Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

JCX BXC

Fattes wrote: »

Will have zero impact, they are mostly eared towards new airports and green sites. Dublin is anything but, the restriction on night flights is totally justifiable and reasonable. No need for the airport to be operating 24\7 under normal conditions

I think its completely unreasonable. Especially closing as early as 11! Reduces the utilisation of fleets considerably.

The population? No sympathy. If you don't like the noise don't move beside an airport ffs!

Shannon Control

Fattes wrote: »

Will have zero impact, they are mostly eared towards new airports and green sites. Dublin is anything but, the restriction on night flights is totally justifiable and reasonable. No need for the airport to be operating 24\7 under normal conditions

Nobody's asking for that, the condition limits the use of the runways at Dublin's busiest time of 6-7 in the morning. Extremely unreasonable in my opinion, seeing as those restrictions would actually diminish most of the necessity for the runway in the morning at all.

Brian CivilEng

I'd say the restrictions are very unreasonable. Considering our longitude and timezone, for business travellers to arrive in European capitals before 9am they need to fly out by 7am (1hr time difference and minimum 1 hour flight time). Restricting take offs before 7am would render same day business trips impossible.

MJohnston

There can't be more than 10 people living in the airport's flight paths that predated the existence of the airport itself.

LXFlyer

To be fair the restrictions were developed at a time when aircraft were noisier.

Aircraft have since become significantly quieter.

The issue is not about the airport extending operating hours to 24/7 but rather that there are sufficient slots to facilitate additional flights in the early morning and late night, in other words the first wave of departures and last arrivals.

Fattes

abitofacomedian wrote: »

I'd say the restrictions are very unreasonable. Considering our longitude and timezone, for business travellers to arrive in European capitals before 9am they need to fly out by 7am (1hr time difference and minimum 1 hour flight time). Restricting take offs before 7am would render same day business trips impossible.

Jet operations did not start until the mid 60's from Dublin so there are quite a lot of people that have a right to object.

As for your business trip logic that is nonsense,London, Luxembourg, Paris, Berlin, would all be do able within one business day and Tell that to Zurich who operate a similar policy. The restrictions from 6-7 is for both runways to operate together, so they can open one or the other.

We are probably one of the closest houses to the airport and less than 500 meters from the runway and when runway 16/34( I think the backup one) is used the planes are less than 20 meters above our house on take off with engines pointed down and nose up! No objection to the new runway but flights between midnight and 6:30 is a nightmare.

In reality a lot of EI flights arrive at 1 and 1:30 from one of the spanish islands normally running late happens 2/3 times a week. Having quiet hours form 12-5:30 is not unreasonable and works in Zurich.

Chris_5339762

Fattes wrote: »

We are probably one of the closest houses to the airport and less than 500 meters from the runway and when runway 16/34( I think the backup one) is used the planes are less than 20 meters above our house on take off with engines pointed down and nose up!

Lucky sod

BonkeyDonker

Fattes wrote: »

Jet operations did not start until the mid 60's from Dublin so there are quite a lot of people that have a right to object.

And aircraft now are considerably quieter than the aircraft from this time and even a few years ago. And future aircraft will be even quieter again.

While focusing on German Airports the following report has great information on the decrease in aircraft noise, and the continued efforts to decrease it further. http://www.bdl.aero/en/bdl-reports-en/aircraft-noise-report/

Fattes wrote: »

As for your business trip logic that is nonsense,London, Luxembourg, Paris, Berlin, would all be do able within one business day and Tell that to Zurich who operate a similar policy. The restrictions from 6-7 is for both runways to operate together, so they can open one or the other.

London is an hour closer to Europe than we are so that works to their advantage. Paris/Luxembourg etc are closer again and one hour ahead so a 6am(local) restriction in Paris is the equivalent of a 5am (local) on Dublin BEFORE you factor in the hour+ distance advantage.

Fattes wrote: »

We are probably one of the closest houses to the airport and less than 500 meters from the runway and when runway 16/34( I think the backup one) is used the planes are less than 20 meters above our house on take off with engines pointed down and nose up! No objection to the new runway but flights between midnight and 6:30 is a nightmare.

Ironically a second runway in the case of Rwy/34 (34 especially) a second parallel runway would reduce it use - especially in the morning when Rwy 28 AND 34 can be used for departures simultaneously. A second parallel runway available at this time would reduce the use or Rwy 34.

Also you may be grossly underestimating the height of the departing aircraft by a factor of at least ten I would say.

Fattes wrote: »

In reality a lot of EI flights arrive at 1 and 1:30 from one of the spanish islands normally running late happens 2/3 times a week. Having quiet hours form 12-5:30 is not unreasonable and works in Zurich.

And if you go back to before the growth of Ryanair and Aer Lingus into bucket and spade routes you will remember charters regularly departing well into the wee hours of the night so the current situation and quieter aircraft are an improvement (along with the lower fares)

Dardania

I'm happy to agree to those restrictions for take-offs, with the quid pro quo being we join Central European Time rather than IST / GMT.

Completely per abitofacomedian's succinct point, If I can't get to Europe in time for meetings, I have to travel the night before. That is a PITA on my family life

Fattes

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

Lucky sod

Yep has its perks, but two EU ways running flights at 6am may not be great for the sleep patterns! Good if your a plane nerd like me

Great to see the development and badly needed

Stealthirl

Id love a house near the airport,with modern insulation,windows ect you can block out a lot of noise if you wish compared to 40-50 years ago.

jimbis

I'd happily listen to Concorde take off over my house every 15 mins rather than my neighbours little rat dog barking constantly 24/7 :mad:

KwackerJack

Would I be mean to say if you don't like the sound of a plane then dont buy a house near an airport?

Fattes

BonkeyDonker wrote: »

Also you may be grossly underestimating the height of the departing aircraft by a factor of at least ten I would say.

Nope actually spot on, we have had it checked in conjunction with the DAA. A large part of the Airport complex was CPO / taken form the original family farm this property is on.

Having dual runways operating from 6am is excessive, that is what the planning prohibits, not both, just that one can operate between those hours.

KwackerJack: the family that own this farm pre date the airport by roughly 300 years or so!

Tenger

KwackerJack wrote: »

Would I be mean to say if you don't like the sound of a plane then dont buy a house near an airport?

I think you may have missed the angle of this particular debate. It wasnt about buying a house near an airport. It was concerning an existing home and the airport growth impacting upon it and the residents inside.

Fattes

moloner4 wrote: »

I strongly disagree. When working on the ramp at 6am it's the most traffic of the day on the taxiways. I've seen and been on flights with 6-7am departure times but due to sheer number of aircraft they could be waiting up to 30 minutes once leaving the gates, especially Ryanair.

With pax numbers looking at easily 27/28 million this year, surely this problem will get worse?

This is not about delays at the airport but quality of life for those living in the areas directly impacted by the airport. We have top class windows and insulation and still we can hear aircraft depart, Arrivals are not so loud.

The planning restriction was designed to benefit the community not facilitate DAA, or airlines

Blut2

Fattes wrote: »

This is not about delays at the airport but quality of life for those living in the areas directly impacted by the airport. We have top class windows and insulation and still we can hear aircraft depart, Arrivals are not so loud.

The planning restriction was designed to benefit the community not facilitate DAA, or airlines

At some stage the benefit to the many outweighs the cost to the few, though. If operating for a few extra hours a day allows for hundreds of thousands more passengers to transit through DUB a year it has massive positives for the airport, the Irish state, and the passengers themselves.

Not to be harsh, but a compulsory purchase order on all properties as close to the airport as yours would probably be the most logical solution to NIMBY-ish objections to airport expansion/time window operations. You could then buy a replacement property elsewhere with the funds, and the airport could expand operations without objection.

Fattes

Blut2 wrote: »

At some stage the benefit to the many outweighs the cost to the few, though. If operating for a few extra hours a day allows for hundreds of thousands more passengers to transit through DUB a year it has massive positives for the airport, the Irish state, and the passengers themselves.

Not to be harsh, but a compulsory purchase order on all properties as close to the airport as yours would probably be the most logical solution to NIMBY-ish objections to airport expansion/time window operations. You could then buy a replacement property elsewhere with the funds, and the airport could expand operations without objection.

First off we never objected to the new runway we see it as a positive.

Yeah obliterate a community and families with ownership dating back to the 1700's to benefit 60-80 flights a morning, remove access to a large cemetery that serves the needs of 1/4 of the cities population and a new,crematorium. Oh and the thousands of jobs you would take away with a cpo, from hauliers and business parks that operated in the area. The benefit will never outweighs the cost to the few and the wider economy in the area.

There is room for both, here are the operational realities.
Busiest business route form the airport is a one hour flight, Dublin-London
7/10 busiest routes are less than 2 hour flight time. London, Manchester, Birmingham, Paris, Brussels,Edinborough. So the early flight times are not essential.

Fattes

moloner4 wrote: »

For you not, for the millions each year that do fly in the morning from dublin it is essential

You are talking about doubling the flight capacity from 6-7 am in the morning, the current volume is no problem, doubling it is not essential, based on the break down of flight routes by volume from Dublin, London -Dublin accounts for a silly % of flights form Dublin airport, but arrivals are split between 4 airports in London.

BonkeyDonker

Fattes wrote: »

Nope actually spot on, we have had it checked in conjunction with the DAA. A large part of the Airport complex was CPO / taken form the original family farm this property is on.

Having dual runways operating from 6am is excessive, that is what the planning prohibits, not both, just that one can operate between those hours.

KwackerJack: the family that own this farm pre date the airport by roughly 300 years or so!

20M is @60ft. Are you sure you did not mean 200M which is @620ft as I seriously doubt any aircraft would be that height passing the end of the runway, never mind nearly 500M out.

Fattes

BonkeyDonker wrote: »

20M is @60ft. Are you sure you did not mean 200M which is @620ft as I seriously doubt any aircraft would be that height passing the end of the runway, never mind nearly 500M out.

Aircraft will pass over us 30/40 seconds after take off on the Backuprunway, max climb rate of an A320 is 200 FT per min. So yep average is about 30/40 meters some are lower some are higher

Blut2

Fattes wrote: »

First off we never objected to the new runway we see it as a positive.

Yeah obliterate a community and families with ownership dating back to the 1700's to benefit 60-80 flights a morning, remove access to a large cemetery that serves the needs of 1/4 of the cities population and a new,crematorium. Oh and the thousands of jobs you would take away with a cpo, from hauliers and business parks that operated in the area. The benefit will never outweighs the cost to the few and the wider economy in the area.

There is room for both, here are the operational realities.
Busiest business route form the airport is a one hour flight, Dublin-London
7/10 busiest routes are less than 2 hour flight time. London, Manchester, Birmingham, Paris, Brussels,Edinborough. So the early flight times are not essential.

How many houses are within 500m of the runways of Dublin airport like yourself? And of these, how many of their residents have moved in within the last 75 years (ie, after they could have expected to have been aware of the likelihood of the airport existing and expanding)?

80 flights a morning would be upwards of 10,000 extra passengers a day. Thats approx 350k a year. This figure will also only grow massively in the future, 350k a year is an extreme low estimate. To argue that moving the very small number of local residents to another location would have more economic damage than constraining DUB flight capacity in the long-term is not at all plausible.

CPO'ing these houses would not destroy 'thousands of jobs', but increasing capacity at Dublin would most certainly create many jobs (both at the airport and in Ireland in general).

I know it must be annoying for you living so close to the flight paths, but if you step-back and look at things objectively you have to realise the greater good for the country is for the small number of local residents to be fairly financially compensated and moved to a different location.

Negative_G

Fattes wrote: »

Aircraft will pass over us 30/40 seconds after take off on the Backuprunway, max climb rate of an A320 is 200 FT per min. So yep average is about 30/40 meters some are lower some are higher

I can assure you the max climb rate of an Airbus A320 at take off thrust is significantly higher than 200ft/min.

JCX BXC

Negative_G wrote: »

I can assure you the max climb rate of an Airbus A320 at take off thrust is significantly higher than 200ft/min.

200ft/min he he.

Maybe in the event of an engine failure

BonkeyDonker

Fattes wrote: »

Aircraft will pass over us 30/40 seconds after take off on the Backuprunway, max climb rate of an A320 is 200 FT per min. So yep average is about 30/40 meters some are lower some are higher

So we have gone from 20m to 30/40 meters.

Bold italics and underlining mine. That is simply incorrect. The actual number is hard to define as it is dependent on many factors, but climb rates of 2000ft per minute plus would be the norm.

Using the minimum climb requirement for a Type A/B aircraft (ATR72, etc., and assuming that you live 500M from the end of the runway, and that the aircraft rotates at the end of the runway it would be a minimum of 60M passing this point.

For a Type C/D (B737, A32 etc) this would again be at least 80M and again probaly more as they would be airbourne before the runway threshold.

So while I may initially have been incorrect by my factor of ten statement, they are not as low as you state either.

Strumms

Negative_G wrote: »

I can assure you the max climb rate of an Airbus A320 at take off thrust is significantly higher than 200ft/min.

Exactly. This guy is away with the faireys. Also 30 seconds after take off the average aircraft will have reached about 2000 ft.

Fattes

Fattes wrote: »

Aircraft will pass over us 30/40 seconds after take off on the Backuprunway, max climb rate of an A320 is 200 FT per min. So yep average is about 30/40 meters some are lower some are higher

Absolutely nothing in this post is true or accurate.

Time Sep between departing aircraft is more like double what you suggest.

Max climb rate, depending on loads could be between 3000 and 4000fpm initially but is more likely to be between 2-3000fpm.

Most aircraft will cross the end of the runway at minimum 200ft and will pass first house at minimum 1000ft plus.

As for this rubbish in previous posts you waffle on about. Where is this cemetery that services a quarter of Dublins population ?

Where is this community that will be obliterated ?

ALL land has been bought up so NO one still owns land that will be CPO'd.



It's incoherent rambling, non accurate stuff like this that ruins anyone with real issues with a projects chance of being listened to.

Fattes

Deleted User wrote: »

Absolutely nothing in this post is true or accurate.

Time Sep between departing aircraft is more like double what you suggest.
Max climb rate, depending on loads could be between 3000 and 4000fpm initially but is more likely to be between 2-3000fpm.
Most aircraft will cross the end of the runway at minimum 200ft and will pass first house at minimum 1000ft plus.
As for this rubbish in previous posts you waffle on about. Where is this cemetery that services a quarter of Dublins population ?
Where is this community that will be obliterated ?
ALL land has been bought up so NO one still owns land that will be CPO'd.
It's incoherent rambling, non accurate stuff like this that ruins anyone with real issues with a projects chance of being listened to.

Take a deep breath and read again! I never suggested or commented on CPO land! This in in relation to the restriction around night time flight, all for and supportive of a badly needed second runway. Dardidstown Cemetery, is on the opposite side of the R132 and has nearly finished completion of the largest crematorium in Ireland. Its design PP and concept is that it will cater for all of North County Dublin cremations.


As for the restriction on flights between 23:00 and 07:00 which is the main point I highlighted Here is a list of airports in Europe that operate quite hours, some under law, some under planning conditions and some voluntary,

Amsterdam, Paris CDG, Munich*, London LHR*, Frankfurt, Madrid, Zurich*, All operated no flights emergencies between 23:00- 06:00. The * all have limits between 06:00 and 07:00 with class 1/2 noise generating aircraft not operating no idea what falls into that category.


Blut2; I am guessing you have not read my posts, its quiet nice here, and living close to the airport is not a problem. There is 8 houses on the r132 within 400 meters of the airport roughly the same on the south side and on the west I don't think there are to many in close proximity. As for timing Jet operations did not become frequent at dublin Airport until the 60's and few who bought there houses in the 50's and 60's could have foreseen wide scale commercial jet travel

the climb rates were in relation to runway r/w 16/34 the shorter backup runway and were rough estimates. Again the average heights given are from the DAA and were in relation to planning permission for a new building in the area. They gave clearances of anything from 30-100 meters (Worst case scenarios)

EchoIndia

Fattes wrote: »

the climb rates were in relation to runway r/w 16/34 the shorter backup runway and were rough estimates. Again the average heights given are from the DAA and were in relation to planning permission for a new building in the area. They gave clearances of anything from 30-100 meters (Worst case scenarios)

The rate of climb are not runway-dependent. As I type, an A320 just off runway 10 is climbing at 2,500 fpm and that is on a warm day. Click on individual aircraft on FR24 to see rates of climb pretty accurately.

https://www.flightradar24.com/53.43,-6.26/13

BonkeyDonker

Fattes wrote: »

Dardidstown Cemetery, is on the opposite side of the R132 and has nearly finished completion of the largest crematorium in Ireland. Its design PP and concept is that it will cater for all of North County Dublin cremations.

That cemetery is to the south of the existing runway, and as far as the planning permissions go will be completely unaffected by the new runway to the NORTH of the airport.