Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120954527#Comment_120954527

FCC approved the permission change in the first place, so no. The appeal is residents appealing against FCCs approval.

The enforcement is against the 2007 permission.

Captain_Crash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120954531#Comment_120954531

That’s a whole day in the high court…. They’ll need a lot more than that!

plodder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120954446#Comment_120954446

I suspect the DAA's current case against the enforcement order is just as unlikely to succeed, and is merely a delaying tactic. What are they going to argue? That they are too big to be told what to do? The residents might be better off seeing if they can become directly involved in the case, as the DAA might not have any great incentive to see it decided quickly imo.

Captain_Crash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120954714#Comment_120954714

Im sure you read the article and saw exactly what they’ve argued, and it’s enough for the HC to agree that there is a basis for appeal 🤷🏻‍♂️ hence the stay!

stephenjmcd

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120954714#Comment_120954714

Well seeing as the judge seems to agree that Fingal didn't go through the proper process and the DAA also citing EU law on airline safety I'd say it'd take a brave person to back against the DAA. Particularly so as FCC have already said the cap is defunct and a noise quota more appropriate

plodder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120954762#Comment_120954762

My guess would be that the stay more reflects the claimed severe impact of the order like up to 4,400 flights being cancelled. It was an ex-parte application so none of these claims could be questioned. I don't think that would matter when it comes to the main hearing itself though and the actual arguments seem pretty weak to me.

Whatever about the enforcement notice itself, this isn't credible:

The company’s legal team also claimed the planning condition - which is being enforced by the council - is so vague and imprecise as to be unenforceable.

What is vague or imprecise about 65 flights per night on average between 11pm and 7am?

Anyway, the case isn't being mentioned again until November. So, I imagine they'll be hoping that ABP make their decision before then. Or failing that the Summer schedule will be well over and done with.

Jamie2k9

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120954836#Comment_120954836

ATC Strikes, Weather, Other Airport Inifstructure failure, Medical or Fuel Diversions...is the average over a year, month or week.

Bussywussy

Hopefully 28L/10R needs a few months of scheduled nighttime works to put the North runway in use 😜😜😜

sparrowcar

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955201#Comment_120955201

There's a week of it just around the corner.... ;)

plodder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120954867#Comment_120954867

92 days. It's in the RTE report.

titan18

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120954836#Comment_120954836

Tbf, 4400 would seem correct. Probably 60 flights a day getting cancelled until end of the summer schedule at least (based on previous posters analysis) and then more in the winter season. You'd likely easily get to 4400 by year end

plodder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955303#Comment_120955303

Even if it is correct, it doesn't help them with the substantive issue. They are kind of in the same situation now legally, as the people who built this house without planning permission and who have had various stays of execution despite not having a leg to stand on legally. So, having a stay granted in your favour is not the big win some people think it is. It's a delaying tactic.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/couple-who-built-house-with-no-planning-permission-seek-injunction-preventing-demolition-over-new-evidence/a662085380.html

Cookiemunster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955369#Comment_120955369

Maybe so, but FCC are tying to enforce a condition of PP that they themselves have already overturned in favour of noise quotas. Some local residents have appealed this to ABP. If ABP decide to rule against the residents then the noise quotas automatically come in. Why are FCC now trying to enforce something that they have already agreed to overturn?

markpb

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120955408#Comment_120955408

Because it’s their obligation. Until AbP make a decision, the existing conditions are legally enforceable. If someone complains to FCC about it, they don’t have much wiggle room. If it was a physical structure, they could wait for the outcome of all appeals before knocking it but an operational one is much simpler to enforce. Stop doing it until a decision is made that allows them to.

DublinKev

It must be the wind direction but I have never heard the take offs sound as loud off 28R as they have been tonight here in Swords. Not a complaint, love the sound of them, but it’s curious that in the week that we’ve had, the FCC enforcement order and the DAA High Court stay, they sound so loud. The conspiracy theorist in me thinks they must be gunning those engines! 🤣

rameire

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120958351#Comment_120958351

Was in St Anne's park this afternoon for a few hours and could hear the planes constantly. I believe it is to do with the cloud cover being so low and constant, the sound is just bouncing around.

dublin12367

Could anyone see DUB coming to a compromise with residents over flight paths or ever bringing in the same thing Heathrow has, ie. North runway used for departures and south for arrivals until 3pm. Switching from 3pm until 11pm.

Then every Sunday it changes to the opposite for the week ahead, next week north runway arrivals and south for departures until 3pm and then switch for the evening.

I think that is a brilliant system Heathrow operates. Gives everyone a break and fair for all residents at each end.

I know it would require another planning change but it really does seem a bit daft the way DUB operate. Residents who were immune to departures off 28L now getting less than 5 percent of westerly departures, down from 100 percent, and residents (whom shouldn’t be complaining as the runway was planned for years!!) under 28R not used to departures at all getting 95 percent of them now.

I do think DUB shot themselves in the foot by basically moving all departures to the new runway and therefore have now received such backlash from residents, hence the mess they are in currently.

Heathrow’s system would should hopefully cut out a lot of the moaning residents from the North runway out who could do serious damage if night restrictions are brought in.

I expect to get a comment that they cant land on 28R or depart off of 10L because of Malahide residents which I think is absolutely ridiculous. There should be no restriction that you can’t take off on 1 side of a runway that cost 300 million. That’s like building a house and saying you can’t use upstairs.

EchoIndia

That would indeed be a fairer solution. The fact that the runways are not both of approximately the same length would complicate matters somewhat, in that for westerly departures during the day (i.e. with the 28s in use), every second week they would be saddled with a shorter runway than at present. Of course, when on easterlies the current default of 10R for departures already imposes operational restrictions for some flights.

dublin12367

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120968066#Comment_120968066

Yeah, is it just the Transatlantic a321 that have the issue with the shorter runway at DUB? If needs be the could always use the longer one if required.

Wasn’t 28L/10R to be extended at some stage too? Is that on the long finger now?

Economics101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120968039#Comment_120968039

Is Heathrow subject to local authority planning permission for flight paths etc? Or is there a separate, tecchnically competent regulatory body?

Is the tyranny of the local planners unique to Ireland?

EchoIndia

Here's some information about Heathrow, just in case anyone thinks they have it cracked there.

https://www.heathrow.com/company/local-community/noise/operations/cranford-agreement

HTCOne

As we've discussed on here numerous times before, the population is to the east of east-west runways at LHR, so regardless of which runway is in use, a similar number of people are going to be affected. The population center in DUB is to the south of the east west runways, so the variation in numbers affected is vastly different.

Using 28R for departures affects far fewer people than 28L, and it is longer, which is more important for departing aircraft than arrivals.

Captain_Crash

Another thing with LHR is they don’t depart of 09L so in that config it’s similar to DUB with only one (09R) being used for departures all day! With a big turn after departure, before anyone else comments on that lol!

prunudo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120968735#Comment_120968735

And yet, for years, a larger group of people didn't complain and got on with it. Now all of a sudden there is a flurry stories in the media from aggrieved residents about a runway that has been in the making for 60 years.

Economics101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120968723#Comment_120968723

Am I right in thinking that the Heathrow Cranford agreement on noise management was an agreement between LHR and several local authorities and maybe other entities? The planning permission as we understand the term, was for the various civil engineering works at LHR, most notably extra taxiways to enable more Easterly operations. The local authority planners did not have some sort of veto over things like SIDs as far as I am aware.

Of course they haven't "cracked it" at LHR: given the population of London, the level of LHR traffic and the position of LHR due West of London, it's basically uncrackable.

Captain_Crash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120968911#Comment_120968911

Yes as far as I know the Cranford agreement is just that, an agreement!

EchoIndia

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120968986#Comment_120968986

An oral agreement at that! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cranford_Agreement

LXFlyer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120968784#Comment_120968784

That's a very important point.

The notion that switching runways at Dublin each week and midway through the day would be an improvement in general is laughable.

With the prevailing wind from the southwest that would mean landing aircraft passing over far denser populated residential areas for half the day on approach to the north runway 28R than they would to the south runway 28L. Similarly departures from the 28L affect more residents than 28R. There is a balance to be struck here and the current restrictions regarding preferred runway use are the best compromise.

I do however think that there should be a debate about the night time operations, and I think that the airlines need to play an active role here.

I fully accept the need for some night time operations, with priority being given to:

• First wave transatlantic arrivals
• Overnight cargo flights
• Ehiopian transit flights
• Flights to/from strategic international hubs

Looking at samples of schedules, I would have to question why, for example, flights to regional GB locations need to leave Dublin before 06:00 or arrive back after midnight. They are anti-social in virtually every respect.

The scale of the late night arrivals from sun locations are probably the main issue. Tonight, for example there are 15 flights scheduled to arrive between midnight and 01:00, of which 2 are from GB airports, 3 from international hubs and the other 10 from sun destinations, and a further 10 arrivals between 01:00 and 02:00, all of which are from sun destinations.

Even worse tonight is a TUI flight from Rhodes that is scheduled to arrive at 03:20 - that is just madness.

I get that much of this is about maximising fleet utilisation for the airlines, but is that amount of arrivals post-midnight a good thing in general? Public transport options are very limited overnight to/from the airport.

I think that a healthy debate about this is no bad thing, without getting emotive.

The solutions, in my view, are

• More insulation (albeit within reason)
• Extending the normal airport operating hours to be from 06:00 until 00:00
• Siitting down with the airlines to keep movements outside of those hours to a minimum based on the priorities above

dublin12367

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120970504#Comment_120970504

Aircraft landing on 28R is not going to be a whole lot nosier than aircraft landing on 28L. There’s 1.6km width between the two. Anyone under 28R complaining of landing noise ( in future) needs to give their heads a wobble.

With regards to departures, again 28L have been over flown for 30+ with minimal disruptions. I don’t think too many under this flight path are concerned about noise or even notice it at this stage. Bar that one resident who makes 1000s of complaints a year. The suggestion was more to give 28R residents a break as they are shouting the loudest and who knows what damage that could do.

If you look at Manchester, standstead, or Gatwick and look at their night time flights schedule tonight, the residents of Dublin should be happy that they have only a 15,10 and 1 between 00:00 and 03:00. Manchester in particular is quieter all day compared to Dublin except between 12am-4am.

Flights have to leave for the UK at 06:00 during the week especially in order for people to get to meetings etc and onward connections. With regard to night time flights from the UK, some people do day trips for matches etc.

The flights wouldn’t be scheduled for such times if they were empty. The demand is obviously there and none of them should be gotten rid of because of a few residents. Some flights are also scheduled for such times at night to base the plane in a location for a 6am morning flight to somewhere else.

The new noise quota approved by Fingal and awaiting approval from ABP would also allow these flights continue.

I would have thought the obvious choice of the first flights to be cut (if required) would be the Ethiopian flights in the morning? Nobody can come off or go on these planes anyway? That could be moved to Shannon.

LXFlyer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120970817#Comment_120970817

Causing issues for another group isn’t solving the problem. I don’t think the ABP ruling regarding the preferential use of the two runways is going to change, so let’s park that.

I would also comment that he/she who is shouting the loudest isn’t always right. There’s generally a middle ground to be found.

But I was raising a more general point for discussion the desirability of post-midnight arrivals. They have most definitely grown in number in recent years.

I really don’t care less what Manchester or Stansted do. My point was about Dublin and the level of their post-midnight arrivals.

Who actually actively wants to arrive back in Dublin that late, especially given the lack of public transport options from the airport. I genuinely don’t think that many people do!

The flights operate because the airlines are maximising their fleet utilisation. Most of the people on them have a choice between a morning flight home or those flights. I doubt most would choose to get home that late!

I am 100% behind 06:00-24:00 ops, with limited additions, but I’d have to question the numbers of post-midnight sun holiday arrivals tonight and an 03:20 arrival in particular.