Representation by James Giles Lee
- Date submitted
- 9 November 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Aircraft Noise is an enormous problem. It is much greater than the owners of Gatwick Airport [GAL] admit. This is largely because of the application of imperfect noise metrics. As a result, a very significant number of people are judged to be free of disturbance from noise, for example the whole population of the borough of Tunbridge Wells. The second runway will increase traffic and noise will increase proportionately. GAL argue that new engine technology will reduce the noise per aircraft and so the average level of noise will not increase noticeably. This is a bogus argument. Without an increase in traffic, the noise would reduce. The impact of the second runaway will be to increase the noise proportionate to the increase in traffic with reference to a no-second runway scenario. That annoyance will be very considerable. The second runway SHOULD ONLY BE PERMITTED IF GAL COMMIT TO REAL AND SUSTAINABLE WAYS OF REDUCING NOISE. This is not impossible. Intelligent design of arrival routes using PBN technology, and with the use of more meaningful population metrics, could actually reduce noise, even if traffic were to increase very substantially. Current thinking about arrival routes, using the FASIs process, is not fit for purpose. Inadequate metrics and rigid constraints have produced a range of options, which will significantly increase the population that is impacted adversely by aircraft noise. For example, one FASIs option would directly overfly the town of Tunbridge Wells with a population of more than 50,000, while the designers claim that only a few thousand would be impacted! If this option were introduced, the second runway would be devastating for the town. If GAL were able to produce an acceptable scheme that really reduces noise with growing volumes, then NOISE MUST BE MONITORED BY AN INDEPENDENT AGENCY, USING MEANINGFUL METRICS, AND THE PERMITTED CAPACITY OF THE TWO RUNWAY OPERATION SHOULD BE CAPPED REGULARLY AND CONTROLLED ACCORDINGLY. I am not against allowing GAL to expand by opening a second runway. Indeed there could be some benefits form that model. I am totally against allowing GAL to expand willy nilly, while pretending that aircraft noise is somehow reducing!