Representation by Peter Brown
- Date submitted
- 3 October 2018
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I am most concerned about the nuisance from noise from aircraft flying overhead. I live in St. Nicholas-at-Wade, which is directly under the flight path of aircraft, particularly those coming in to land. When the airport was active, life as made impossible whenever a plane went overhead. If in the garden, conversation had to stop for about 5 minutes, and it almost seemed you could touch the aeroplanes.
I do not like being woken up at night. Like most other people, I need 7 hours sleep at night, and the noise caused by aircraft at night causes real problems. Disrupted sleep causes problems in doing my job properly, and means I am always tired. Quality of life is severely compromised. Surely it is a basic right to be able sleep properly?
My grandson, when staying with us when the airport was active at the age of [Reacted] was frequently woken up by aircraft passing overhead at night, and was terrified, crying and inconsolable. My wife and I were seriously thinking about saying he couldn’t stay with us in St. Nicholas any more for his own good. His parents supported this. But what a shame, that in the interests of health, our family and social life would have been affected?
Although the applicant has insisted that he does not want or need night flights, they are nevertheless included in the application. It is easy to change one’s mind, once permission has been granted.
Furthermore, the veiled business logic of the application appears to favour capturing the bottom of the freight market viz. noisy night flights, as the following indicates: - the proposal to accept night Air Traffic Movements rated at QC4 - prohibited from the London airports on noise grounds - failure to address disturbing impacts from noisier aircraft - asserting free night flights as the top reason operators would choose Manston above E Midlands Airport - his response to the public consultation comments favouring night flights repeatedly states that RiverOak Strategic Partners Ltd “welcomes support for night flights”
As most of UK cargo flights are night flights it is especially important to be clear about what is a realistic worst case night flight scenario and about the human costs of that proposal.
Recent medical evidence has shown that sleep disruption does cause severe medical conditions such as stroke and heart disease. Again, should we be subjected to this? Despite any data put forward by the applicant, night flights definitely do disrupt sleep – I can tell you from experience!
Quality of life was also affected by environmental factors. Fumes from the aircraft and dumping of fuel before landing were extremely unpleasant, and constituted a health risk.
Thanet is a district which is trying to increase one of its major expansion industries, tourism. An airport of this type will definitely discourage tourists from visiting the area and hamper the economic recovery of the area.
I do believe that the economic benefits claimed by the airport are overstated. Freight traffic needs less manpower than passengers. There is also no additional trade from visitors.
Some people have accused us of knowingly moving into an area with an airport, so we should not complain. This is not true, because when we moved to St Nicholas in 1983, Manston was an RAF aerodrome, with noisy flights approximately two or three times per year, and then only a few flights on each occasion.