A consultation over plans to reopen Manston airport as an air freight hub with associated business aviation and passenger services comes to an end tomorrow (February 16).
RiverOak Strategic Partners, which is behind the proposal, had planned to submit an application for a Development Consent Order to the Planning Inspectorate last year to allow a compulsory purchase of the site. It bought out the DCO rights from the original proposing company RiverOak corporation in 2016.
But that date was delayed, allowing for more public consultation, with particular concerns being raised by some residents who would be under the flight path in Ramsgate and Herne Bay.
The night flights issue
The latest consultation documents state the possibility of night flights with up to 8 freight movements a night between 11pm and 7am.
Last weekend campaigners against the proposed cargo hub were distributing leaflets to homes under the flight path and had some 50 volunteers engaging with the community in Ramsgate town centre. A 20ft message objecting to night flights was written in the sand.
Matthew Griffiths, legal advisor to the No Night Flights campaign group, said:” RSP has produced almost 4,000 pages of highly technical documentation which many of us have had difficulty accessing. Repeated throughout is scenario planning for 8 night flights, every night.
“The section on reducing noise sets out an ability for them to have even more than that, with no set limits. Crucially, the documents also confirm in section 1.5 that RSP will permit night flights by a category of plane not permitted at Heathrow as it is too noisy. The reality is that Ramsgate could very soon be living with much worse than that 8 nightly flights ‘worst case scenario’.
“We are calling for the consultation to be conducted again, properly, with a clear NO to night flights by RSP and a full Health Impact Assessment for all of those in the flight path”
RSP director Tony Freudmann said the firm is not looking for scheduled night flights but wants “flexibility.”
He said: “We have to model the worst case scenario (in the documentation), which is what we did. We are looking for some flexibility but we are not looking at scheduled night flights.
“The problem with cargo flights is they do sometimes run late and if you have a plane with flowers or fresh produce you can’t tell them to go away, they need to land or they will ,lose their cargo.
“That is not a regular thing and we just need flexibility for that scenario. The old 106 restrictions meant there was no need for night flights apart from exceptional cases and we are not likely to need anything different.”
The RSP project – and talks with Ryanair
RSP aims to reopen the airport site in a £300m project to create an air freight hub with passenger services and business aviation.
Theirs is a four phase plan across 15 years to create 19 new air cargo stands, update the runway, four new passenger aircraft stands and updated passenger terminal, refurbished fire station and new fire training area, aircraft recycling facility, flight training school, hangars for aircraft related business, highway improvements and the creation of a museum quarter.
This week Mr Freudmann said negotiations could see Ryanair basing aircraft at Manston if the Secretary of State grants the DCO.
He said: “We have been having discussions for the last two years or so. Their position has always been get the airport open and put the right infrastructure in and we will be interested in putting 2,3 or 4 planes there.
“It is a long way off though with the DCO expected in 2019 and the airport not open until 2021. Ryanair would commit themselves maybe 18 months before the airport was operational. Ryanair are mainly operational from Stanstead and Luton with nothing really south of the Thames. They have always said they would not be turning Manston in Luton but would have two to four planes to pick up flights where we know there is a demand.”
Mr Freudmann says that basing craft at the site would mean there could be flights to Europe and Edinburgh on a rotation of morning, afternoon and evening.
He said he was also hopeful of the return of KLM. The inaugural KLM flight from Manston airport to Amsterdam Schiphol took place on Tuesday, April 2, 2013.
KLM offered UK passengers 190 destinations worldwide through its hub at Schiphol – the destination from Manston. The service operated twice a day, every day of the week on a Fokker 70.
The service ended just prior to the closure of the airport in May 2014.
Ryanair declined to issue a statement. A spokesman said: “While we are always interested in new routes, we don’t comment on speculation.”
Ryanair is the largest low cost operator in Europe, operating from over 30 bases across Europe and carrying some 100 million passengers in 2016.
Despite declining to comment on the Manston negotiations, the firm does have expansion plans. This Summer it will extend its network to Jordan and there will be service expansion at Manchester, Milan Bergamo, Palma Mallorca, Pescara, Rimini and Valencia.
Some 30 new routes were announced by the firm this month and last year Ryanair secured the green light to take over part of failed Air Berlin’s operations at Berlin Tegel airport.
Stone Hill Park – homes, leisure and business
However, the site belongs to Stone Hill Park which is due to submit an updated planning application to Thanet council for 3,700 homes, schools, nurseries, GP surgery, community hall, children’s playgrounds and sports facilities;46,000 sq metres of employment floorspace; a heritage airport reusing the western part of the runway, a sports village and a country park.
The development plans, with a lower housing figure of 2,500, had been earmarked in Thanet’s Draft Local Plan as a contribution towards a housing target of 17,140 new isle homes by 2031.
Some 1,555 homes have already been constructed; another 3,017 have been given planning permission; 2,700 are accounted for through windfall housing –sites that have historically had planning approval and may be put forward again – and 540 are already empty homes.
This leaves 9,300 properties to be accommodated.
But the publication stage of the plan was voted down on January 18 meaning there may now be central government intervention following a threat issued last November by Secretary of State Sajid Javid, from the Department for Communities and Local Government. He said the failure of Thanet and 14 other authorities to meet deadlines to put a local plan in place meant the government may serve notice of its intention to intervene.
The vote has caused a split in the ruling UKIP group with 12 members crossing the floor to become Independents.
RSP consultation deadline
The deadline for responses to the RSP consultation is 11.59pm on Friday 16 February. Responses can be made online, by email or by post and copies of all consultation documents, together with full details of how to respond, are available at rsp.co.uk
The DCO is due to be submitted next month and expected to be accepted for examination by April. Examination is a 12 month process.
Mr Freudmann said: “We would expect the final granting to be by April 2019 and then there would be a two year programme to get the airport ready with opening expected in the Summer of 2021.”
I find it hard to understand why anyone could have difficulty in obtaining the information. Documentation was available to take away during the two consultations that were attended by almost 900 people. In addition documentation in written and digital (USB stick) are obtainable from eleven libraries, four of which has the full PEIR documedntation until they close on Friday evening. In addition requests on RSP help line for copies of printed documentation and or USB sticks were responded to within 24 hours.
900 people! My word, that’s a lot of people! I didn’t realize there was such a massive amount of interest in this subject!
Were these the Herne Bay (pop.38,000) and Ramsgate (pop.40,000) consultations and if not where were they?
I do not have the exact split in numbers, but it was 870 between the two Consultation events! There was more at Ramsgate than Herne Bay.
Only a tiny fraction of those who will be affected by this development have been able to participate in the consultation. TDC requested a longer consultation period but RSP ignored this request. Two consultation events hardly seems adequate for such a major development which wil affect so many people.
There have been a total of 18 consultations over 18 months. The documentation has been available in the 11 libraries for a month with copies of documentation available in written form and on memory stick. It is also available for download. The period of this latest consultation exceeds the period laid down.
18 consultations? You jest, Alan Barker. When were they? Do tell.And have you read the 3,900 pages of consultation material?
Only a tiny fraction of those who will be affected by this development have been able to participate in the consultation. TDC requested a longer consultation period but RSP ignored this request. Two consultation events hardly seems adequate for such a major development which will affect so many people.
I refer to my earlier answers. About 650 people from Ramsgate turned up for the last of three Consultation Events at Ramsgate. For those who turned up, they had the opportunity to discuss any concerns with representatives of each of the teams involved in the project and of the four directors of RSP who were there also.
This has been a long going argument regarding the future of the Manston Site .I believe the RSP proposal is sinsere .There is too much negativity regarding this subject .I frankly do not wish Manston to become an extension Ramsgate with thousands of houses being built .There is little employment in the area lets face it numerous factoriesand industry have disappeared to name Phizer as one of many .Is stone Hill park deluded to think they are going to be the saviour of employment on this site .There are many units sitting empty already .Where exactly are all these thousands of people going to get medical treatment the QEQM is bursting at its seams already .The idea is ludicrous of building thousands of houses any where in Thanet .Perhaps Sajed Javed should come down here and see the problems we have.I think it is bullying by central government to enforce housing on certain areas purely because it’s cheap land compared to the city and the rich counties such as Surry and the like .I would like the site to become an operational airport again and bring employment and much needed funds to area from landing fees etc.Im fed up of these certain people winging about noise they probably only just moved here when they retired and wish for a quiet life and don’t care about jobs I have lived here all my life 50 years therefore I think I have a right to have my say
It is delusional to think this American Co (AKA UK Co. ) will provide the jobs so badly needed in Thanet , what was it 2000 and that Ryanair will fly happy holiday makers to countries far and wide. The houses, well we are going to get those anyway and to say this would be an extension of Ramsgate is a complete over the top reaction. Housing on Manston would not be much more that those at Westwood Cross. I repeat the houses are coming anyway Manston as an airport will not stop that !!! At least future housing on Manston would help off-load overcrowding in the surrounding villages and if proposals can be believed there would be medical; schooling and sports facilities as well. More jobs will come from a mixed development without the NOISE: POLLUTION: NIGHT FLIGHTS (yes night flights) of an aircraft breakers yard and freight terminal. TDC and local MPs should get on board and force the Secretary of State by saying no housing without extending QEQM and all the other infrastructure facilities we so desperately need.
The facts about aviation’s damage to people’s health and to the environment in general are the same whether you have lived all your life in Thanet or only a few years.
The former airport site is a brownfield site and as B. Jones says, if it cannot be used for housing,that housing will go elsewhere in Thanet. Since the foolish rejection of the local plan, a petition to Sajiv Javid has been set up asking that local residents should be given a say in what happens to Thanet. How splendidly, though not amusingly, ironic!
I really wonder why anybody living under RSP’s proposed flight path would want them to succeed in their bid to develop a cargo hub airport at Manston.
People who live near Heathrow are fighting expansion plans- they know what it’s like to live near a 24/7 airport. Their local MPs are supporting them; ours are supporting RSP.
If people in Thanet don’t want thousands of new homes, they should have spent the last few years lobbying their MPs , trying to get the government to reduce the number in the quota for Thanet. And perhaps, before giving TDC the impression that Thanet was full of airport enthusiasts, they could paid a fact-finding visit to the residents around Heathrow. They could also have checked out the most recent research on the damage to human health and to the environment caused by aviation.
We spent 15 years under the Heathrow flightpath before moving out to where we are now. We moved not because of the airport, but because of the increase of traffic going through our little town and the danger to our disabled son. Imagine having all the extra cars that 4,000 homes bring, increased waiting times for medical services, schooling for our children and no extra jobs for people!
I totally agree and TDC were correct to kick an airport into touch on the strength an EXPERT feasibility study which said it was not viable – talk about tilting at windmills !!
Biggles fans should think about the NOISE: POLLUTION and disturbing NIGHT FLIGHTS before tying to impose their ideas and dreams on those living around Manston.
The documentatuon runs to almost 4000 pages over a dozen volumes. There is no index. It would be impracticable bordering on the impossible to study the material at the local library.
Downloading or accessing via mobile or tablet was nigh on impossible.
With a desk top pc and a fast broadband connection, it was possible to read the stuff. But with no index, understanding the material was just about impossible.
RSP claims to have sent out by mail 55000 invitations to one or the other of their consultations. No one in my street (under the flight path) got one.
RSP’s consultation was woefully inadequate.
The 4000 (and more) houses come anyway.
It’s not a choice of “Airport or houses”, it’s “Airport and houses, or houses”
Those who believe that there has been an inadequate amount of consultation may be unaware of the fact that RiverOak have had far more consultation than required or even expected (as may be seen in the contrast between the number of people who attended Stone Hill Park’s consultation events and the number who attended RSP’s.
Further, critics tend to pay insufficient attention to the fact that social media and the press has paid a great deal of attention to these various consultation events and to the availability of a vast amount of information viewable or downloadable on-line. Many thousands of people will have chosen to download or view RiverOak’s documentation online but NOT felt they needed to take the additional time to question RiverOak and their key expert consultants in person.
Recent political changes at TDC would not have happened but for awareness that the leadership of the current Administration at TDC has not fulfilled promises made to the electorate and has attempted to deceive people in relation to the existence and strength of the ‘evidence base’ that RiverOak has made available to all during the lifetime of the present Administration, and that the lies and deceptions of that Administration’s leadership have been purposeful in supporting a draft local plan that was not fit for purpose but which in relation to Manston was a perfect fit for Stone Hill Park’s unapproved and widely condemned plans and projections.
A lot of people would rather have housing on the former airport than an airport plus the same number of housing on, probably greenfield sites.
Please could you give more detail about why you think the turned- down Local Plan was not fit for purpose.
Why should I or anyone else wish to support a previously-unknown company whose finances are opaque, some of whose principals have been found guilty of serious offences, and whose plans carry with them very damaging long- and short-term consequences for me and for thousands of other local residents?
I back manston as an airport 100% be it solely freight or freight and passenger.
4000 more homes in our relatively small town is ludicrous, out of that 4000 how many would be reserved for full time benefits families, how many of the homes will belong to families with 2+ children looking for schooling and eventually work, how many of them 4000 homes would have families with a car or two bringing our town and surrounding areas even more traffic chaos, probably increasing the cost of parking around the towns and pushing up insurance premiums for everyone in the area.
I don’t need to go to lengthy consultations or to read though mountains of paperwork to know that the airport being able to open up an run successfully as an airport/cargo hub is the best option for our area. This would create work and jobs for the area not take them away! it would see our young college and uni talent in the area an opportunity to go and see the world at a much reduced cost rather than going to Heathrow etc.
I would love to know how many of the “airport doomsday no to night flights” campaigners are actually from this area. Everyone from the area that I speak to on the matter is so positive for the airport and understand its heritage and its status. This is such an opportunity and KLM knew this, they were doing well and would have continued to do so if it wasn’t for the corrupt plans of Ann Gloag.
If you took the trouble to read RSP’s documentation (difficult though it is) you would reach the conclusion that their proje tions for jobs are just made up. They’ve pulled figures from out of thin air, with no basis whatsoever.
Why do you say Ann Gloag’s plans were corrupt? She is a businesswoman and it was clear to her that keeping Manston Airport open would not be profitable.
This of course is a reply to Joshua Galt not to Andrew.
From Her initial purchase of the airport she never had any intention of keeping it open. It is a long term investment and the likes of KLM had seen the long term prospects. She would have invisaged a sale of land for other purposes long before she ever made a formal bid to take over the airport. I’m not saying she is the only corrupt party as of course we have to look closer to home TDC! Let’s face it the biggest brown envelope will decide manstons fate.
Can you give me (and other readers) proof for your accusations? There are rather a lot of them going around at present.
Of what corruption is Ms Gloag guilty? Do you have any evidence?
It isn’t possible to comment on the bonafides of those backing RSP, as they’re registered in Belize, and hide behind a veil of secrecy.
Dr Pritchard’s correspondance is meritorious if only because his sentences contain more words than some shorter novels!
He says “Those who believe that there has been an inadequate amount of consultation may be unaware ..” . Quite so. People are unaware. Not everyone uses social media. Many people don’t take a weekly local paper, nor subscribe to an on-line version. RSP has claimed to have sent out 55,000 invitations, deliverd to addresses in affected areas. In my street, not one of the neighbours I spoke to had had such a leaflet: even more alarmimg, they hadn’t a clue what I was talking about when I mentioned RSP. “Unaware”, indeed.
I don’t know how many thousand people attemped to access or download RSP’s documentation. What I do know is that everyone I’ve spoken to who has attempted to do this has been frustrated by the technical difficulties in doing so. The few that managed it were further frustrated by the lack of an index, and the impenitrable nature of the almost 4000 pages spread across a dozen volumes.
Dr Pritchard speaks of TDC’s attempt “to deceive people in relation to the existence and strength of the ‘evidence base’ that RiverOak has made available…”. I haven’t seen any “evidence base” supporting aviation at Manston: quite the contrary. Every piece of independent expert research says that commercial aviation is unlikely to succeed at Manston. It never made a profit. Price Waterhouse Cooper tried to 22 months to sell it. The Falcon Report dismissed it. The Davies Commission ruled it out. Just where is this fabled “evidence base” supporting RSP’s case?
PEOPLES FEARS ABOUT A 24/7 AIRPORT ARE NOT BASED ON FACTS. I WORK IN THE INDUSTRY AND HAVE FOR YEARS. TAKE STANSTED AIRPORT. DISCOUNTING THE ROYAL MAIL,FEDEX UPS AND TNT NIGHT FLIGHTS WHICH WOULD NEVER MOVE, STANSTED HAS 35-40 FREIGHTERS PER WEEK. THREE OF THESE ARE SCHEDULED TO ARRIVE BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 2200-0600. THE PLANNERS COMMENTS ABOUT WANTING TO BE 24/7 TO ALLOW FOR DELAYED FLIGHTS CARRYING PERISHABLES SOUNDS VERY LIKELY. I AM
UNBIASED TOWARDS MANSTON AS AN AIRPORT, I AM AGAINST IT AS IT WILL TAKE SOME WORK AWAY FROM MY EMPLOYERS AT STN SO HAVE NO MOTIVE TO
TALK UP THE AIRPORT. I JUST DONT LIKE SEEING UNREALISTIC CRITICISM AND HYSTERIA. 8 FLIGHTS A NIGHT!NEVER. EVEN 2 FLIGHTS A NIGHT. IT JUST WOULDNT HAPPEN. AIRLINES DONT LIKE OPERATE THEN.
PEOPLE WHO SAY THESE THINGS HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE INDUSTRY SO
RSP’s own documentation says there will be night flights.
Roger Gale, spokesperson for RSP, said in a letter to the Thanet Gazette that there would be “a modest number of nigjt flights”.
So it must be true if Mr Gale said so.
Daytime flights cause noise and pollution too. I don’t think anybody is panicking.
The freight airport will not create many jobs. It will bring lorries into the Thanet Way. If successful that will bring problems. Of its own. Ryanair will do thezarea no favours with its well documented history of low pay and poor working conditions. It will also pay little in sum of fees to be here. lol st its profit. They are huge yet flights are cheap. It’s because they squeeze the last penny out of everything. In reality we would get more jobs from a large supermarket. As for so called KLMinterest. The New EuristAr servucecyo Amsterdam And Schiphol will make that a non starter. I’d love to see a successful airport here but logic says it ain’t gonna happen.
Did Dr Pritchard say something? I confess I started reading it but fell asleep.
RSPs comments about nightflights are ill conceived and baseless.
Which airlines have they spoken to that want to do night-flights?
Or come to think of it, any flights at any time.
With my position in the industry and knowledge of potential customers
I would suggest none. The possibility of perhaps 2 or 3 per 24 hours is all I could imagine. The bottom line is the airport has failed with nearly every passenger service and the amount of freight flights
operating until its closure were not enough to stop the massive losses. Running a 24 hour airport is expensive. The revenue potential
simply isn’t there so unless the suggestion of Ryanair actually holds
some credence (which I doubt), the land will disappear under a swathe of houses. Instead of an airport you will have the pleasure of eyesore leggo housing estates , and all the extra traffic such de eopemebring.
I daresay I’m not the only one who’d rather see a housing estate than hear planes directly overhead all day and night.
Regardless of all the pro-and anti-airport comments here and on social media, it is going to be the government who decide whether Manston Airport is needed as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project, (NSIP), for the benefit of not only Thanet and the South East, but the whole of the UK. The government will study RSP (RiverOak’s) documents and decide whether the information they provide is adequate or not, whether the consultations satisfied the DCO/PINS statutory requirements or not. The fact that some people didn’t have a clue they were on isn’t RiverOak’s fault. Many saw the papers (local and national) and TV announcements, and heard from the radio, that they were on. Plus, many thousands more received leaflets. Sadly, Thanet apathy is alive and kicking. Many who knew about the consultations couldn’t be bothered to go. Looking at national averages, the turnout was actually very good, believe it or not. The results of overwhelming support for the airport reflect and confirm what has always been the case locally, despite what No Night Flights say. But, as I said before, the decision of Airport or Houses at Manston is out of our hands.
Can you give your reasons for thinking that there is overwhelming support for RSP’s plans, now that many people in the area know that what they say they want is a cargo airport producing more noise and pollution than Heathrow?
Are there credible statistics produced by an impartial source to prove this?
“The fact that some people didn’t have a clue [that RSP’s consultations] were on” certainly is RSP’s fault. Vattenstall’s plans for enlarging the wind farm were made known to every household in Ramsgate by means of an illustrated booklet delivered to each address. A company as allegedly well-funded as RSP could have done the same.
RSP has buried crucial information among almost 4000 pages. Perhaps “Thanet apathy” would have been considerably reduced if they and their spokesman, the “MP for Riveroak”, had been clear from the start about what their alleged plans entail.
Dear Ramsgate Resident,
I think you have summed up the situation very succinctly! Shortly the Application will be submitted, and by the end of May will know if it has passed the initial test leading to the DCO process starting in earnest!
Marva, am I right in saying that several anti airport groups carried out leaflet drops in and around the Ramsgate area informing them of the consultations? If so, you cannot say that Ramsgate residents did not know about the consultations!!!!
I don’t know. I didn’t get a leaflet.
Marva, can you provide impartial statistics from a reliable source to prove that RSP’s plans for Manston will (with far fewer flights than Heathrow) produce more noise and polution than Heathrow?
I’ll have a look. How about answering my question first?
18/07/16 Herne Bay
14/06/17 Herne Bay
24/01/18 Herne Bay
If I am right that adds up to 18 events in total
You are replying to Businesswoman’s question, I take it.
There was more than enough publicity about the events with or without the leaflets for people to hear about the meetings. Television, Newspapers, Social Media.
Now what about your answer!!!!
But you still haven’t answered my question.
Actually I have as far as I am concerned.
A list of RSP’s consultations doesn’t answer my question to “Ramsgate Resident.” The answers to Alan Barker’s question are to be found in RSP’s documentation and on Heathrow’s website.
If you detail the info comparisons I will ask the relevent team at RSP to respond as logically such a conclusion is wrong!
RSP for maximum in year 10 = 17,000 take offs/Landins
Heathrow last year was 480,000 take offs/Landings
So how can you make that claim Marva Rees?????
RSO have a night quota of 6000 ( more than Heathrow) using a QC of up to 4 (very much noisier than Heathrow)
Ergo: if ever Manston takes off, night tine in Ramsgate will be intolerable.
‘Intolerable’… oh please! Let me guess moved down here in the last 10-15 years, decided to buy a house next to/near an airport, first to complain about planes!
Go live next to Ramsgate train station for a while, the trains there arbeing shunted around all throughout the night, there is a considerable noise that comes from around the depot at night but guess what like everything else the residents get used to it! Without these places then our infrastructure would collapse. Just stop this whole doom and gloom approach to the airport and accept it’s a good thing for our area!
Well, you’re just wrong.
There is no airport here. Life’s great. If ever it starts up again life will be dreadful. RSP say so in their consultation documents.The absence of aviation at Manston for the past 4 years has had no detrimental effect whatsoever on Thant in general or Ramsgate in particular (other than the loss of a handful of jobs; which has been more than made up for since Wetherspoons opened).
So I was right then, new to the area and have decide to move next to an airport! Oh and the opening of a Wetherspoons is compensation for a career in aviation is it. I’m guessing that a new co-op will be all we need to support the jobs of 4000 homes then! Get real!
I don’t see why it should matter how long someone has lived in Ramsgate. The noise and pollution from a busy cargo airport will affect everybody here. It is the refusal of airport supporters to accept that the proximity of an airport to a town -any town- is severely detrimental which is the unrealistic attitude.
Why do so many pro-airport people use rudeness and sarcasm? This isn’t necessary and it certainly doesn’t help your argument.
You’re still wrong.
And I don’t think many of the jobs lost when Manston went bust for the nth time were the epitome of a career in aviation.
Marva Rees: people resort to rudeness and sarcasm when they have no actual argument.
So then Marva, I take it your not from around here. Could you please tell me the pollution statistics for the proposed airport against that of 4000 houses and the cars that would come with them houses….
Oh and Andrew, it’s obvious that your obnoxiousness towards the jobs at the airport is hindering your thoughts. I’m guessing you think that the airport ran on a couple of people checking in bags or serving coffee. If you understood the full logistics behind the running of an airport you might not be so quick to comment on a loss of a few menial jobs.
Thanks for supplying the number. It is in RSP’s section on noise, I think.
There is no choice for the residents of Thanet. Airport plus houses, or just houses. But of course, it will be the planning inspectorate who decide, not TDC.
We get the houses, plus the pollution from cars etc; OR we get the houses plus pollution AND an airport.
Why not settle for the former, with less pollution for Thanet?
They have to give a maximum for the DCO, however they wish not to have night flights between 11pm and 6am (see their latest statement). However they need flexibility in case of delayed flights, emergency landings and other unplanned events.
By the time the airport is open, the classification of aircraft in use will have changed anyway!
They do not have to factor in night flights for the DCO. The Planning Inspector has made that quite clear.
No Quota is needed for emergency landings.
Why do they need a Quota bigger than Heathrow’s to cope with the occasional delayed flight or unplanned event.
Unless they’re planning to have lots of noisy night flights. Both Wiggins and Infratil, previous operators of Manston applied for night flights: Both Wiggins and Infratil applied for permission to have scheduled night flights at Manston. Infratil applied twice saying that it could not attract cargo operators to Manston without being able to offer night flights.
Planning to build lots of housing, don’t you mean? Which would blend in seamlessly with the Manston Green development (at the end of the ex-runway) which has just been granted a couple of million by the government.
I wish to reiterate my comments from a few days ago.
Andrew. Across the Thames in Essex is the UKs main hub for freighters. (Leaving out EMA which is a massive DHL hub). Mail and courier companies would not consider leaving STN for Manston due to its remote location. There are on average between 35-40 scheduled non courier/mail cargo flights at STN per week of which 3 operate during the night. Manston airport would want the option of allowing night flights for delayed operations and the occasional night flight. I can’t comment on why they would apply for such a high night noise allocation. However, as I’ve previously said, the business just isn’t there to keep Manston going. It shut for a reason, and that wasn’t corruption. Circumstances haven’t changed. Instead of listening to the developers and scaremongerers, listen to someone that’s been in the industry for 30 years. The only way Manston could reopen and operate at a profit is with a massive government subsidy. Not going to happen.
One last comment from a neutral non resident . I cannot accept that the alledged vast amounts of people who are against the airport would not have googled for info and updates if they really cared.
Nearly everyone uses the internet nowadays on their phone or laptop, even my 80 year old parents.
I think the anti airport people are almost certainly in a small minority. Sorry, but its an impartial realistic view .
I’ve read the Davies Commission and reports by Falcon Consultancy, Avia and York Aviation. All off them independent experts. None of them gives Manston a hope of success.