Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

Aren’t we in the midst of a climate emergency??

Should we all not be trying to cut back on air travel to stop the planet burning like agriculture, cars etc instead of encouraging more??

No. We are an island nation.

i wasnt aware of their use of the 16/34 during grass cutting, thanks for the information. i used see them alright before the redevelopment, thought it bizarre at times due to lack of significant northerly winds. Know one family that was driven demented by it but it only sporadically happened so they never complained about it or so they said...

i should have been more explicit - it is not insulated for sound purposes or by the daa as part of their planning/noise abatement plan. It has triple glaze windows throughout, 100mm internal wall insulation on block with cavity throughout except for ceiling which has a 280mm metac roll insulation with additional 30mm foil backed kingspan on roof. It also has MVHR systym so no holes in walls for noise to pass in.

Ultimately it is how they operate westerly departures from the north runway that affects me personally. As part of planning, the daa submitted environmental assessments of the impact of the north runway, which includes noise mapping. under the original planning application they described flying category c+d planes (ie any jet engine, not propellor planes) directly out for up to 5 nautical miles until they had reached a height of 3000ft above sea level before diverging north. they drew pretty maps which showed the modelled routes for these planes over north dublin.

these do not correspond with the actual flight paths that the daa are operating. flight are deviating at 650ft above sea level and flying over areas that the daa never stated they would be flying. Local people were refused planning permission as they were originally meant to be on the flight paths detailed in these plans. Others (like ourselves) have been granted PP despite finding ourselves now on these flight paths. we are not idiots. we knew it would be louder. I cycled myself out to an area close to the south runway approximating where my (now) homes distance is from the north runway. I looked at these maps. We discussed it with our architect. they looked at the noise contour maps. We paid for extra 'noise insulating' triple glaze to be installed in the southern side of the house as it faced the runway and the flight paths approx 2km in the distance. The adjusted the flight paths in february 23 which avoided the 75degree deviation towards kilsallaghan. No diference to me, still flying over my house. If the daa had stated what they were actually going to do there is no way we would have rebuilt. You might say 'tough, you built near an airport'. I would say, why bother with planning if you are going to ignore it when it is inconvenient? We live in a democracy. Planning is there for a reason. we have had professional noise report done, showing LAeq dB

(LAeq,9hour 09:00- 18:00) of 65 when we were in a 55 zone. The same report had peaks of 92-93db. we are in the countour zone of 50-55db. of course we are not happy.

You mention a 30degree deviation. the daa draws up its flight paths (for review and approval by Airnav ireland (formerly Irish aviation authority)) based upon international guidance i believe by the international civil aviation organisation. The daa have discussed using both the north and south runways in what they describe as simultaneous modes vs segregated modes. an old version of the regulations was published in 2004 prior to the daa's pp in 2007 (https://www.icao.int/Meetings/AMC/MA/Eleventh%20Air%20Navigation%20Conference%20%28ANConf11%29/anconf11_ip003_app_en.pdf) and was updated in 2018. i am lead to believe that there is no major update on the guidance in the intervening period. I suppose what is clear however is how the daa have been using the runway since opening. When the planes depart westerly they have deviated northward in excess of what they described in their pp. However when departing easterly they continue in the manner as described in their planning - ie straight out without significant deviation. Surely if there have been safety regulation changes requiring a larger divergence between the two runways then that should also occur whether or not the wind comes from the west or east.

the daa appealed the restriction on night time flights to fingal coco under a 'relevant action' which went through in 2022. This relevant action was subsequently appealed back to an bord pleanalla in august 2022 - and is still awaiting a hearing. Until that hearing is undertaken, the relevant action is not in place and the original PP stands. If the daa are saying that their PP was inadequate to facilitate the building an operation of a north runway profitably then they should have not built it until they had sorted their planning. they went ahead anyway and built it. Note however that this 'relevant action' makes no attempt to change flight paths and it was granted with the stipulation of the daa having to adhere to the environmental assessments and plans attached to the original planning including the environmental noise corridors that were described.

in realtion to insulation etc, their PP stipulated that all homes within the certain noise contours required insulation prior to useage of the runway. that clearly hasnt happened.

finally: https://youtu.be/xZnsPSTuEL8?t=730 . youtube webinar from jan 2023 involveing a ceo of Liege airport Laurent Jossart who states Liege ariport (with a turnover of 100million/annum) spent 450million on buying and insulating 6500 homes around the airport. If the national interest is such that a few dozen people need to move and a hundred more houses need proper insulation to allow full airport functioning then do it. But dont pretend its not an issue and hope it goes away.

Its the 21st century. As per the WHO (https://www.who.int/europe/publications/i/item/WHO-EURO-2018-3287-43046-60243), noise - particularly at nighttime - has a significant and real impact on health, both cardiovascular and also developementally on children. it is not good enough to say 'suck it up, get used to it'. certainly some people do, but many others do not. you do not need to be woken to have sleep disturbance - as any patient with obstructive sleep apnoea can attest.

Planning for the runway would have gone through FCC and AbP or, more likely, AbP via the Strategic Infrastructure planning. In either case, a national authority reviewed the case and was happy with the reduced overnight flights. If FCC put them in originally, AbP could have taken them out but they didn’t.

Agree logically but that’s not what’s in the planning permission granted - the new runway closes and less flights allowed on the original runway.

madness

I have DART trains at the end of my back garden and I'm watching how this plays out with great interest.

Thinking along these lines...

2nd very long planned runway opens and the number of flights between 23:00 and 07:00 is reduced as a condition.

so...

when DART + gets completed, what are my chances of having the number of trains reduced between the same hours.

Also, sometimes I like to sit out in the evenings but when a train goes thundering past, I have to pause the conversation so ideally a reduction in the number of trains from 17:00, overnight and up to 09:00 the next day would suit.

We have a gift in this country for turning the simple into the unworkable. The media and their policy of winding up NIMBYs are a very big part of it.

This relevant action was subsequently appealed back to an bord pleanalla in august 2022 - and is still awaiting a hearing

A year in the system and still no decision either way no wonder this type of nonsense goes on!!!

All the public transport projects are caught in the same limbo too. MetroLink is going to oral hearing but AbP have no idea when that might happen. The Bus Connects projects are in nomans land.

I hope they change the SIDs off 28L to an immediate right turn

brianiac, you make some very good points and set them out clearly, while I don't agree with you, thank you for that.

There are two separate issues here. You are talking about the routing of departing flights when 28R is in use. While that may be an issue for you, you will be driving flights more over Ashbourne and Rathoath if they were to continue straight for 5 miles and then turn right and ultimately left again for southbound departures. That would be even over more population. 28L and 10R are right up against the city, these must have straight in and out routings both ways, simple as. The deviations must be to the North. Safety rules dictate that one of the runways deviates.

The issue that everyone is jumping up and down about is the 65 flights between 23:00 and 07:00. That is a significant reduction to where we were BEFORE the North runway was in use. More infrastructure, less usage. Madness. As it stands, the North runway is not even in use at those times. It will have zero effect on the noise during the day for you.

One other point, having lived by the airport for over 6 years, the noise is very much either side of a flight path, particularly at night when it is quiet and no ambient noise (traffic / birds / people moving) around. It would be my opinion based on where your house is (guessing pretty much under the current routing off 28R), that you will still have significant noise from the nearby airport even if they go straight on for 5 miles.

Stop making me h**ny 😂😂 jokes aside, the noise you hear these days from modern jets is mostly airflow and not even the engines themselves!

Back in the 70s, people drove cars without seatbelts, smoked everywhere, children were beaten and abused in schools and we collectively believed in the power of flat lemonade. Time moves on, life improves for people.

Not the engines? The airflow is through the engines is it not? Unless you're trying to define "engine" as only the combustion chamber, which would be interesting.

It's true that modern jet engines make less noise. But there are a lot more of them nowadays.

My understanding is, that a condition to the north runway planning results in a new restriction on the whole airfield. They are complaining about flights that were taking place previously and would contuine on the southern runway. That is the issue I have with the planning, not that the Daa should be exempt. Equally the issue is the underfunding of aBp which is causing the isse to drag on.

They should not be flouting planning conditions regardless. I wonder are there other airports in the developed world just ignoring legal operating restrictions like this. Who knows ABP might not even rule in their favour as I see the Dutch government has decided to reduce capacity at Schiphol by 12% for reasons of noise pollution and to help reach climate targets.

If you go back a couple of pages in this thread, I posted the info, which I took from FR24.