Brussels region noise regulation

[Shengenzone]

Because of the new regulations (scrapping of the tolerance on the old regulation) of the Brussels region, Yangtze river express has announced they will move all operations to Amsterdam.
Furthermore Saudia cargo announced as well that they will move to Frankfurt.
Didier Gosuin will be happy...

[flightlover]

The Brussels and Walloon politicians just don't get it, so it seems.
They want to kill a well performing airport in the hope that airlines will automaticly choose one of the other Belgian airports. But it seems those airports are just not attractive enough.

[sn26567]

Caution! Here we touch a very delicate political issue. Hence, let's avoid putting the blame to one or the other and rather look for solutions.

It is a fact that Brussels Airport is too close to the City and hundreds of thousands of people are affected by aircraft noise on some routes. There are not 100 ways to solve the noise problem. Here are two proposals.

1. In the Brussels Airport 2040 presentation, Arnaud Feist explained that aircraft become less noisy, and with the proposed extension of runway 25L and the associated taxiway, less people would be impacted in the future. The airport ombudsman goes even one step further: like in Schiphol with the Polderbaan, he would put a new runway even further away from the present terminal, with a looooong taxiway.

2. Like it has been done for Liege airport, the flights could be concentrated on the least populated areas and people in these areas would get funding to better insulate their houses, or even be expropriated.

[Shengenzone]

Caution! Here we touch a very delicate political issue. Hence, let's avoid putting the blame to one or the other and rather look for solutions.

It is a fact that Brussels Airport is too close to the City and hundreds of thousands of people are affected by aircraft noise on some routes. There are not 100 ways to solve the noise problem. Here are two proposals.

1. In the Brussels Airport 2040 presentation, Arnaud Feist explained that aircraft become less noisy, and with the proposed extension of runway 25L and the associated taxiway, less people would be impacted in the future. The airport ombudsman goes even one step further: like in Schiphol with the Polderbaan, he would put a new runway even further away from the present terminal, with a looooong taxiway.

2. Like it has been done for Liege airport, the flights could be concentrated on the least populated areas and people in these areas would get funding to better insulate their houses, or even be expropriated.

Both solutions are political and not a solution at all! A true Belgian solution would be to just do nothing.
Solution 1 affects households and communities which have never been affected before and havn't asked for it.
Solution 2 creates a lott of extra pollution due to the long taxiway !

Noise of aircraft has been reducing steadily since a long time. So just do nothing and maybe extend the taxiway if there is need for extra capacity.

[Yuqu12]

Fact is that, if these regulations stay, every airline with a loud aircraft type will move. And if there is told this is political sensitive: yes, but you can blame the government of Brussels for imposing these taxes (whether this is right or not, stays in the middle for me)

[PttU]

Solution 2 creates a lott of extra pollution due to the long taxiway !

Just curious: is it?
Offcourse it's more polluting compared to standing still, and an aircraft is made for flying, not for rolling. But compared to the thousands of miles flown, is it so bad to roll a few miles? Would an aircraft be more or less polluting than putting the same amount of cargo in trucks (made for the road, made for rolling) and driving the same distance?

[speedbird1]

What does the new regulation say exactly?
Rgds,
Speedy

[Yuqu12]

What does the new regulation say exactly?
Rgds,
Speedy

They don't say much. They use the noise restrictions from the EU (which are quite strict) without any margin by which almost every plane over Brussels makes too much noise. And every plane which makes too much noise, has to pay a tax to the government which is a couple of thousand euros per flight depending on how loud the plane is.

[flightlover]

Caution! Here we touch a very delicate political issue. Hence, let's avoid putting the blame to one or the other and rather look for solutions.

It is a fact that Brussels Airport is too close to the City and hundreds of thousands of people are affected by aircraft noise on some routes. There are not 100 ways to solve the noise problem. Here are two proposals.

1. In the Brussels Airport 2040 presentation, Arnaud Feist explained that aircraft become less noisy, and with the proposed extension of runway 25L and the associated taxiway, less people would be impacted in the future. The airport ombudsman goes even one step further: like in Schiphol with the Polderbaan, he would put a new runway even further away from the present terminal, with a looooong taxiway.

2. Like it has been done for Liege airport, the flights could be concentrated on the least populated areas and people in these areas would get funding to better insulate their houses, or even be expropriated.

You can look for solutions, but which of those would be possible to implement in less than half a month?
And why can't we blame them? They knew it would be impossible for BRU to have a good solution in the time frame they set by changing noise regulations when they did. And most important: THEY NEVER MADE A SECRET OF IT BEING THE GOAL TO SHRINK BRU IN FAVOUR OF CRL AND LGG.

Btw, the minister in charge of creating a 'national flight law' is not doing much effort if you ask me.
This law is the only legal way to ensure a stable environment for flight ops on Brussels airport. And even than. I would not be to optimistic of it being a law that let's BRU be competitive vs other hub airports in neighbouring countries.
The minister in charge has already aired her opinion by stating cargo ops should move to LGG and pax ops should spread over other airports. Not much of a surprise if you know she belongs to the same party that imposes the new noise regulations for the Brussels Region.

[korvo]

Didier Gosuin is a member of défi (the ex-FDF), and the airport is on the territory of Flanders. This is simple economical sabotage and harassment, fueled by his anti-Flemish sentiments. It's a pity that people like Gosuin can't be put on a passenger black list ...

[Yuqu12]

The minister in charge has already aired her opinion by stating cargo ops should move to LGG and pax ops should spread over other airports. Not much of a surprise if you know she belongs to the same party that imposes the new noise regulations for the Brussels Region.

Btw: She has become he. Gallant is replaced by Bellot. And the MR (liberal party) has indeed something to say in Brussels, but it are especially the PS (social party) and CdH (christian party under the flag of Céline Fremault) which are trying to move everything from BRU to CRL and LGG.

[lumumba]

Brussels Airport is surrounded with very populated areas.
For sure it has to be closed at night this airport has a very bad location for that.

But we have to get out of this north against south discussion.

Brussels will not be the first airport that is closed at night and has a flight restriction because he is surrounded by living people.
For me it's clear that it's impossible to let night flights in our geographical situation Flanders and Brussels,also it has to stay a medium airport for the same reason.

[Acid-drop]

I bet this topic will go to 300 pages very quicly

flightlover, your 2 messages clearly show a huge lack of knowledge of the situation and a very clear hate message against one community. This calimero "that's so unfair" behaviour is plain ridiculous.

The Brussels and Walloon politicians just don't get it, so it seems.
They want to kill a well performing airport in the hope that airlines will automaticly choose one of the other Belgian airports. But it seems those airports are just not attractive enough.

- The walloon politicians are not involved. This mess comes from brussels people who clearly don't care about the rest of the country (and for a good reason, the people who vote for them are in brussels only)
- they care about noice, they certainly don't want to kill an airport
- LGG and CRL did not wait this noise mess to become #1 in their field
- LGG is not getting any benefit from this, as the airlines are moving to other airports outside the country
- LGG and CRL are hiring a lot of flemish people

The minister in charge has already aired her opinion by stating cargo ops should move to LGG and pax ops should spread over other airports.

It's not a "her" anymore.
And the "he" is very good at NOT saying anything about the subject.

which are trying to move everything from BRU to CRL and LGG.

That has never been the hidden agenda as it's impossible and everybody knows it.
All the companies that could use LGG over the overpriced BRU did the move already.
The other need good belly cargo options and will never move to LGG.

so once and for all: this is NOT BRU VS LGG/CRL.

A true Belgian solution would be to just do nothing.

My bet is on that.

[Didymus]

Didier Gosuin is a member of défi (the ex-FDF), and the airport is on the territory of Flanders. This is simple economical sabotage and harassment, fueled by his anti-Flemish sentiments. It's a pity that people like Gosuin can't be put on a passenger black list ...

This interview is striking (questions in Dutch, answers in French): http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws/video ... =1.2834228

He literally says BRU is economically important for Flanders, but not for Brussels so Flanders should solve it. A pure form of "vechtfederalisme" (literally: fighting federalism) if you ask me. He even comes close to using the phrase "Nous sommes demandeur de rien." (We're not asking for anything), but says "Nous ne sommes pas demandeur de low cost." instead. There's no hope for any political solution, I'm afraid.

[korvo]

There's no hope for any political solution, I'm afraid.

If there's no hope for a political solution, we should just "invent" some nuisance taxations for Brussels ourselves. Maybe a compensation-tax for every passenger originating from Brussels.

[Yuqu12]

There's no hope for any political solution, I'm afraid.

If there's no hope for a political solution, we should just "invent" some nuisance taxations for Brussels ourselves. Maybe a compensation-tax for every passenger originating from Brussels.

How you look at it, that's perhaps not a bad idea. If they want taxes for their inhabitants rest, it is not fair that it is for 10% of the whole Belgian nation, but a plane full of Americans (for example) has to pay for that. So you could make Brussels inhabitants pay for it, but then they won't fly anymore because that is way too expensive.

Therefore, scrap that stupid idiotic tax for overflying planes which don't cause any problems (literally: if you are in Brussels city, you don't hear them because of all the street noise) and let them fly fly fly

[Conti764]

Didier Gosuin is a member of défi (the ex-FDF), and the airport is on the territory of Flanders. This is simple economical sabotage and harassment, fueled by his anti-Flemish sentiments. It's a pity that people like Gosuin can't be put on a passenger black list ...

This interview is striking (questions in Dutch, answers in French): http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws/video ... =1.2834228

He literally says BRU is economically important for Flanders, but not for Brussels so Flanders should solve it. A pure form of "vechtfederalisme" (literally: fighting federalism) if you ask me. He even comes close to using the phrase "Nous sommes demandeur de rien." (We're not asking for anything), but says "Nous ne sommes pas demandeur de low cost." instead. There's no hope for any political solution, I'm afraid.

That's where this fool is mistaken. When Ibworked on the airport, I had a lot of contact with personel. The dominant language amongst - what I call background-staff - was French and Most of them don't live in Flanders.

But then again, it's not the electorate his party is aiming at...

[sn26567]

Again, very touchy political discussion, which we want to avoid at all costs. Don't blame people, try to propose solutions. And try to listen all arguments from all the parties in the discussion.

[jan_olieslagers]

With my apologies for going politic, but that is hard to avoid here:

* I am sure someone with a good understanding of tax and law, both federal and regional, could come up with Flemish regulation that would (in practice, not of course in its wording) cost mainly to Wallo-Brux while reducing total tax to BRU carriers, offsetting the Brussels lack of national solidarity.

* what is really dégoutant in this matter is the total silence from the Wallonian side, even if they are the first to profit from the present Brussels maneuvers. An even cleverer strategy from the Flemish would be to side with Wallonia against la capitale but it wouldn't be easy, I guess, not knowing much about politics.

[Acid-drop]

Stop saying walloons are involved ! Its simply not true.