CPRE aren't impressed
Night flights at Manston have been an extremely contentious issue for many Thanet residents. Some believe that allowing the flights will bring economic prosperity to the area, with much needed local employment opportunities. Others believe that it is unlikely that many jobs will be created.
We took the stance some time ago that we did not believe allowing night flights would bring any real economic benefit to the residents of Thanet, and may in fact bring real harm to the area due to the impacts of noise and air pollution.
We are glad to see that we have been justified in this view by a recently published report authored on behalf of Thanet District Council by Parsons Brinkerhoff, a leading transport consultancy.
This report, which is based on an examination of the documents submitted by Infratil, clearly brings into doubt many of their claims. Parsons Brinkerhoff indicates that Infratil's views of the economic benefits are wildly over-optimistic, while the impacts of noise - the major concern of residents in the area - have been seriously understated.
These two points alone vindicate the local opposition groups, whose concerns have been regarded by some as backward-looking and 'nimby-ism'.
The fact that Flybe are pulling out in March because they cannot fill planes is damning proof of the lack of demand for flights out of Manston. We simply cannot see how allowing night flights will help Manston grow as a passenger airport, and therefore generate both jobs and economic sustainability for the area.
In light of this recent report, CPRE Protect Kent would ask that there be a full and unrestricted public consultation before any night flights are allowed. This should be open and transparent, with all the facts available.
This will enable the people of East Kent to weigh up the benefits and disadvantages of night flights and lobby Thanet District Council accordingly. It is only right they be given this opportunity, as it is their communities and environment that will be significantly affected by the implementation of night flights.
CPRE Protect Kent, Jamie Weir 25th Jan 2012
CPRE, FlyBe, Noise, Parsons Brinckerhoff Manston, Night flights
Reader Comments (31)
Passengers will not be flying to Manston to visit Thanet. They will be looking to get away from here as soon as possible and will be expecting fast transport to London to continue their journey. Being hours away from London will not encourage passengers to fly here. Manston is too far away for catchment, and there is only one direction in and out.
Why don't those people who live out of Thanet stop and think. They rightly don't want another airport in their vicinity, but please stop saying Manston is the answer to everything! They are just pushing the problem away to Thanet residents. Maybe they should just be saying - 'Enough is Enough'.
"Local attractions, leisure and hospitality businesses contribute a whopping £217 million to the Thanet economy each year." As revealed by Sandra Matthews-Marsh, chief exec of Visit Kent.
Dear oh dear
Didn't Infratil know there was a town at the end of the runway that would not want 24 hour flying when they bought the airport?
Infratil did that hoping that they would be able to sprinkle over the airport the fairy dust that other companies had failed to sprinkle, thus making them a fortune where other companies had lost a packet.
Infratil failed to understand UK travel times and logistics, and so made the mistake of thinking that people would travel here in their millions to fly from Manston. Oh Dear, as Oh Dear might say - Infratil got it wrong.
Infratil then asked for a government handout to get them out of the mire. The government said "no" because it wasn't viable.
Infratil is a seriously successful, wealthy NZ company who should have been able to afford top flight analysts to look at Manston as an investment. They don't often get it wrong but they did with this one. I, for one, am not interested in seeing the jobs I create threatened by their bad business decision. It's time for them to look for Plan B.
I find your posture on this issue really tragic because someone with your energy could be doing much more positive things as far as Ramsgate / Herne bay is concerned!
I'd rather you were more interested in health than wealth, but your analogies and anecdotes of law and business show that you're pro night flights, and anti gentrification evident from your DFL bashing!
You'd rather back a crap business model with your chums / shareholders at the airport. Why don't you move your kiosk up by the airport road where you can sell ice creams to the freight drivers at night? I'm sure you'll feel the economic benefit. You could sell hot toasted sandwiches at the roundabout by McDonald's by Minster and reap the benefits of the trickle down of money before it raced off at 60 mph down the A299!
To a lot of people here it seems you miss the OBVIOUS problem that a lot of people have is that NIGHT FLIGHTS wake a lot of us up, and we SLEEP AT NIGHT and have to go to work too, as well as our children who will need to get good grades so they can get a better job than running a sweetie kiosk!
It is the threat of "inconsiderate" (i.e waking everyone up on the flight path) airport use that NNF bases its mandate on, and not as you love to spin it; anti-airport! You know this as you've been to the NNF meetings where this has been clearly stated!
Infratil want to land a lot of planes a night - not just a couple, and it quite naturally gets people concerned that their basic human right to sleep is being weighed up as a political possibility by TDC.
Let's face it it is universally considered anti-social to make a lot of noise at night, in any business unless its an emergency! For some reason Infratil / Buchannan wants to be treated differently from everyone else. I say no. They are rubbish at managing Manston Airport, and that is their fault - NOT OURS.
Infratil and its propaganda machine (insert marketing company name here) continually pedal that the opposition to night flights is unreasonable, and choose to only answer the questions they prefer to.
They are even going to have a children's day soon, which is perverse when you consider the facts that night flights almost universally not tolerated because they are detrimental to school performance, concentration etc...
Infratil - yes the same company which makes millions profit every year also begged the Gov't for money to open a new passenger route! Rather than spend its own money - it would rather spend OUR tax revenues on a risk its not willing to take! What a bunch of spineless leeches they are!
I have an inkling that the airport IS truly scared of local opposition to night flights because it sees that letting night flights land at Manston is its only viable option left. I can see why - because planes that are not allowed to land anywhere else will be allowed to land at Manston ~ where you guessed it; those annoying locals who might be affected.
Do you ever wonder why the planes are not allowed to land at night anywhere else??? Do you know the answer Gerry??? Speak up, Speak up - so we can all hear you!!! We are democrats we want to hear the nitty gritty of this business proposal!
Before you start another crap argument like 'we all pollute and drive cars and they allow it in China' can you guess answer to the question?
Do you think IRAN air et~al give a toss about the noise they make - NO - because they don't live here! They are in and out before Infratil send you a boiler plate email to tell you that the plane that woke you up was not 'that loud' and they can do what they like anyway because an inept bunch of politicians gave them a bit of paper saying they could.
Time to sell your shares oh dear... money talks but bullshit still stinks!
Just recently this has been diluted by a few pro night flight contributors who don't offer any constructive insights as to why this would be good for Thanet but rely on regurgitating Infratil's PR spin and scare-mongering with provocative comments and badgering individuals, presumably to disrupt and distract. The same thing happened to the NNF Facebook page a while ago. Personally, I won't be rising to the bait.
Not that old chestnut again! When I moved here planning permission had been granted for a small terminal building with a legal agreement attached to the planning consent placing a total ban on night-flights. Perhaps you can explain how I could have anticipated that the local Council would tear up this legal protection and authorise hundreds of night-flghts? I could no more anticipate this than you could anticipate the Council tearing down your house to make way for a new road.
I moved here because its a nice environment, and the airport was (and still is on its knees) which was disappointing since the potential for passenger flights would benefit my business model. I thought it was going to go bust again to be frank, but I don't hope for it. We mainly moved here because the schools are good (probably won't be once night flights kick off) and there is a large foreign language industry which my wife is training in. The environment us the key element that this and many other businesses continue to benefit from, especially education which does benefit Ramsgate in particular. We also have long time family in the area who don't the threat of night flights either (what a surprise!!!)
I see that the education and 'knowledge' economy will be hurt badly by the proposals because they all directly benefit from the environmental strengths that Ramsgate in particular has. To sacrifice that is utter madness and there are alternatives to Infratil and night flights.
The night flights element was not a loud public issue when I moved - at least I had not noticed as this is a new issue so I did not prophesize that some desperate multinational had to consider ruining the basic human right to sleep and change its neighborly policy with local residents.
You have an answer now.
I have an answer for the one I've posed you and your shareholders yet avoid like a spin doctor in case common sense starts to become transparent to the community at large...
Infratil want night flights in volume because they are not allowed anywhere else that does not use its daytime capacity. They are not allowed elsewhere because they are proven as anti social and detrimental to public health because of sleep deprivation.
Sleep is a basic human right because you die earlier and children don't perform well in schools. It's these sorts of reasons that bars and music festivals are not allowed in residential area at night in case you had not noticed. Any other business making this disturbance would not be tolerated, and you know it!
I predict that the night flights will push away people from Ramsgate that want to study (e.g. mature students renting, teachers living) and any potential home buyers who have jobs moving in. This will then mean that the residents that benefit from this will lose tenants. Amongst many other examples like that It's a downward spiral from there at a guess, and that is a negative cycle which will be very hard to escape from.
So contrary to your belief that DFL's alike like to be hypocritical I'd like to point out that I want my children to grow up here and prosper. We are integrating pretty well actually, probably much to your annoyance. Anyone furnished with the full argument for and against will see that there is a sacrifice not worth taking for a company that does not have the residents interests at heart. That is also the problem, I don't think the community at large in Thanet are furnished with the knowledge. If they were then NNF would not exist. NNF has a lot of members and as a group it's growing quickly!
Infratil & Thanet is not a partnership between business and community. It is short term gain at the expense of long term growth.
You continue to bully everyone that has an opinion beyond your own that airport must succeed by any means necessary. The problem is your not very good at speaking publicly or even speaking common sense and that makes you come across as some crazy troll, and a bit of laughing stock.
Never the less of what I say you'll still back Infratil whatever the common sense argument. I smell the whole bullshit underlying this commons sense argument that NNF puts forward... it's the smell of corruption and old fashioned views that any business is good business!
PS - Ive tried to think about what benefit I selfishly have to make from the night flights, but as of yet can't think of one. That's why I suggested you put your money where your mouth is and move your kiosk near the airport since you love it so much, but the parody is as mad a you can guess. Yours along with countless other businesses would suffer when night flights loom.
Bye bye!! Love you!
Nice new windows. You are a pillock. No wonder you got thrown out at the last election. Anyone for a kerosene flavoured ice cream?
P.S. I use my garden at night for astronomy and I sleep with my windows open in the Summer.
Your personal demons are starting to show! Oh deary dear - time for some self help sessions! I know a life coach under the flight path who would be happy to help you out of your prison.
If their neighbour's dog bit their chid would they say to their wife its our fault dear for living next to a dog owner? Of course they wouldn't, they would expect the dog to be kept under control, and that is what we want at Manston some control over the quality of our lives, we all have the human right to sleep at night and NOBODY is going to take that from us least of all some desparate business man from NZ.
Stargazer .
"The risk of having a weight and balance related accident with cargo flights is 8.5 times higher than with passenger flights"
http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/1149.pdf
Unless you're going to do a community service and offer to swap homes, your outdated mind set is offensive and based on some ill-informed illusion that night-flights will bring prosperity to Thanet as opposed to a quick buck to the failing business at Manston and blighting Ramsgate in the process. What right does this New-Zealand based company have for the sake of it's own profit to actively detriment the lives of 30,000 people? The answer is NONE!
Perhaps you'd like to regurgitate some of Charles Buchanan's lies, as do the local newspapers, and media who seem to be too dim and inexperienced to ask the right questions or put forward the affected community's real concerns, based on health, safety and for those lucky enough to own their homes, mortgagees and landlords the immediate drop by 30% in value of their property, adding to negative equity, lowering of rental values and for those who will experience increasing decibels from flights as they manoeuvre into and out of Manston an incremental loss on top of the 30%!
Even Terence Painter despite knowing the truth has to say all is OK, if he admitted to anything else the Ramsgate Sands project will implode yet again: his purchasers will however have searches and realise that a seafront location smelling of aviation fuel is really no kind of paradise. As for Frank Thorley supporting night-flights, what's his expertise?, contributing to anti-social behaviour and increasing alcohol related illness amongst the population.
You carry on Oh Dear, threatening, insulting and showing your true mind set. I think your silly strategy will just reinforce the determination of people who will be directly affected by cargo night-flights which I repeat are 8.5 times as likely as passenger flights to have accidents.
"Air travel is the safest form of travel there is, no argument it's a proven fact."
Sadly, this isn't true. If you examine the statistics for different types of travel you find that, although air-travel is pretty safe, compared to riding a motor-bike, it is not as safe as the bus or train. Yet another example of our resident troll inventing facts to justify his pre-determined opinion.
http://legacy-cdn.smosh.com/smosh-pit/112010/main-troll.jpg
Exactly as I thought. Oh Dear doesn't understand that the CAA is an organisation whose remit is to promote aviation. He has swallowed their propaganda hook line and sinker and is now hawking it around as if it is scientific fact The key is whether you are looking at safety in deaths per mile or deaths per journey. Aircraft travel over vast distances and so, the statistics can be presented to show that they are the safest form of travel per mile. However, if you look at deaths per journey, both coach and rail travel are safer.
Anyone who wants to understand how statistics can be used to give a totally misleading impression need only recall the example of Concorde. It was the safest passenger aircraft in the world, until it had an accident. Immediately, it became the most dangerous aircraft in the world. Oh Dear should stick to selling coffee from his little hut and leave statistics to people who bothered with getting an education.
They refuse to listen to alternative opinion and therefore have only the capacity to lash out irrationally to logical argument.
Coincidentally Gerry O'D is possibly the biggest hypocrite of all by being the self same person campaigning to have boards removed from the sea wall in front of house because it spoiled his view, even though the restoration work being undertaken was for the safety and benefit of others.
Then has the temerity to complain about others when they want to see things change for the better.
Fact is, G.O'D as he thinks of himself and 'Oh Dear' as we think of him, is little more than a bigoted half wit who is hanging on Buchanan's coat tails in the hope his master will throw him a bone at some point. One assumes Charlie, GOD and Oh Dear will be sharing a helicopter ride at some point so they can fly over Thanet and practice their 'evil' laughs while pointing at the 'little' people.
FYI when I arrived in Thanet the airport was switching from military to civilian use. At the time the MOD had already stipulated that there would be no night flights or at least they would be kept to a minimum. Then when it was sold it was a stipulation that no civilian night flights would be taking place.
So when I moved to Thanet - there were NO night flights. There was an airport and as I recall there was some considerable doubt as to whether or not it would remain an airport. There were muted tones of moving Dreamland to Manston and expanding the theme park.
So, Oh Dear, talking out of his sizeable bottom again.
Facts will win this day.
Fact, there is some legal contention over Manston being allowed night flights and whether or not they can do it anyway. Is and should planning be inviolved, we shall see at the end of this consultation.
Fact, there is no business model to justify night flights.
Fact, they will not be creating 1,000's of jobs, it is incredibly likely they won't even create 20 jobs
Fact, night flights are a nuisance as I demonstrated with a noise meter in the middle of the day on the other side of the Island through double glazing. The decible levels were over 92 above ambient during a landing and take-off and 4 miles out of the noise contour. Those recordings are being passed on to the consultation and make a mockery of the rigged consultations provided by Manston.
Fact, Manston have consistently lied and manipulated facts to achieve their goals. For me this is why I am campaigning against them.
Oh Dear, you are a sad little man. But thank you for giving me additonal impetus to want to fight against the change for change sake mob. Regardless of the damage it may cause.
It is not a case of NIMBY, but rather justifiable expansion and cost to the genuine benefit of the community. Manston, does not give us that.
Before you depart for warmer climes O Dear, why not have the courage of your convictions and let us know who you are. After all we tree huggers aren't the type to throw a brick through your window, that's usually reserved for the strutting type that wear jackboots and attempt to browbeat the majority with their simplistic and inaccurate views.
Have fun.
I can rejoice in the fact that CT11 will be a MUCH pleasanter place without your presence.