Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

Options
1216217219221222293

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 355 ✭✭moonshy2022


    I’ve heard people complaining about the noise the sea makes splashing on the beach after they bought their idyllic home by the sea, who do they complain to about that ?


    “Can you turn the sea off at night so I can sleep please”


    People are idiots, you buy beside something that is known to generate noise. But then complain afterwards 🙄. Buy beside a train line, a motorway, a factory, a school etc etc. oh but I bought and built in the countryside, yes buy 3 miles from a busy international airport !



  • Registered Users Posts: 876 ✭✭✭HTCOne


    No matter what happens the aircraft are going to pass over SOMEONE'S house, just preferably over the least amount of houses possible. Using 28R for arrivals would negatively impact far more people than for departures, as northwest county Dublin is far more sparsely populated than the coasts.

    My blood was boiling reading a story on Facebook yesterday from Newstalk where a resident was complaining that the noise was preventing them sleeping as it was so bad during the night. The new runways closes at 6pm, nobody challenges these scroungers. I was halfway through writing a withering reply to the auld nutcase before deciding it wasn’t worth risking my employment over.

    The current runway layout/plan was published and available since the 1950s, anyone who has bought since then only has themselves to blame. The only thing that has changed was they were both originally intended to be 4,000m long and the aircraft make a fraction of the noise they did back then, and climb a hell of a lot faster and thus are higher.

    Post edited by HTCOne on


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,232 ✭✭✭plodder


    To be fair, while the plan for a runway has been around for a long time, the detailed operating procedures haven't been. So, the only thing set in stone is the runway itself. We're getting one change to the new procedures already. I'd be fairly sure it won't be the last. I don't see why there shouldn't be an alternating system in Dublin like there is at Heathrow for example. The idea that residents have to take whatever is thrown at them because "they should have known" is ridiculous.



  • Registered Users Posts: 355 ✭✭moonshy2022


    The bloody planning permission has dictated how the runways are operated. For someone who likes pontificating about stuff you really haven’t done any research at all about what you a bluffing about have you ?!


    I’d highly suggest doing your research Plodder if you want people/others to take you seriously.



  • Registered Users Posts: 358 ✭✭orionm_73



    The people in Boroimhe and Ridgewood are complaining about take off noise. That would be the same regardless of what operating procedures were used. Changing the departure route will have zero effect on the take off roll noise. So to complain that a decades long planned for runway is now in operation is bizarre.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 876 ✭✭✭HTCOne


    Plodder, because Heathrow is to the west of a major population center with east/west runways it doesn't matter which Runway is in use, the same number of people will be affected regardless. Dublin is to the North of a major population center, so anything that brings traffic in a southerly direction has a disproportionate effect on people. Not comparable situations. If Dublin had north/south oriented runways then it would be. Far better to bring the traffic north or west into the sticks (relatively). The selfishness and NIMBYism of these residents is astonishing.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,232 ✭✭✭plodder


    Look, it seems like you aren't too familiar with the planning system. Certainly not for the level of indignation and anger you are showing.

    Planning is just another consent. What do you think happened when the DAA didn't like the conditions in the 2007 permission (which is still in force apparently and they are ignoring)? They put in a new application to alter the conditions. Any planning permission can be altered with a subsequent application at any time, for any reason. That is well established law.

    If it was decided that an alternating runway usage scheme was to be used, then a planning application would be submitted to permit it. No big deal.

    Why don't you take a walk on the beach to clear the head? The noise of the sea splashing is actually quite refreshing.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,232 ✭✭✭plodder


    This isn't my battle to be honest. So, I'm not going to get dragged into the weeds on the details. But, I'd point out the south runway was used exclusively for departures (obviously) until the new runway was built. So, it would hardly be revolutionary for it to be used some of the time with the new runway.



  • Registered Users Posts: 172 ✭✭Cilar


    Any idea how the iaa came up with a fly over waypoint right on Ratoath. That makes most flights to sounthern Europe and North America climb over the most populated area in east Meath. Placing the waypoint on rural area south of the town would make more logical sense.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,232 ✭✭✭plodder


    As I said already. There has been a plan for a runway for a long time but the operating procedures came after these houses were built. The DAA went back to the well to get planning conditions changed. So residents are just as entitled to seek changes to be made

    .. such as moving departures to the south runway because it is located further away from housing or some kind of alternating system.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,426 ✭✭✭prunudo


    If departures are from the south runway, arrivals will be on the north runway and that means low flying aircraft over more densely populated areas. The points being made really smack of an 'over other peoples house but not mine' attitude.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,307 ✭✭✭bikeman1


    This just keeps going around and around in circles. To the East of the North runway is a densely populated area. (Portmarnock/Malahide)

    To the South of the Airport is Dublin City (the most densely populated area in the country).

    To the North and West is sparsely populated.

    Can planes avoid every house or area on departure - no. Can the airport be moved - no. Does it make sense to fly over more densely populated areas because a few people who live beside the airport that has been there for 80 years don’t want noise - no.

    Please remember that when we will have those calm days in the summer and sea breezes, 10R will be use for departures, out over to the East, passing the North City straight out past Howth. Will these people complain? No, they know that they live near the airport and that living on an island is the most important place in this country for getting on and off said island.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,843 ✭✭✭sparrowcar


    There's no place here for your articulate, rational and well balanced view.....

    Let's keep this thread for what it's for lately, a place for bitching and moaning about Dublin Airport.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,926 ✭✭✭trellheim


    Can we please split the SIDs out to their own thread please, it deserves it at this stage



  • Registered Users Posts: 876 ✭✭✭HTCOne


    Delete



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,751 ✭✭✭Karppi


    The daa went back to change the planning conditions on operating times for the new runway, and to move from a numerical cap on movements over night to a noise “budget” approach. It is not seeking to change the preferential use of runways, which basically is minimising the noise for Portmarnockonians



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,232 ✭✭✭plodder



    If departures are from the south runway, arrivals will be on the north runway and that means low flying aircraft over more densely populated areas. The points being made really smack of an 'over other peoples house but not mine' attitude.

    Is that really true though? The approach to 28R doesn't look more densely populated than the approach to 28L in my opinion. It's basically two different parts of Portmarnock that get overflown in each scenario. It depends on the exact routes presumably, so if this question was addressed in the planning applications maybe someone could point it out? It would be interesting to see what the thinking was.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,751 ✭✭✭Karppi


    The point is that An Bord Pleanala set the operating “preferences”, so you probably need to consider the number of people under the departure from 28R versus the number under the departure from 10L; and of course they are also the comparisons for an approach to 10L v an approach to 28R.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,232 ✭✭✭plodder


    I'm not familiar with the details of it yet, but the principle of a noise budget seems sound enough. One of the big eye (or ear) openers for me, is the difference in noise levels between your bog standard Ryanair 737 and the wide-bodied jets like the A330 and the B787. You'd hope they'd be accounted for differently in a noise budget.

    Also, I question "minimising the noise for Portmarnockians". The current arrangements suit people at the Northern end of Portmarnock, but the apartments and houses down at Station road are affected. It would be the other way round obviously for 28R arrivals.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,751 ✭✭✭Karppi


    I think it’s about avoiding new populations receiving new noise; if you see what I mean. Quite how the bias in favour of Portmarnock and indeed Malahide came about goes back to the original planning approval in 2007.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quota_Count_system provides an explanation of the quota count system, based on that used in the UK



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,505 ✭✭✭✭Brendan Bendar


    The apartments and houses down at the Station road were built in the last three years.

    The outer marker for 28L is about 200 meters from them.

    Shouldn’t be a major surprise for those living there.

    …Edit.. those on the left looking West from the Estuary.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,232 ✭✭✭plodder


    The buildings on one side of the road are recent enough, but the other side has been there 10-15 years I'd say.

    Then again, if it's the case that these plans have been around since the 1950's then most of Portmarnock and Malahide were built after that.

    Also, it's clearly the case that residents in the Station Rd area had no choice but to accept the present flight paths when there was only one runway, but now there are two. So, there are more options and ways of doing things.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,769 ✭✭✭Captain_Crash


    Yea there’s been apts on Station Rd for at least 16 years…. I lived there for a year back in ‘07



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,751 ✭✭✭Karppi


    1969 was when the parallel runways were first described, including a map. I think they were included in the County Development Plan in 1971.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,185 ✭✭✭goingnowhere


    Don't forget 28R is basically a replacement/extension of the old 29



  • Registered Users Posts: 113 ✭✭Phen2206


    Indeed it is here on this page. The map is dated October 1968. Amazing to think that they were thinking about parallel runways 55 years ago! A rare example of forward thinking in Ireland when it comes to infrastructure. Credit to the daa where it is due for holding onto the land for 28R all these years. Current noise issues aside it has been a pretty smooth project thus far, which the likes of LHR can only dream of when it comes to a new runway there.

    https://www.dublinairport.com/blog/2019/06/26/history-of-dublin-airport-s-north-runway



  • Registered Users Posts: 921 ✭✭✭Bussywussy


    Looking at the new SIDs the meltdown when they realise there's very little difference is going to be Hillarious.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,751 ✭✭✭Karppi


    No, it’s not. It’s an entirely different concept based on parallel runways. 29/11, 23/05 (as it was) and 17/35 (as it was) were based on the old RAF notion that if you had three runways in an equilateral triangle, no runway would ever have more than a 30 degree crosswind affecting it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,751 ✭✭✭Karppi


    It is an example of long range airport planning which is, I believe, unmatched in Europe, if not further afield. Certainly in its time. Imagine being sat in a civil service office over 50 years ago and having the vision that Dublin Airport could grow to such an extent. That’s real strategic planning



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 124 ✭✭Astral Nav


    In many respects it was indeed but remember all the green belt rows during the 80s and 90s as Malahide and Baldoyle looked like they would eventually meet?

    The runways may have been planned but the planning for the terminals have been largely made up over time leading to today's ramp congestion.

    One part may have been well planned but as for the rest? Let's not even mention a rail link (I just did🤭).



Advertisement