Brussels region noise regulation

[Desert Rat]

I think you nailed it...all flight are first flying low above Brussels or the associated BRU municipalities...the 5000 figures applies just for the Brussels city municipality.
Therefore this figure or the way it is presented in the news is biased.

[Airbus330lover]

And the noise is more important at low altitude......
We have about 100% low altitude above Brussels (region not city)

[sean1982]

Well unless you are all 76 years old, then yiu have the right to complain. The airport didnt start operating last month and airplanes have been making noise before yesterday as well. People who can't deal with that, I suggest you pick up your household and move to the woods in the Ardennes. Apparently its really quiet there.

[shockcooling]

And the noise is more important at low altitude......
We have about 100% low altitude above Brussels (region not city)

25R is used as the main runway for take offs, taking in consideration winds and traffic flow. How on earth can all planes take off without ever flying over this 'Brussels Region'?, I calculate only 2km between end of 25R and the border (Haren). Meaning all aircraft should have to make a turn (even worse, completed) within 1NM. It's impossible!!!!
And even if you managed to stay out of the 'region', the noise will be easily detected, because when a plane turns the 'soundmap' turns as well (because of a sharp bank).
Now you can try to create a departure route which is SAFE for all aircraft, considering all ICAO limitations (2 and 4 engined a/c). Good luck.

Just give it a thought.

My 2 cents

[Yuqu12]

I agree totally with Sean. Yesterday, a woman with an accent from Antwerp said that the planes were too noisy on vtm. The journalist asked: "but the airport was already there, so you knew it when you bought your house?". The lady said "yes, yes well euhm yes yes... There are more flights now than earlier!".

No. There are much less movements than 10 years ago and the planes have become more silent. The grand chamber of the ECHR even said in a case in the '70ies (!, much noisier airplanes) that if only 2% or 3% of the whole community complains and an airport is an economic import factor for a country, maybe those people should move their household. Thus there was then no violation of art. 8 ECHR (which guarantees the right on private life, but also good sleep and a nice envirmonment). Maybe the politicians should read that case and make their conclusions.

[lumumba]

And the noise is more important at low altitude......
We have about 100% low altitude above Brussels (region not city)

25R is used as the main runway for take offs, taking in consideration winds and traffic flow. How on earth can all planes take off without ever flying over this 'Brussels Region'?, I calculate only 2km between end of 25R and the border (Haren). Meaning all aircraft should have to make a turn (even worse, completed) within 1NM. It's impossible!!!!
And even if you managed to stay out of the 'region', the noise will be easily detected, because when a plane turns the 'soundmap' turns as well (because of a sharp bank).
Now you can try to create a departure route which is SAFE for all aircraft, considering all ICAO limitations (2 and 4 engined a/c). Good luck.

Just give it a thought.

My 2 cents

That's true that's why we have to make 25L also a take off runway to the south west with new taxi ways etc...

So you can spread the noise ,but if you had read the topic than you new it

[lumumba]

Well unless you are all 76 years old, then yiu have the right to complain. The airport didnt start operating last month and airplanes have been making noise before yesterday as well. People who can't deal with that, I suggest you pick up your household and move to the woods in the Ardennes. Apparently its really quiet there.

Why you always have to be so provocative....Maybe a small therapy could help.

Today we are discussing a more fair spreading plan that's what's about and yes we now planes will always make noise.

[lumumba]

I agree totally with Sean. Yesterday, a woman with an accent from Antwerp said that the planes were too noisy on vtm. The journalist asked: "but the airport was already there, so you knew it when you bought your house?". The lady said "yes, yes well euhm yes yes... There are more flights now than earlier!".

No. There are much less movements than 10 years ago and the planes have become more silent. The grand chamber of the ECHR even said in a case in the '70ies (!, much noisier airplanes) that if only 2% or 3% of the whole community complains and an airport is an economic import factor for a country, maybe those people should move their household. Thus there was then no violation of art. 8 ECHR (which guarantees the right on private life, but also good sleep and a nice envirmonment). Maybe the politicians should read that case and make their conclusions.

Or today we listen more to people to the population maybe or democratic system is more aware etc...
We can change things it's not because it was like that that we have to accept it.

In the past there was no green party ,people are more aware of there quality of life today than in the past.

[lumumba]

I'm just reading in Bruzz that the Flemish plan leaked out in De Tijd do someone now about it?

[Yuqu12]

For me, it is in fact quite simple: if you go live in the vicinity of an airport, you know you'll have noice. It is exactly the same as you go living at the coast and complain of the wind and the sand. Then why would you do it? And in fact things are changing in the positive way, less flights and less noisy aircrafts. They should be happy instead of complaining.

[lumumba]

For me, it is in fact quite simple: if you go live in the vicinity of an airport, you know you'll have noice. It is exactly the same as you go living at the coast and complain of the wind and the sand. Then why would you do it? And in fact things are changing in the positive way, less flights and less noisy aircrafts. They should be happy instead of complaining.

I understand that but that's not why we can not try to make things better or more just.

In another country it would be easy but Belgium you now...

[Yuqu12]

The most easy option is that Bellot lets Belgocontrol decide the most safest and best routes, put these routes in the "Vliegwet" and that everyone respects this decision.

[sean1982]

Well unless you are all 76 years old, then yiu have the right to complain. The airport didnt start operating last month and airplanes have been making noise before yesterday as well. People who can't deal with that, I suggest you pick up your household and move to the woods in the Ardennes. Apparently its really quiet there.

Why you always have to be so provocative....Maybe a small therapy could help.

Today we are discussing a more fair spreading plan that's what's about and yes we now planes will always make noise.

I know that speaking your mind these days is being seen as provocative. I've been in a position for a while where speaking your mind is a job requirement so that's what I do, furthermore, listening to communities doesnt work as you can never do good for everyone. People who cant stand airport noise shouldn't live near the airport, punt aan de lijn. Trying to kill the second economic motor of te country just out of personal wellbeing is nothing short of pure egoism.

[lumumba]

The most easy option is that Bellot lets Belgocontrol decide the most safest and best routes, put these routes in the "Vliegwet" and that everyone respects this decision.

And why not use two runways for take off and landing?

[Yuqu12]

Indeed Sean. If those 60.000 jobs get lost, this will be an economic drama. They represent +-2% of the Belgian BBP. This was 400 bilion Euros. This would mean that 8 bilion euros get lost. Where is the government going to find that? They can't even find 1 bilion!

[Yuqu12]

The most easy option is that Bellot lets Belgocontrol decide the most safest and best routes, put these routes in the "Vliegwet" and that everyone respects this decision.

And why not use two runways for take off and landing?

I never said this is a bad idea, if this is the best/safest solution according Belgocontrol, then why not?

[convair]

The most easy option is that Bellot lets Belgocontrol decide the most safest and best routes, put these routes in the "Vliegwet" and that everyone respects this decision.

That would be the "normal" way to solve things: letting the people who are in charge also take the decision.

But I'm afraid their decision would be contested by people saying (rightly or wrongly?) that they are politically "guided".

That is why some of us here suggest to put the matter in the hands of a college of foreign experts.

[Jetter]

Or today we listen more to people to the population maybe or democratic system is more aware etc...
We can change things it's not because it was like that that we have to accept it.

In the past there was no green party ,people are more aware of there quality of life today than in the past.

Amazing how you're able to defend the NIMBY's. It's not about the democratic system being aware or not, it's about democratic institutions that are unwilling to cooperate and only interested in their own image while forgetting about the economy of the nation they're part of. Also listening to the people shouldn't mean listening to a select few persons with a special interest and forgetting about the well-being of the population as a whole; only a few people are disturbed by some noise while many more profit from an airport that's able to use it's potential.

It's not about quality of life either, every rational human being should be able to understand that if you're deciding to live in the vicinity of an airport that'll cause some disturbance. Actually they're very lucky because BRU is the poorest performing major airport of the whole world in terms of traffic the past ~20 years. AMS has grown more the past year alone than BRU in 18 years i.e., and yet The Netherlands has a higher quality of life and Amsterdam is the most popular place to live within The Netherlands.

[EBBU]

'Safety first' is always the primary concern in aviation. And this is indeed true for operational people because they are the ones on the front line and so the ones that are confronted with the results of their actions.

But for other actors in this debate Safety is not that important. They just want to be re-elected or eliminate any noise they perceive as annoying.

E.g.: using two runways for arrivals and departures at the same time can create complicated situations in the air or on the ground.

Less hotspots in the traffic flows equals greater Safety but in the interest of politics and noise dispersion this is regularly disregarded.

That is why even foreign experts are not the solution because they will deliver what their employer requests.

[Desert Rat]

Why would they report something wrong...contract real professional like Navblue and they will redesign the airspace while taking into account safety and impact on the population. Using the latest improvements in airspace design...

www.navblue.aero