The UK government has angered longhaul operators by imposing stringent noise limits at all three London airports, which will severely discriminate against B747 operators, including Stage 3 B747-400s.
The limits imposed by the UK Department of Transport will reduce noise levels out of Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted by 3 dBA by day and 2 dBA by night to 94 dBA and 87 dBA, respectively, from January 1997.
BAA, the airport operator, will impose fines of up to ú1,000 (US$1,600) on aircraft breaching the limits at night, and is currently determining the level of daytime fines. Iata is threatening a judicial review to overturn the limits, claiming the complaints it filed with the UK DOT have so far been ignored. Iata's environment director, Leonie Dobbie, states that all long-haul operators will be affected, estimating its members will end up paying 'billions of dollars' in fines.
Operators of older B747s would incur a 10 per cent payload penalty, translating to some 70 passengers, or some US$70,000 per take-off to comply with the limits, estimates Dobbie. Iata is concerned that the limits will threaten the introduction of new aircraft. British Airways is likewise worried that the limits will 'affect even modern B747-400s . . . flown according to the approved procedures'.
As no comparable limits or fines exist elsewhere in Europe, Dobbie predicts that the new limits could result in the transfer of traffic to other European airports, such as Amsterdam or Paris. She warns that the limits could also encourage the proliferation of similar, unilateral rules at other European airports, replacing Icao standards.
Asian carriers are likely to be the worst hit by the new limits, as most fly B747s into London. One UK aviation source points to the situation a carrier like Singapore Airlines, which only operates B747-400s from Singapore to Heathrow, would face. Penalised by the use of these Stage 3 aircraft, the carrier may consider using smaller aircraft at higher frequencies to meet the noise limits. This in turn leads to more frequent noise interruptions and increased pressure on slots.
The Orient Airlines Association sees the limits 'as totally unreasonable and unjust', affecting all of its members. Richard Stirland, OAA's director general, predicts Asia-Pacific countries may retaliate if the airlines affected complain to their governments on what could be viewed as 'an imposition of taxation by the UK'. Countries might, alternatively, impose penalties specifically on UK airlines, says Stirland.
OAA questions the logic in the timing of the limits considering 90 per cent of aircraft using London airports will be Chapter 3 by 2002. The OAA further estimates that the introduction of newer aircraft means that out of 353,500 annual daytime departures from London airports, only 0.52 per cent exceed the current base limits for noise.
The lack of any reasoned argument from the UK DOT is exacerbating criticism of the limits. Iata maintains politics are behind the imposition of the new limits, linked to the ongoing public inquiry into terminal five at Heathrow. 'The limits aim immediately to appease environmental lobbyists' complaints over noise regulations,' agrees Austen Hall, of lawyers Nicholson Graham & Jones. Ironically, Dobbie points out, the new limits will not alter the perception of noise nuisance by people living near the airports.
Lois Jones
Source: Airline Business
