Aircraft noise - have your say...

[Sue]

DulwichFox Wrote:

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

the bloody birds.. why don't they have a lie

> in.

>

xxxxxxxx

It's the bloody foxes that keep me awake. At least birds don't dig extremely large holes beneath the roots of shrubs :(

I too am sick of the planes, drilling, banging (as in hammers), shouting, shrieking and noisy boilers which all pierce me to the very core, and am considering emigrating to Mars :))

[StraferJack]

I don't have a noisy boiler. I just have one that goes "tick tick tick" constantly. Once per second. It is literally driving me mad

I welcome aircraft, car, children - all kinds of noise pollution. Anything to distract me from that tick tick tick

[Sue]

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> I don't have a noisy boiler. I just have one that

> goes "tick tick tick" constantly. Once per second.

> It is literally driving me mad

>

> I welcome aircraft, car, children - all kinds of

> noise pollution. Anything to distract me from that

> tick tick tick

xxxxxx

SJ, I fully sympathise, BUT

If it went "tick tick tick" for a bit, then stopped for random but quite short intervals, then started again, wouldn't that drive you madder?

I have that from the boiler (not ticking, firing up. Not mine, btw. Had it been mine, it would have been in landfill by now :)) )

ETA: Sometimes it's not random. Sometimes it's regular short intervals. I lie and wait for the next one ... and the next one ... and the next one .... much like planes, then ....

[run_red]

fazer71 Wrote:

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

> StraferJack Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Fazer. Anti aircraft noise and pollution and

> > congestion

> >

> > But pro car noise and etc etc

> >

> > Curbs against one are an outrage and against

> the

> > other are A Priority

>

>

> Car noise is no where near as intrusive it's

> moderate by comparison.

>

> Aircraft noise is high pitched and goes through

> double glazing and solid walls.

That isn't true, aircraft noise tends to be dominated by low frequencies which are much harder to insulate against than higher ones.

[fazer71]

run_red Wrote:

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

> fazer71 Wrote:

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

> -----

> > StraferJack Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > Fazer. Anti aircraft noise and pollution and

> > > congestion

> > >

> > > But pro car noise and etc etc

> > >

> > > Curbs against one are an outrage and against

> > the

> > > other are A Priority

> >

> >

> > Car noise is no where near as intrusive it's

> > moderate by comparison.

> >

> > Aircraft noise is high pitched and goes through

> > double glazing and solid walls.

>

> That isn't true, aircraft noise tends to be

> dominated by low frequencies which are much harder

> to insulate against than higher ones.

Really

Well you know when it's bloody loud for me that's when I can't hear the tv over the sound of a jet engine.

It's been for the last 18 months for 38 1/2 year prior to that I have never heard any jet over my roof never had a need to raise the volume on the tv due to jet aircraft noise.

If there was going to be a motorway at the end of my garden there would be consultation but for aircraft 500ft from my roof nothing zip zero sweet f a ..

I used to go on a 2 month work contract to some god awful dump and suffer all kinds of noise and look forward to coming home for the nice quite weekend mornings in bed ... Now I can't wait to head off on a contact to get some sleep.

Insane .

[edcam]

People breathing in the street is getting ridiculous now. And the sound of the wind. Madness I tell you.

[fazer71]

20% more chance of dying of stress-related diseases under Heathrow flight path

A new study, to be published today (9/10/13), has found that deaths from stroke, heart and circulatory disease are 20% higher in areas with high levels of aircraft noise than in places with the least noise. Researchers at Imperial College London and King's College London compared data on day- and night-time aircraft noise with hospital admissions and mortality rates among a population of 3.6 million people living near Heathrow airport. The findings are published in the British Medical Journal. The study covered 12 London boroughs and nine districts outside of London where aircraft noise exceeds 50 decibels - about the volume of a normal conversation in a quiet room.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/12/heathrow-hub-quieter-four-runway-airport

If you're not affected then you are lucky if you are then it's very bad news.

If you're worried about the value of your property then you should be get because this is only going to get worst.

[jimmyay]

Much of London is really blighted by ever present aircraft noise, it has a huge effect on your quality of life without you appreciating it. When you move to a city where the planes don't fly over at all you really notice the peacefullness, birdsong and calm. it was wonderful when the icelandic volcano blew up and all the flights stopped for 10 days. it was like living in a completely different city.

And saying " you live in a global capital city, get used to it" is nonsense. Many / most global cities don't have aircraft overflying the city to reach the airports. Heathrow is in the worst place imaginable. it would be far better to shift it all out the estuary and have no overflying of London at all.

[fabfor]

Thanks jj and fazer.

Nice to read something sensible and serious here. I imagine the juvenile jokers are of the type who mock people no matter how serious the issue is.

[fazer71]

jimmyay Wrote:

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

> And saying " you live in a global capital city,

> get used to it" is nonsense. Many / most global

> cities don't have aircraft overflying the city to

> reach the airports. Heathrow is in the worst place

> imaginable. it would be far better to shift it

> all out the estuary and have no overflying of

> London at all.

Agree the estuary airport is the only solution.

My point is we are now on the FULL flight path or have been for the last 18 months.

The aircraft now join the flight path above East Dulwich some joining above Blackheath.

Where we were previously before the joining point.

Now we get every single flight landing at Heathrow flying above us it's a conveyor belt of Jets which goes on constantly.

Where it was previously 1 in 10 now it's 9 in 10.

Many locals haven't noticed I didn't but when you do it's very intrusive and difficult to ignore.

Here you can see flight live notice how they all turn and join the flight path above Forest Hill Brockley have all noticed but many in East Dulwich haven't yet

http://www.flightradar24.com/51.46,-0.17/13

http://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk/news/10722322.Brockley_aircraft_noise__worst_in_London___says_campaign_group/

It is a new experience only getting worst.

[fl0wer]

See what you make of this article that's in the news today.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/dec/16/business-case-airport-expansion-wwf

[grabot]

fl0wer Wrote:

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

> See what you make of this article that's in the

> news today.

> http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/dec/16

> /business-case-airport-expansion-wwf

Quite depressing really. Airport expansion pushed by the business fraternity. In my 20 odd years experience working in the City, the vast majority of business travel has been superfluous, primarily a status enhancement mechanism for management; for some reason foreign travel is still perceived by many to be an indicator of higher status, although surely that ceased to be true 30 years ago!

So, the same people who encourage outsourcing and emphasise processes over people insist that face-to-face contact is absolutely vital in business and keep me awake at night.

[fazer71]

Totally agree.

Majority of the early morning flights are only 1/2 full.

This evening it's constant drone drone screech screech every couple of mins.

It wasn't like this in ED 18 months ago.

Next summer is going to be a complete nightmare in the garden if they continue with this new flight path.

[fl0wer]

Live updates of reaction to Commission's report here =>http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2013/dec/17/heathrow-expansion-airports-commission-publishes-interim-report-politics-live-blog?commentpage=1

[StraferJack]

"Majority of the early morning flights are only 1/2 full. "

Intersting and completely untrue in my experience - where are you getting that from?

"It wasn't like this in ED 18 months ago. "

the regular ED flighpath threads every 6 months on the forum would suggest otherwise

[*Bob*]

Here's the EDF thread from 2007 - a few choice quotes below

http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?20,44985,page=1

"Is it just me or is there suddenly a huge increase in the air traffic noise in East Dulwich? I moved over a year ago, but have only noticed this in the last couple of months. Either I have been living under a rock for 12 months or something has changed in the flight paths!? Anyone else notice the same?"

"Air traffic noise has not been a problem here for the first of my eight years but since August 2007, I have noticed it as being a more or less continuous problem from about 6.00 am to 11.00 pm, which I find extremely unpleasant, so much so that I have begun to think about moving. It is my intention to complain to Heathrow and I suggest that anyone else who is concerned about this does too. This website address may assist you"

"I agree with you. I work from home and it has changed noticeably in the last month or so."

"I used to live on Chesterfield Grove and it was continuous, that area seems to be the junction point for planes coming in from the north, east and south and just about the point when they change their flap configuration and speed, which results in a lot more noise."

[*Bob*]

.. and today's news, of course

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25402007

[Jeremy]

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> "Majority of the early morning flights are only 1/2 full. "

>

> Intersting and completely untrue in my experience - where are you getting that from?

It sounds unlikely to me too. Airlines aren't in the habit of running flights which are usually half full.

Also not convinced that business travellers are the main reason for all the traffic... look at the ratio of economy to business class seats in your average long haul flight.

[fazer71]

Wind direct this morning meant no flights over ED.

So I slept until 8.00 rather than 4.30 this morning.

Lovely.

It' only a matter of wind direction, can anyone fixe this permanently? ;)

We need to start praying because Heathrow look to be getting a new runway so expect more and more flights over ED.

[fazer71]

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> "Majority of the early morning flights are only

> 1/2 full. "

>

> Intersting and completely untrue in my experience

> - where are you getting that from?

>

> "It wasn't like this in ED 18 months ago. "

>

> the regular ED flighpath threads every 6 months on

> the forum would suggest otherwise

Heathrow flight path moves 10-20 miles north to 10-20 miles south.

Sometimes we don't notice because it's further north over the Thames.

Early morning flights are often 1/2 to 2/3 full from personal experience having taken flights from SE Asia and European cities.

They're only full during the holiday periods.

[*Bob*]

Perhaps the forum could benefit from a template thread for this complaint? Simply personalised the relevant pieces of information and then submit?

Has anyone noticed the increase in aircraft noise recently? I've lived in (insert) for (insert) years and never used to hear a thing. Now every single aircraft coming into London flies directly over my garden, turns left at the shed and then lands at Heathrow. Does anybody else feel the same?

[fl0wer]

Just been listening to Boris Johnson being interviewed on BBC R4 morning news.

Defensive and quick-talking, he was unable to listen to the interviewer's questions, or present anything except the Big Vision of his own. The talk was what one of my tutors used to call a boys pissing competition - who can aim furthest.

No mention at all of where it lands, on life in the estuary. He elaborated purely on the 'benefits' to humankind, carefully not mentioning what it is like for those who live beneath flight paths. BUT - to my ears this is far worse - expansion into a 'Boris Island' will be devastating to marine life and the huge flocks of overwintering birds who need areas of wetland to survive.

Right, that's about the Thames runway idea.

Now to look at the propaganda that "we" need more aeroplanes at all.

A lot of air freight is fresh, out of season foods and flowers grown far away. Shoppers can be aware that paying out for these products contributes directly to their ongoing profitability especially for middlemen and for supermarkets....and airlines.

Here in ED we get an extra din of Heathrow plane noise from Friday through to Sunday. Most probably from budget companies like Easyjet. The more frequently people use air travel, the more fossil fuel is jettisoned overhead, the more propaganda we will hear that another runway is essential, and the more everyone will suffer urban blight.

So it seems to me that consumer choices have the most bearing on what happens next.

[cle]

Not to mention whatever floods might have happened, even last week. It's too tenuous.

Heathrow is in the best place, objectively. It's a pain living under the paths sometimes though. But it's part of what makes up London and its economy and success.

[*Bob*]

Boris Island is a pipedream.

The third runway will be exactly where it's always been planned - Heathrow. Gatwick is a diversionary tactic to appear 'open to ideas' I think.

fl0wer Wrote:

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

> So it seems to me that consumer choices have the

> most bearing on what happens next.

On this I certainly agree. That's why there will be a third runway. It's why people are still willing to climb into their cars despite it taking an hour to move five miles across London.

[BrandNewGuy]

fl0wer Wrote:

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

> Here in ED we get an extra din of Heathrow plane

> noise from Friday through to Sunday. Most probably

> from budget companies like Easyjet.

Budget airlines don't use Heathrow.