Airport seeks legal clarification on night flying

[White Heather]

I was trying to imply that they would be tempted to pull a lot of aircraft out if it came to that, because of the nature of their growth they have almost all second wave departure return after 11pm. They won’t be able to tailor their program just to suit LBA, and it may make the airport that must not be mentioned more appealing I’m sorry to say.

If there were to be the straw to break the camels back this would be it if the night rules hold firm.

Exactly!

 

[pug]

Exactly!

Sorry WH I just didn’t want to come across all doom and gloom on here too, so I misunderstood that you were implying the same thing. I’m afraid it will be a very real possibility and so I’m hoping Jet2 are part of the process because their views should count for reasons we all know.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Sorry WH I just didn’t want to come across all doom and gloom on here too, so I misunderstood that you were implying the same thing. I’m afraid it will be a very real possibility and so I’m hoping Jet2 are part of the process because their views should count for reasons we all know.

The airport themselves must be very confident, they're spending over £100m to raise capacity to 7m pax.
If they don't get their way the extension is going to be a white elephant.

 

[752]

Can not see Jet2 just sitting back and letting that happen. We know they have already met with Labour. I wouldn't be surprised at all if conversation in the background are going on and Jet2 are involved.

All a complete joke.

 

[dmrodgers]

I was trying to imply that they would be tempted to pull a lot of aircraft out if it came to that, because of the nature of their growth they have almost all second wave departure return after 11pm. They won’t be able to tailor their program just to suit LBA, and it may make the airport that must not be mentioned more appealing I’m sorry to say.

If there were to be the straw to break the camels back this would be it if the night rules hold firm.

An unfavourable response from the inspectorate could just push Jet2 into axing a number of routes due to the unfair restrictions being placed on the airport and tough they have said no more UK bases just push them into considering the airport we must not mention by transferring these routes where they would be made more than welcome, especially as they are panning on a Spring 2026 opening, by a Labour controlled council and new airport operator. Losing jet 2 as a major base would be a massive loss to the City and Region as a direct result of a council which is not fit for purpose. I've never known any council, other than this Labour controlled council, so anti development to one of its major employers.

 

[pug]

An unfavourable response from the inspectorate could just push Jet2 into axing a number of routes due to the unfair restrictions being placed on the airport and tough they have said no more UK bases just push them into considering the airport we must not mention by transferring these routes where they would be made more than welcome, especially as they are panning on a Spring 2026 opening, by a Labour controlled council and new airport operator. Losing jet 2 as a major base would be a massive loss to the City and Region as a direct result of a council which is not fit for purpose. I've never known any council, other than this Labour controlled council, so anti development to one of its major employers.

I would be guilty in saying I would support a move to the airport that we must not mention, but that’s because I’m selfish and want an easy life. But I think given the employment from having their base in Leeds and at LBA, it just seems such a big stretch to then go moving lock stock barrel down the road. Would say a lot for a major tennant to be forced out by a council that is playing to people who chose to buy a house near an airport and complain about the noise (that’s barely noticeable these days anyway!), so I think a pragmatic solution will be found.

 

[Len Fish]

It’s a total nonsense that Leeds City Council still expect the airport to operate within a night flying regime imposed 30 years ago given the major developments in aviation and in particular in engine noise reduction. Still it’s little surprise as they’re still stuck in the Dark Ages with everything they touch. Leeds and the airport deserve much better than this shower of head in the sand, backwards looking, blindfolded Councillors.

 

[dmrodgers]

I would be guilty in saying I would support a move to the airport that we must not mention, but that’s because I’m selfish and want an easy life. But I think given the employment from having their base in Leeds and at LBA, it just seems such a big stretch to then go moving lock stock barrel down the road. Would say a lot for a major tennant to be forced out by a council that is playing to people who chose to buy a house near an airport and complain about the noise (that’s barely noticeable these days anyway!), so I think a pragmatic solution will be found.

I agree with your comments but not suggesting they move lock stock and barrel to the airport we must not mention but to transfer some flights from their from LBA base so future quotas are not breached. This is all down to the idiotic council we have in Leeds who do not wish to see the airport proper and provide employment for the citizens of this city and surrounding areas.

 

[pug]

I agree with your comments but not suggesting they move lock stock and barrel to the airport we must not mention but to transfer some flights from their from LBA base so future quotas are not breached. This is all down to the idiotic council we have in Leeds who do not wish to see the airport proper and provide employment for the citizens of this city and surrounding areas.

I don’t see an alternative, they won’t just operate day time sectors and base aircraft elsewhere for the afternoon ones, would cost too much. No if they were forced to operate only between 0700 and 2300 they would take most of their fleet elsewhere. I don’t envisage a scenario where the council would allow this to happen.

 

[White Heather]

I don’t see an alternative, they won’t just operate day time sectors and base aircraft elsewhere for the afternoon ones, would cost too much. No if they were forced to operate only between 0700 and 2300 they would take most of their fleet elsewhere. I don’t envisage a scenario where the council would allow this to happen.

That won't happen. This isn't about having to operate between 0700 and 2300. LBA still has a legitimate planning approval to operate up to 2800 movements in summer ( plus 10% of any unused winter allocation, so a maximum of 120 extra). Last year's total was indeed 2920. So if LBA lose this, firstly the QC 0.25 aircraft will all still count towards the total, (LBA argue that they are exempt) and the number of flights will need to be restricted to ensure the 2800/2920 seasonal maximum isn't exceeded. The most likely outcome therefore is a reduction in the number of based aircraft to reduce early departures and night arrivals, which probably explains LBAs reluctance to build more than a couple more stands until this is resolved.

Of course, if LBA do lose, then they can, and probably will, submit a planning application to vary night time hours to 0600-2330, which will resolve the matter if approved. The irony is that as part of the abandoned new terminal project, the Council has approved those very hours. So if that scheme was going ahead, none of this CLEUD nonsense would be necessary. The big problem with a new planning application though is that even if approved, it opens the door for the Council to attach strings such as an annual passenger cap, and/or various Section 106 requirements, designed to force LBA to pay for things that the Council persistently neglect.

What's certain though is that if LBA lose, it's not the end of the story and they won't just sit back and accept defeat. In the short term though, it makes it more vital than ever that they secure airline partners willing and able to operate within hours, so mainly using aircraft based elsewhere and operating into LBA during the day.

Step forward easyJet, Ryanair, Loganair, Sun Express, Wizz and hopefully, others, enabling continued growth.

 

[michael]

In my experience of our business going to the Inspectorate on a planning issue the good thing about this is that the inspector will look at it purely from a legal and case law perspective. The inspector is not political, not a NIMBY, and will take no flack from delusional influencers such as MP's, clowncillors, and members of a certain opposing organisation. Additionally the way airports both over the hill and 'down the road' are operated (or may be in the future) will not have an influence on the final decision. Case law is there for a reason and the recent outcomes at other airports will have more of a bearing on LBA's future than local politicians and NIMBY's

 

[Hendi]

What are the rules at other airports regarding aircraft rules on noise etc? Will the planning inspectorate take into consideration what goes on elsewhere? Or is leeds just a case on its own in battle with the council and what goes at other airports has no effect? You'd think there would be an across the board rules regarding noise etc not punishing one lt Creates unfair competition between airports surley!

 

[White Heather]

What are the rules at other airports regarding aircraft rules on noise etc? Will the planning inspectorate take into consideration what goes on elsewhere? Or is leeds just a case on its own in battle with the council and what goes at other airports has no effect? You'd think there would be an across the board rules regarding noise etc not punishing one lt Creates unfair competition between airports surley!

It's all about what the correct interpretation of the LBA planning approval so nothing to do with other airports or what does on there.

 

[Finger66]

I think in this day and age competition has to be fair, unless PINS determine the antiquated rules should still apply in today's modernised world. Which would be ridiculous I must add. I still think there will end up being some sort of compromise agreed upon which means both parties can then walk away with some (if not all) pride in tact. But then again, who knows and these rumblings have some time to run just yet

 

[pug]

Thanks White Heather and Michael for your detailed responses, that makes me feel a bit more positive that a solution that works for all will be found.

From what I can see it is primarily Jet2 that would be affected, this is because they are having to take slots later into the night due to shortages, which results in aircraft arriving back way after midnight and in order to grow this will have to increase. They will of course realise their own responsibilities in mitigating noise.

 

[Aviador]

Worst case scenario, I don't believe LBA is massively over subscribed on night ops but It would have an impact of course, but I don't believe it would be to the levels suggested by some. That is just my view on the matter. Fingers crossed for the right outcome for the airport. On the basis of the legal aspects of this, it would appear the council is taking the ilogical NIMBY view rather than the logical view. I would expect the legal outcome will be based on the logical view which is what the airport needs.

 

[Finger66]

It's an interesting one isn't it. LBA would not waste money on an appeal if they didn't think they had a good chance of success, which ultimately then costs the council money in appeal hearing costs etc. what I think this proves is the council won't say "no" to the NIMBY's but have the get out out of saying to them the decision was taken out of our hands. Interesting stance when all councils are pretty much broke financially. Just goes to show how weak they are and also how anti LBA they are

 

[Aviador]

I have mentioned this before but there is another way of increasing the number of movements at the crucial time which is between 07:00 and 08:00 and then again in the evening between 22:00 and 23:00 which is to build the proposed parallel taxiways .This proposal is thought to increase the number of movements from 16 to 25 per hour. That would increase the number of movements by a total of 18 movements during the crucial points just after and just before the night restrictions come into play. European flights over 4 hours flying time departing before 23:00 would benefit from arriving back at Leeds after the restrictions end in the morning.

 

[White Heather]

The other problem here is that the airport and council don't agree on the counting of delayed flights either. Such flights, arriving in night hours have the capacity to use up valuable night movements. And, they're numbers are an unknown yet the council consider LBA should reserve a given number of night movements for such events, which of course means less available for scheduled movements and the potential they'll be wasted if the delayed flights dont materialise.

Ultimately, this shows the council are clueless as to how the aviation industry works or the impact of Draconian rules on airport operations, the airlines, and they're customers.

 

[Finger66]

Yes planes make money (or do in theory at least) when they are flying. There wouldn't be the number of LCCs around as there are today if they couldn't maximise fleet use. The potential local employment impact of Draconian flight limits being upheld doesn't even bear thinking about. If the worst happened and Jet2 were forced to reduce, would this open up the door for someone like EZY (and possibly others) to come in with lots of away based flying I wonder. All may not be lost if in the unlikely event this does go against LBA