Why so quiet? (plane noise)

[Yogi_bear]

For the last few days there has been very little noise from planes. It's amazingly quiet. I can hear birds singing. Anyone know why there are so few flights overhead at the moment? Is it just the wind direction? Or is it Heathrow trying to fool us into thinking that a third runway will be OK?

Anyway, enjoy it while it lasts. Hope I haven't jinxed it...

[kford]

The wind was blowing from the east the other day, so probably that. City planes were still landing though.

[bobbsy]

Was plane after plane after plane when I was in Dulwich park yesterday evening...at least every 2 mins...loud...

[yeti]

Its certainly not quiet if you are under the City Airport flight path. They seem to follow a very exact route curving round over the Horniman Museum.

[mikeb]

Every 2 mins is significantly less than Heathrow's every 40 seconds. And while the peak volume of the City jets is louder than the peak of the Heathrow planes, perhaps because they are smaller, the noise lasts for a much shorter time - there is never any more than 10 seconds silence between Heathrow planes.

[Fjgb]

In Honor oak I've thought they are lower and louder this week.

[i*Rate]

Make the most of the peace and quiet until the wind is back in it's usual SW direction then we're in for the our 15 hours a day of flights every 1.6 minutes on average.

Interesting to hear the chief exec of Heathrow (or whoever?) on the radio this week talking about the wonders of the new third runway that he's looking forward to. All the new jobs, boost to economy, etc. Pity us 10s of 1000s of Londoners having our lives messed up by the noise - but we don't count. Seems like we really have no right to quietness, it's all about other people making money.I wonder where the new flight paths will be? A lot of people are in for a shock if and when it happens.

Still, I suppose it's my own fault for moving here 36 years ago. I should have known that, one day, this quiet part of London, twenty miles from Heathrow, would end up like living next to an airfield or a sawmill! But, nobody warned me.

Stand by for take off - pip pip!

[fabfor]

I've also noticed that it's much, much quieter near Peckham Rye Park. So nice.

[hpsaucey]

Yep - agreed!

enjoying it.

fabfor Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I've also noticed that it's much, much quieter

> near Peckham Rye Park. So nice.

[*Bob*]

All posted yesterday - 18th May:

fabfor Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I've also noticed that it's much, much quieter

> near Peckham Rye Park. So nice.

hpsaucey Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Yep - agreed!

> enjoying it.

rubby Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Well it's a good feeling so far but how far it

> would be.

Since westerley operations have been back in force since mid-afternoon on 14th May - with all the same heavy Heathrow-bound air traffic overflying us non-stop since then in all the usual places - this is yet another fine example of the gap between perception and reality when it comes to aircraft noise.

[mikeb]

Bob, odd you should post that. I was woken up this morning at 6 by planes landing into Heathrow. No gap in my perception.

[DulwichFox]

mikeb Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Bob, odd you should post that. I was woken up this

> morning at 6 by planes landing into Heathrow. No

> gap in my perception.

I have heard planes overhead but to hear them actually landing at Heathrow..

Heathrow is 20 + miles away.. You must have very acute hearing. :)

Foxy..

[*Bob*]

mikeb Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Bob, odd you should post that. I was woken up this

> morning at 6 by planes landing into Heathrow. No

> gap in my perception.

But not the four previous mornings?

[mikeb]

Bob, as it happens no, not the previous four mornings. Not every day. Just enough to be a pain. The real issue is when it starts getting warm but I can't sleep with the windows open, as then I'm woken from 4.30.

From many years of backwards and forwards on this forum, I think you know that the planes bother me and I know that they don't bother you. This could be for many reasons not related to how loud they are - for example, John Holland-Kaye claimed that he used to enjoy sitting in his garden in Fulham watching them land overhead, though his perspective is a little skewed.

For what it's worth, rough noise levels outside my house (db meter on iphone i.e. not scientific)

* general background noise: c. 60db

* when traffic passing:60-67db, depending on what it is

* when a plane overhead: 65-75db

I think the db scale is calibrated so about 10db feels 2x as loud. So the planes feel about twice as loud as the traffic, which feels about right. There isn't much traffic between 4:30am and 7am though. And I think 70db feels a lot louder at night than when background noise is up at 60db.

Incidentally, the loudest thing around is the 176 bus with that ridiculously loud fan system. But the difference there is that the new buses are quieter and so progress should result in less sound, contrasted against aircrafrt noise.

[*Bob*]

They do bother me Mike (as I'm sure I've said before), I'd rather not have them - I'm possibly more aware of them than most because I sit in a room recording with microphones most days and I'm home here in ED all the time. I'm not immune and I'm not some crazy who 'can't hear them'.

My point was: we have a period of relative quiet when the wind is easterley and there are no Heathrow arrivals - everyone enjoys it. So much so, that some people manage to go on enjoying it for four days 'after' the Heathrow planes have actually resumed.

Basically, they didn't notice.

[rendelharris]

I agree perception is part of it Bob, but it's worth noting that Sunday and Monday and the early part of Tuesday were relatively fine days, then it's been cloudy mainly; sound waves do reflect off clouds, amplifying the original sounds, so maybe that is a factor. Also, I don't know if this is the case but it would make sense if it is, doesn't air traffic control route planes lower when there's cloud cover?

Of course also on sunny days we're all in better moods and so less likely to find things irritating!

[*Bob*]

I agree there are many factors that affect how loud the noise seems - and a lot of them you can't do anything about. But if you can accept that your brain IS capable of filtering noise down when it wants to (or when it's decided it isn't there - even when it is) - this is the most positive step you can make towards feeling better about it and not driving yourself around the twist about the whole thing.

It'll serve you better than joining Hacan and getting angry about it ever will.

I don't know about altitudes / approaches on cloudy days - but the noise differential for 1000 feet either way or whatever as heard on the ground - is actually fairly minimal.

[rendelharris]

I'm not actually angry about aircraft noise at all - doesn't bother me - just finding this an interesting discussion. There's some interesting information here:

http://www.nats.aero/environment/aircraft-noise/

in which you can see that, for example, an Airbus A320 descending at 4,100 feet can be heard on the ground as 59.2DB, whereas one descending at 3,700 feet will be heard on the ground as 64.7DB - given that the decibel system works to base 10 (i.e. 20 decibels is 100 times more powerful as 10 decibels(though not 100 times as noisy)) it would appear that quite a small drop in approach altitude can have a significant effect on ground noise. Roughly speaking that 5 decibel difference would manifest to the human ear as a 50% increase in loudness.

[*Bob*]

That is true (the 10db / double or half in perceived also) and it might make a difference if the approach altitudes when the planes hit SE22 were uniform, only they aren't.

There's a wide variation in altitudes on any given day - sometimes it's 3000ft (!) difference between lowest and highest.

There's been an argument to bring the planes in at a steeper angle (so they stay higher for longer) for some time but AFAIK most of the studies have shown the practical effect on perceived noise would only be minimal.

[hpsaucey]

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> All posted yesterday - 18th May:

>

>

> fabfor Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I've also noticed that it's much, much quieter

> > near Peckham Rye Park. So nice.

>

> hpsaucey Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Yep - agreed!

> > enjoying it.

>

>

> rubby Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Well it's a good feeling so far but how far it

> > would be.

>

>

> Since westerley operations have been back in force

> since mid-afternoon on 14th May - with all the

> same heavy Heathrow-bound air traffic overflying

> us non-stop since then in all the usual places -

> this is yet another fine example of the gap

> between perception and reality when it comes to

> aircraft noise.

Er - no not really,

my fuller statement would have been: 'yes I was enjoying it'....

HP

[mikeb]

@Bob, sorry I misunderstood you.

The problem with just accepting it and moving on is that it means there is no opposition to Heathrow's neverending ambitions to extend the airport. You clearly can't campaign against a third runway (and another terminal in due course) while maintaining karma about aircraft overhead.

And I happen to believe that there ought to be limits and considered constraints on the expansion plans of a private sector enterprise in West London when its operations entail negative externalities effecting millions of people. Oddly, I would probably feel slightly better if it remained in public ownership.

If it ever becomes unavoidable that noisy planes will be overhead every 40 seconds from 5:30 am until 11pm for ever then yes, I will do my best to accept it and try hypnosis or something (or move out).