I am AGAINST night flights from Manston airport.
Living on the Nethercourt estate we bear the brunt of flights to and from the airport. The noise is so loud that we are afraid the planes will hit the roof of our house and is very frightening. We are woken up every time and it is difficult to get back to sleep again. If this happens as a regular event several times a night our health and well being will deteriorate rapidly, as has been proved medically
The more flights there are, there is more damage to the structure of the house and roof.
It causes animals to become traumatised at night by loud noises, I have even seen foxes and birds frightened at night.
It would be far better to develop the tourist trade of the area which will provide more jobs than the airport will.
We are too far east of Britain to make it a suitable area for a large airport the distances are too great for travel to the rest of the UK.
I am emailing to notify my strong opposition to the Manston night flight proposals. I and my family are living in Herne Bay immediately beneath the inbound flight path for aircraft approaching Manston from the East, and have for many years suffered the noise, pollution and danger created by the old aircraft used.
Time after time in recent years Manston has shown itself to be a bad neighbour – insisting on always bringing aircraft in low flying over the heavily populated North Kent coastal strip, often at already unsocial times, and also seeming to allow patched up old bangers from the repair shops there to do endless test circuits over our heads.
Why incoming planes have to follow a flight path low over Herne Bay is beyond me – immediately to the north of Herne Bay is the sea, to the south relatively open countryside. The only explanation I’ve ever been given is that the airport doesn’t have proper radar/instrument landing systems due to cost – and this just about sums up the whole operation.
Tens of thousands of people in Whitstable, Herne Bay and Thanet will have their quality of life ruined by this airport if night flights are allowed – for what seems to be a pitiful commercial gain. We have a right to a decent night’s sleep – and I understand this is the stated view of the European Court of Human Rights.
It is time to accept the fact that this airport is in the wrong place and a commercial no hoper. Thanet and this area of Kent has a long tradition of providing leisure, pleasure and holidays to the region and capital city. What would create far more wealth and employment for the area would be an Alton Towers style theme park on the airport site – this would rejuvenate the area, provide a great local amenity, get rid of the planes once and for all, fill the council’s coffers with cash, and provide decent employment for those already working at Manston plus many others besides.
I live under the flight path to Manston, and as such I am against any increase in traffic especially at night.
I cannot hear my own television when the planes fly over, even with double glazing, and the noise is only endurable because there is a time during the twenty four hours when we have respite. This is important for us, I am retired, but my son and daughter have demanding full time jobs and need a decent night’s sleep in order to perform their duties properly.
I do not believe that any increase in traffic would bring a huge increase in prosperity to the area. There is no way of ensuring that any jobs that are created are filled only by people from Thanet, or that money made by people working at the airport would be spent here.
There are a large number of Thanet residents, who already bring money into the local area and spend it at local businesses, will see no benefit from this expansion, but whose quality of life would be immensely adversely affected. I consider myself to be one of these and so, I reiterate, I am against any increase at all in the permitted air traffic at Manston.
On behalf of my family I am totally against the proposals being considered by the Council and make the following observations.
You state that you will take particular notice of those who contribute to this consultation that are “living under the identified flight path”, but the problem that I have always had since moving to Herne Bay 10 years ago, is that the incoming aircraft never keep to a defined route. The path given to me by the previous owners showed it to be starting over the sea off Whitstable, passing the end of Hampton Pier and crossing over land by the Pier. I live south of this line and constantly have flights over my house. I have even seen cargo planes coming from the south over Herne village and turning towards the airport. So this is the first issue – the airport does not seem able to control the routes taken by aircraft and therefore the possible area of disturbance by night flights is considerable larger than just near to “the identified flight path”…..whatever that is.
Manston is not a busy airport during the day and therefore it must be possible to organise slots for the proposed night time cargo flight during the day.
There are a number of false assumptions in Infratil’s submission regarding increased employment, disturbance and the noise from night flights. Most of these have been addressed in the Council’s independent report and therefore it does not need me to comment on them, except to wonder why the company attempted to mislead in these areas. Could it be that if they obtained this proposal it would give them a more saleable asset?
If granted it would become a gateway to unlimited aircraft movements between 11pm and 7am as there is no control with fines or penalties for breaches.
This area does not need this type of development which would cause disturbed sleep to large numbers of residents, reduce the popularity of the area from tourists, do nothing for the local economy and destroy all the efforts that have, and are, been made to improve the communities in Thanet and Herne Bay.
Dear Mr Hart,
I have lived in Ramsgate since the 1970’s when the whole of the seafront was totally derelict, there was no protection for the historic buildings in what are now conservation areas, the town must have been at its lowest point and there seemed little hope of any improvement. Although many people do not realize it we are now living in a completely different environment, the whole of the seafront, once a string of empty, boarded up buildings is now buzzing with a string of restaurants and bars, all employing local people. There is also a steady stream of incomers, attracted by area, moving in and spending time and money on their new homes.
This upsurge has been mainly a “grass roots” movement over a period of time instigated by people who were not prepared to let their beautiful town fall into a state of decay. To allow Night Flights, with all the detrimental consequences, including the devaluation of properties under the flight path, would betray all their efforts and derail this still fragile revival of the town.
I AM AGAINST INFRATIL’S PROPOSAL FOR NIGHT FLIGHTS FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
1. For every development favoured by Thanet District Council, the public are duped into acceptance by the assurance of jobs, which never materialise in anything like the number promised. This proposal is no different, particularly when the public are aware of the number of jobs created at other airports. “Plane Speaking” tells us that there are currently 240 employees at Manston and yet they suggest that over 2,000 people would be employed “in operating and supplying the airport” with a “further 1,000 jobs supported in the wider economy”. My question is, how many of the 2,000 people “operating and supplying” are actually in the wider community and will there be an additional 1,000 jobs there?
2. The forecasted passenger numbers are unrealistic. Thanet is surrounded by sea on three sides and, therefore, the catchment area is very small. Added to this, anyone who lives within an hour’s drive of Manston is also within an hour or less of reaching Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted or Luton. Considering the endless choices of venues offered at London’s airports, Manston cannot possibly compete. Speedy access and Customs arrival procedures are insufficient enticement if only a few destinations are available.
3. Long distance destinations will never be available. A fully laden 747, for example, will never be allowed (by CAA) to take off from Manston as there is not enough length of runway to abort a takeoff. This is verified by the fairly recent flight, carrying horses, that gouged a chunk out of the grass after running off the runway, because it was overloaded (where were the checks?) and was unable to abort. This could have become a disaster. Any long haul flights could only take off with limited fuel and would need to refuel at another UK airport. It is unlikely that appropriate slots could be accommodated.
4. There are very few flights during the day in and out of Manston. If there is insufficient business to fill daytime slots, why are night flights required? “Plane Speaking” says “Manston must be able to complete with other airports in terms of the times it can handle flights.” I can only assume Infratil are unaware of the anger in London about Heathrow’s flights. See this website: http://www.hacan.org.uk/resources/reports/hacan.night_flight_booklet.pdf. Perhaps they consider there are less people in Thanet than London and they can override our concerns.
5. All aircraft sound noisier at night, simply due to the lack of other noise. Perhaps, if permission for night flights is granted, a condition could be imposed that residents likely to be affected should be provided with sound insulation, such as was provided for Cliffsend residents when the Hoverport was built. “Plane Speaking” mentions an insulation programme, but I have not seen any details.
6. Many of us are aware that, under CAA regulations, cargo aircraft are allowed several major “faults” that are not allowed on passenger aircraft. Whenever residents of Thanet villages complain about being over flown, they are reminded that it is the Captain’s prerogative to detour from the recommended flight path, although Thanet skies are far from crowded and there should be no reason for this except for speed or economy, which are purely personal (and selfish) requirements. If Manston ATC has no control over the aircraft that take off, it seems that night flights could lead to a free-for-all to our detriment.
7. I had no confidence in the previous TDC administration, having been once assured that aircraft landing are quieter than those taking off. When I pointed out that they need to use reverse thrust I was assured that this would not be necessary because “they have brakes”! I hope the new administration have more sense. I note that “Plane Speaking” states that “aircraft such as the current DC8s will not be allowed to take off during this period”. Am I being overly suspicious in wondering why landings are not mentioned?
8. Infratil have stated, as has been mistakenly quoted in the past, that “Manston has one of the longest under-used runways in the country”. This is ambiguous, because they are trying to make the previously-made erroneous proclamation that Manston has one of the longest runways in the UK. This is simply not true. Anyone can access this information on-line and the length of Manston’s runway comes 11th nationally and 8th in commercial, passenger airfields.
9. I am afraid this is my personal feeling of affront when Infratil state “Manston is challenging the consultant’s conclusions that we have underestimated the potential adverse noise impacts” because I find this statement particularly arrogant.
10. I am sorry to say this, but what I am hearing from other Thanet residents is the suspicion, taking into account Infratil’s performance throughout the world, that they want an agreement for night flights in order to create a viable business that they can sell on. If this should be the case and if it should happen, one can only imagine the mayhem that would ensue. Not to mention the horror of yet someone else walking away from Thanet with pockets-full of our money, that has been the case many times in the past.