New altitude-based priorities guidance draws criticism from AEF over noise pollution concerns

15th October, 2026

In August, as part of a tranche of policy updates related to airspace redesign, the Department of Transport announced that they would be changing advice around flight path planning in terms of altitude-based priorities.

Previously, the Air Navigation Guidance 2017 framework required flight path planners to prioritise noise reduction over greenhouse gas emissions savings for all aircraft flying up to 4,000 feet, and also between 4,000 and 7,000 feet unless there was a compelling efficiency argument. The Air Navigation Guidance 2026 replaces that system with a two-tiered priority strategy which lowers the height at which noise is the first priority: 

• Below 5,000 feet (Noise Priority): Local noise mitigation and community minimization remain the primary environmental factors for flight paths.
• At or Above 5,000 feet (Climate Priority): The priority switches strictly to flight efficiency and carbon reduction. At this altitude, planners can bypass historical noise-routing mandates to map out more direct, fuel-saving paths.

As we set out in our consultation response at the beginning of this year, AEF is against this change to airspace planning policy. No evidence has been provided to demonstrate the scale of emissions saving claimed by the Government, and the move will be strongly opposed by communities. 

AEF has long been critical of whether the emissions savings from improved efficiency are the main motivation behind the change. As we’ve stated before, while the process of airspace modernisation (of which this new Air Navigation Guidance is part of) may bring efficiency gains, the main motivation of the airspace modernisation is more likely increased capacity to get more planes in the air. Any emissions savings will ultimately be wiped out by an increase in flights.

The decision also raises questions about whether the Government is taking noise pollution seriously. This comes at a time when the Government’s own research into the impact of noise pollution shows that people are highly annoyed at much lower levels than previously thought, as shown by the ANNE and ANAS studies published earlier this year.  

Next steps:

• AEF is strongly encouraging the Government to follow its own research (ANNE and ANAS studies) and create policies which reflect the negative impact of noise pollution.
• We have also joined over 20 campaign groups calling for an independent ombudsman. This independent body would provide those unfairly affected by airspace change to have a route for appeal or redress.

Also, on related noise issues: 

• AEF is advocating for real-world testing of flight paths, as demonstrated by work done around London City Airport.