RSP have repeated so often that they don’t want night flights, that they don’t need night flights that many people have convinced themselves that this must be the truth.
Yet in their new documentation it is as clear as day that their intention is to send very many planes over our heads during the night. It’s not surprising that they’ve had to come clean eventually but the sheer scale of what they are intending is a real shock. And a real wake up call to residents as the numbers of people contacting us reveal.
An airport’s quota count (QC) is basically a budget for noise. Each type of airplane has a QC – which determines how noisy it is, so, for example a Boeing 747 is really very noisy and has a QC of 4. You can learn more about QC here. Last year, Heathrow’s QC was reduced. This means it’s overall noise budget for the year for night time flying was reduced – down to 5,150 a year from 5,498. Residents near Heathrow have protested long and hard and have managed to use quite a bit of political pressure. RSP wants a QC budget of 6,000. Yes. Higher than Heathrow. With a QC count less than that, Heathrow had on average 15 flights during the night during 2015-16. And Heathrow doesn’t allow planes with noise levels as high as QC 4 rated planes to fly at night BUT RSP’s plans allow for planes at that noise level. Planes noisier than those allowed at Heathrow to be allowed at Manston.
RSP continue to tell people that this is all just a ‘worst case scenario’ and that the QC is simply to allow for planes that run late or that it allows for up to 8 flights a night. It’s not in their interest to make clear to people what an allowance of that size could actually mean. As the evidence from Heathrow and other airports show, a QC allowance of 6,000 could mean very many more than 8 planes a night, every night.
Independent noise experts have assessed what night time flying means for the residents of Ramsgate. In 2010 they let TDC know that with a Boeing 747 flying into Manston the population significantly affected by that noise level would be around 30,000 people. Their recommendation to TDC at that time was that the adverse impact on such a significant chunk of the population was simply unacceptable. And we say it is simply unacceptable now.
Make sure you email RSP at email@example.com
The Planning Inspectorate are also interested in your views about the consultation and how inadequate it has been, how much in the dark you remain and how concerned you are about the impact on your health, the environment, our heritage and our economy. Write to them at firstname.lastname@example.org
From a report for the Airports Commission, 2015:
Both daytime (LAeq 16 hour) and night-time (Lnight) aircraft noise exposure were related to increased risk for a cardiovascular hospital admission. Compared to those exposed to aircraft noise levels below 51dB in the day-time, those exposed to aircraft noise levels over 63dB in the day-time had a 24% higher chance of a hospital admission for stroke; a 21% higher chance of a hospital admission for coronary heart disease; and a 14% higher chance of a hospital admission for cardiovascular disease. These estimates took into account age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation and lung cancer mortality as a proxy for smoking. These results were also not accounted for by air pollution, which was adjusted for in the analyses. Similar effects were also found between aircraft noise exposure and mortality for stroke, coronary heart disease, and cardiovascular disease. The study concluded that high levels of aircraft noise were associated with increased risks of stroke, coronary heart disease, and cardiovascular disease for both hospital admissions and mortality in areas near Heathrow airport.