]

No, you cannot sweep away a study by that kind of argument. What coeur-europe says about UGent study is cmpletely valid. They really used the EU method combined with relevant real data form sonometers and they came to a conclusion. But you can still deny, it's your right. As well as Brussels REgio has the right to fine all aircraft overflying his terriroty (the dB limit is really soft, by the way). But is this a solution ?

Coeur-Europe uses stats for "gêné ou très gêné", which is as from 45 DB. University Ghent uses "très gêné", which is as from 55 Db. Seems fair: downtown city noise even surpasses 45 Db without an aircraft in the vincinity.

[lumumba]

No, you cannot sweep away a study by that kind of argument. What coeur-europe says about UGent study is cmpletely valid. They really used the EU method combined with relevant real data form sonometers and they came to a conclusion. But you can still deny, it's your right. As well as Brussels REgio has the right to fine all aircraft overflying his terriroty (the dB limit is really soft, by the way). But is this a solution ?

Coeur-Europe uses stats for "gêné ou très gêné", which is as from 45 DB. University Ghent uses "très gêné", which is as from 55 Db. Seems fair: downtown city noise even surpasses 45 Db without an aircraft in the vincinity.

I live downtown and yes there is noise on the street side but all the rooms are in the back and it's quiet very quiet just the buzzing from the city and that's beautiful but when the noise is coming from above it's everywhere...

[Fairfax]

No, you cannot sweep away a study by that kind of argument. What coeur-europe says about UGent study is cmpletely valid. They really used the EU method combined with relevant real data form sonometers and they came to a conclusion. But you can still deny, it's your right. As well as Brussels REgio has the right to fine all aircraft overflying his terriroty (the dB limit is really soft, by the way). But is this a solution ?

Yes I can. They are biased. And I think that recent newcomers in Brussels have no say in this matter.

Are you a member of an action group Crosswind?

[Fairfax]

Now let's be fair, Sean. Flanders has most of the jobs at the airport (WAL: 2400, BRU: 3000, VL:14600, data from Brussels Airport); Flanders has most of the economic benefits; Flanders represents probably also most of the Belgian travellers. Why wouldn't Flanders have most of the noise as well, in proportion with the benefits? The "hautain" Brusseleirs have also the right to have a quiet night.

What bothers me the most (reading an older post on p. 15): if we follow this reasoning, this means that if more Brussels inhabitants worked at the airport, if more economic benefits would go to Brussels, if more passengers from Brussels used the airport .... there would be less of a problem (!!!) I saw the same rhetoric in the comments of a newspaper (in short: it's not our airport; if it was, it would be another story)

[Crosswind]

No, I'm not a member of any group. I leave in Brussels (near Reyers) and I personnaly feel aircraft noise as acceptable. Anyway, you said Coeur-Europe is biased, and I admit the validity of your suscpicion. But saying that is not sufficient to reject an argument. You have to point out what is biaised. Otherwsise it's pure argument of authority !

UGent decides by itself, in contradiction with the EU methodology (why ?) to bring the limit at 55dB. This is a bias !