Archived Page

This page is no longer maintained.
For up-to-date information please see the new website

Aircraft Noise

With the building of the third runaway at Heathrow to begin in the very near future, the British Airports Authority (BAA) published a Noise Action Plan in May and invited the general public to express their opinions of the plan by completing a Consultation Survey to be sent in by early October. The Society asked Taplow resident Geoff Holloway, a retired international and domestic routes pilot, to comment on the Plan. His comments have been incorporated within the Society’s response to the consultation.

He writes:

Noise is a subjective issue, with different sounds affecting people differently – a consensus on acceptable levels is an impossible dream. The Action Plan is long on jargon and aspirations, and for residents of the Taplow area much of its content can be disregarded.

Looking first at night movements

Arrivals are only an issue on easterly landings, when aircraft tracking from Europe generally overfly Burnham Beeches heading west, before making a 180° turn to approach Heathrow. Two factors affect noise. First, air traffic control may route the aircraft too close to the M4 corridor and turn it early, thus requiring it to descend earlier and pass over our built-up area. Second, aircrews may fail to observe continuous descent procedures, which are designed to avoid periods of level flight and therefore use of higher power. Air Traffic Control should be more active in limiting descent clearances.

Departures are only an issue on westerly take-offs. Quieter aircraft are desirable but the perceived noise is generally little altered. Restrictions and fines for departures after 2300 hours do exist, but BAA have plenty of scope for granting exemptions (lack of terminal space/hotel accommodation for delayed passengers, etc.) Some other airports, such as Zurich, allow no such flexibility. BAA’s own figures suggest the frequency of dispensations is high but even one a week can ruin 52 nights’ sleep for local residents in one year. BAA should be more strict in enforcing the restrictions.

Turning to round-the-clock operations

The current departure routes involve a turn north, either in the vicinity of Sainsbury’s in Taplow or a little to the west, so as to avoid Maidenhead. These routes have been in place for decades and any change would involve inconvenience for other areas with concomitant howls of protest. Any proposal to shift the burden is unlikely to meet a favourable reception.

The ability of modern aircraft to navigate accurately is immense, which only severe weather conditions should mitigate. A stipulation should be made that speeds must be constrained to enable the aircraft to follow the path accurately. This would have the benefit of increasing the altitude of planes over our area. BAA should insist on greater accuracy in flying the prescribed path.

Regarding the Action Plan

The plan comprises a list of 60 action points under five headings described as “reasonably practicable”. The several sections cover quieter aircraft, balance against carbon emissions, noise mitigation schemes, consulting local communities, influencing planning policy, and research.

Specific aims are lacking. The tone is inspirational rather than objective.

Conclusion

BAA have most of the powers they need to regulate noise. Their implementation is another matter. A more vigorous attitude towards accurate tracking and fining of transgressors is required.

Today, constraining the number of aircraft movements and keeping night operations to a minimum and the enforcement of current regulations are the most realistic actions to take.

Real reduction of noise disruption is likely to be gradual, coming only with the introduction of new technologies as airline finances permit.