Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

Schipol is also a bad example because the Dutch are actually good at planning and if you look at the runways and location of the airport you can see that they have kept residential development away from the runways and flight paths and have large green or industrial buffer zones around much of the airport.

Nonsense.

The districts of Amstelveen, Osdorp, Hoofddorp, Alsmeer and others, are all directly overflown much closer in, on a number the Schipol approaches, than you would find at Dublin.

I'm sure those airports would be delighted to take the flights but experience from the notorious Shannon Stopover era tells us that the airlines and their passengers would be less than happy, so much so that the passengers would make different arrangements and the airlines would transfer capacity to Britain.

If the airlines thought it was profitable, they would already serve those airports. There's nothing stopping them except the lack of passenger demand.

As someone who has increasingly frequent DART and Diesel trains passing my garden at all hours - not to mention engineering works when required, I wonder about RTE's ongoing interest in aircraft noise that arguably all of Greater Dublin experiences to varying degrees.

Maybe somebody in RTE should explain why aircraft NIMBYs choosing to live next to a busy international airport are so worthy of national attention while the rest of us living near railways, roads, motorways, entertainment venues and assorted noise generating industrial complexes manage to get on with life.

Does RTE really consider that these people are entitled to live in some sort of silent Utopia next to a busy European airport? If so, why?

When it comes the provision and operation of vital national infrastructure (housing, water electricity transport) RTE and other media appear to have made it their mission to platform the very few at the expense of the the rest of us.

This could be a rich seam for a Dail committee to mine.

That is rubbish. People are disturbed by the noise, but not as much (apparently) as some news reports claim. Sounds familiar?

There have been long-term plans for a new airport, and the choice now seems to be a site (Alcochete) about 40kms south of the city. This will need hige surface transport investments, and there are hopes that it might open by 2034. The long delays are largely due to the huge costs and also Portugal's financial crisis of 2008-11, a bit like ours.

I live 500 mts from the Dublin South West train line in Newbridge, where the non-stop cork express flies through sounding its horn at least twice an hour ( not to mention all the other non-stop routes ), but have we a possibility to complain? Nah, it doesn’t bother any of either me or my neighbours.

So why don’t you **** off somewhere else with your NIMBYISM

I assume the answer is yes but can the daa apply to amend planning conditions in future, i.e. remove the movement cap at night or adjust it to apply between 00:00-06:00 etc.

______

If 3 flights are scheduled for 22:50 and lets assume they are delayed 15, 20, 25m does this count towards the movmement limit. This could be a major problem if so.

I would agree with you if these conditions were slipped into random applications for bike rack or something. But it's runway application and the terminal application. Those two developments are the airport as a whole. Major applications are not “throwaway” in any shape or form.
The application for the runway is appropriate place to condition hours/terms of runway operation imo.

For the passenger cap. A aviation regulator might be in a position to look at capacity in terms of flight slots. But they’re not going to have a clue on overall development impacts. Wastewater systems, the fire safety capacity, etc.
I very much doubt they would take responsibility for increased occupancy and the risk that goes with it.

There needs to be a overall regulatory process, currently that’s planning process and building control. No perfect by any stretch. But the isolating individual aspects to different authorities would be a disaster.

2.2 is interesting. If a heavy needed the north runway after hours or they would have to offload pax or bags, that could be interpreted as hardship. Likewise for a freighter carrying medical cargo, which most do out of DUB.