Policy LS7 - Operation of the New Runway

an extended runway should be welcomed as the extra length will increase the safety margin for aircraft taking off and landing.

The runway extension is being justified on the grounds that it will allow larger, but more fuel efficient and less noisy aircraft to utilise the facilities of Southend Airport. I see nothing in the JAAP which supports with evidence the supposition that this new generation of aircraft actually will use Southend Airport. Neither do I see any restriction being imposed by either council which requires all, or a percentage of aircraft using Southend Airport to be of this new generation type.

At present the operation of the new runway causes noise disruption at our home on an irregular basis. However, as air traffic increases, we expect the noise levels to rise to an unacceptable level

The JAAP says that "the runway extension allows airlines to operate larger aircraft with increased passenger seating capacity." The reality is that the aircraft that will be permitted to operate from the airport in the future will carry far fewer passengers and therefore be less financially viable.

As we said above in connection with fuel efficiency:-

The fact is that the description of the A319s currently operating from the airport as the most modern and fuel efficient is incorrect. These aircraft conform to chapter 3 of annex 16 to chapter 30 of the Chicago Convention. The specification for chapter 4 aircraft was agreed in 2006 and it is the policy agreed this year to "aggressively" replace chapter 3 aircraft with chapter 4 aircraft in order to meet commitments on reducing emissions. The replacement for the current A319 is the A319neo (new engine option). Both Boeing and Airbus offer conversions by re-engineering existing narrow bodied airliners to meet the new standard. The new engines provide greater fuel economy and therefore lower emissions of CO2; but are heavier, larger in diameter and produce less maximum power. This has the effect of increasing the take-off run meaning that the increase in runway length has been negated. It also increases the landing weight and approach speed putting more impact load on the run way.

The operating costs of the A319neo (156 seats) and the A320neo (180 seats) are virtually the same and orders for the A319neo are understood to have dried up. Fewer than 30 A319neos but more than 1,400 A320neos are currently on order. EasyJet has no A319neos on order, having converted their orders for A319s to A320neos. These aircraft are heavier and require a runway longer and stronger than that now at Southend Airport.

If EasyJet were to purchase the Bombardier C series of aircraft only the smaller capacity planes could be used - CE100 (125 seats) and CE300XT (145 seats). Of the aircraft currently or proposing to use Southend, the Fokker 100, Boeing 737-600 series and Boeing 717 are chapter 3 aircraft. The Emraer 195 is a chapter 3 aircraft and requires a runway of 2,179 metres at maximum takeoff weight. Only the turboprop aircraft operating from the airport, such as the ATR 52/72 of Aer Arran have chapter 4 compliance.

The strategic and local importance of the airport to this area is recognised and in order to reach its potential as a local regional airport, it is essential that the airport is able to expand; of particular importance is the need to extend the runway, as this would increase its attractiveness to fixed based operators. Only with extension to the runway, and the other essential improvements (including new passenger facilities, a park and ride facility and new train station to serve the airport), will the airport be able to transport the anticipated capacity of 2 million passengers per annum.

106 agreement should be reviewed

Can only agree to this

my life has been severly disrupted by planes already ,,we donot want bigger planes

Objected to the extension in the original JAAP reoport and continue to object as now the airport is operating large aircraft frequently it has now demonstrated by the impact to residence how my objections are proven and justified

Very close monitoring as I have raised complaints over operating times in early hours and late at night and currently the airports only real response is - sorry for the inconvenience but we are working to agreed times of operation - no regard or interest in teh impact the daily running is causing which has got to be addressed.

Can the aircraft continue to taxi back up the runway and not on taxing runway by the houses in wells ave as this helps to make the noise not so booming taxi needs to be other side where industrial units are as no one there at night and sun

Several concerns have been forwarded to the airport with regard to the control of operations within the designated control areas.
The area is highly populated and contour maps appear to have not been updated. Any complaint regarding this matter is investigated by the airport
by staff employed by the airport, using airport mechinisms which appear always to support the airport.
I believe that this is a safety issue in addition to being extremly frustrating as in my opinion, it appears that no views,observations or safety concerns raised are being considered by the airport.

The increase in the length of the runway is totally inappropriate in this area. The majority of residents & workers in this area are opposed to the development of the airport & to increase the runway thus increasing its capacity will only lead to more disruption in peoples' quality of life. Allowing larger aircraft to use the airport will result in more noise & air pollution and is unjustified in this small densely populated residential area of southend & rochford.

The increase in the length of the runway is totally inappropriate in this area. The majority of residents & workers in this area are opposed to the development of the airport & to increase the runway thus increasing its capacity will only lead to more disruption in peoples' quality of life. Allowing larger aircraft to use the airport will result in more noise & air pollution and is unjustified in this small densely populated residential area of southend & rochford.

The JAAP says that "the runway extension allows airlines to operate larger aircraft with increased passenger seating capacity." The reality is that the aircraft that will be permitted to operate from the airport in the future will carry far fewer passengers and therefore be less financially viable.
As we said above in connection with fuel efficiency:-

The fact is that the description of the A319s currently operating from the airport as the most modern and fuel efficient is incorrect. These aircraft conform to chapter 3 of annex 16 to chapter 30 of the Chicago Convention. The specification for chapter 4 aircraft was agreed in 2006 and it is the policy agreed this year to "aggressively" replace chapter 3 aircraft with chapter 4 aircraft in order to meet commitments on reducing emissions. The replacement for the current A319 is the A319neo (new engine option). Both Boeing and Airbus offer conversions by re-engineering existing narrow bodied airliners to meet the new standard. The new engines provide greater fuel economy and therefore lower emissions of CO2; but are heavier, larger in diameter and produce less maximum power. This has the effect of increasing the take-off run meaning that the increase in runway length has been negated. It also increases the landing weight and approach speed putting more impact load on the run way.

The operating costs of the A319neo (156 seats) and the A320neo (180 seats) are virtually the same and orders for the A319neo are understood to have dried up. Fewer than 30 A319neos but more than 1,400 A320neos are currently on order. EasyJet has no A319neos on order, having converted their orders for A319s to A320neos. These aircraft are heavier and require a runway longer and stronger than that now at Southend Airport.

If EasyJet were to purchase the Bombardier C series of aircraft only the smaller capacity planes could be used - CE100 (125 seats) and CE300XT (145 seats). Of the aircraft currently or proposing to use Southend, the Fokker 100, Boeing 737-600 series and Boeing 717 are chapter 3 aircraft. The Emraer 195 is a chapter 3 aircraft and requires a runway of 2,179 metres at maximum takeoff weight. Only the turboprop aircraft operating from the airport, such as the ATR 52/72 of Aer Arran have chapter 4 compliance.

Snuck in more 737's - more noise! Need to control

I SUPPORT THIS. I have nothing to add concerning this particular heading. To leave as 'No Comments' gives the impression that the writer could be a 'Don't Know' and has not got a view either way. Those who do not comment must be assumed to be in favour, however, those who object will not interpret it as such. Who the heck compiled this document?

As I said when the first expansion started, it is WRONG TO HAVE AIRCRAFT GOING OVER A BUILT UP ARRA. IM WOKEN EVERY MORNING BY AIRCRAFT NOISE.
YOU SHOULD HAVE BUILT IT, EXTENDED IT OVER AGRICULTURAL LAND. IT IS A DISGRACE WHAT THIS COUNCIL HAS ALLOWED AND SEEMS YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT PEOPLE LIVING HERE AT ALL.

I have no idea at this juncture and without seeking legal advice, what is and isn't unsound with the DPD.

What I do know is I bought this property for my mother several years ago and she moved in expecting it to be the last house she lived in. Please look at where her house is situated. This is an urgent problem and has caused her a serious lack of quality of life, mainly health issues. Even the landing lights are opposite her bedroom window and the noise, air quality, safety and dilapidation of the property due to cracks in the structure because of being located directly under the flight path, due to wake and turbulence and vortex damage.

I am devastated at witnessing her failing health which has been attributed to living directly under the flight path and being a victim to all the factors mentioned above.

My wife and I have already made representations on the last JAAP and have never received any notification of the voting on the preferred option. We quote page 32 in the booklet: Expansion is, however, only acceptable if it is undertaken subject to strict environmental controls, which will ensure that the environment of Southend, Rochford and the wider area is not significantly affected. Page 33 mentions control over night flights. 120 night flights, plus, a month is hardly an acceptable figure. LS2, LS3 and LS7 deals with noise. We can tell you that aircraft noise now does impact on our quality of life - so we are not looking forward to 53,300 aircraft movements per year.