Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I've been here 9 years and never noticed until last month. Obviously I'm not very observant. :) It does seem strange that should be the case when the earliest the large planes can't land before 6am. It doesn't bother me in the slightest, clearly it was taken me 9 years to notice it, but I'm just curious.

Its mainly the SE Asian carriers. If they make good time, its hard to expect the planes to circle London for an hour or so.


There are certain allowances outside the curfew times ... Boeing has a good summary of the current allowances:


http://www.boeing.com/commercial/noise/heathrow.html

The airport is officially open 24 hours but there is a night ban on flights between 11pm and 4.30am - airlines must get (and pay a considerable amount of cash for) special dispensation to land between those hours... between 4.30am and 6.02am only a handful of flights are allowed to land and they invariably come in from the far east, some US destinations and some destinations in Africa. Flights not scheduled to land before 6.02, that arrive before that time, are not allowed to land and are stacked above London and surrounding areas until after 6.02 (most flights will take into account the flight time to allow them to arrive around their scheduled arrival time)... the noise is nothing new to the area... at 3pm everyday the runways at Heathrow are swapped to give residents on the flight path a break. This is why sometimes you'll hear the planes coming in and sometime you wont. Aircraft only approach over London to land and never take off and ascend over London.... hope this info helps..

Since November, Heathrow has been trialling a new system which allows them to move to dual use of runways when a plane is delayed by more than a 10-minute wait to land or take off and/or if 30% of all flights are delayed by more than 15 minutes. There was a diagram I saw which suggested this would increase the number of flights coming over south east London, and you don't necessarily got the few weeks on/few weeks off respite from early morning flights coming in to land. The trial finishes on 29 Feb and apparently complaints about noise from close to Heathrow have risen substantially:


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-17006619

Night flights operate 11pm-6am. Upto 30 a night around 10,000 a year out of Heathrows 580,000 flight allowance.

Apparently they're critical to the airlines, airport and supposedly UK economy.


I joined Heathrow Action Campaign Against Noise (HACAN) some time ago. Night flights cause hundres of thousands of Londoners impaired sleep. Crazy. If the noise troubles you join up with HACAN as well.


The night flght system is up for review this year. Hopefully they'll be banned and everyone can get a better nights sleep.

I worked at Heathrow for about 5 years in the 1990's and arrivals from the far east and Australasia always started arriving around 04:30 am. There were very few takeoffs between 10:40 pm (BA to Tel Aviv) and about 06:30 am apart from an occasional mail plane to Europe. Contrast the Heathrow terminals overnight - where you could almost hear a pin drop - to Gatwick which is busy almost around the clock with all night flights, especially in summer, taking off over a rural area. At least we in South London don't have low flying aircraft taking off over us,because they're many 1000's of feet up before they reach here.
Genuinely interested where you are going to avoid airplane noise.. Seems to me that if you have to live in london or the SE for work/family etc aircraft noise will always be a problem... Northern Scotland maybe? PS lots of advantages to that and not just decreased airplane noise...
it really isnt too bad around here compared to much of London, although sometimes it is intrusive. when the ash cloud closed heathrow for a few days a couple of years back you could really tell the differnce - the constant background hum is inescapable wherever you live in London. i'm just thankful i don't live in west london.
We moved recently (not because of the planes), close by to Herne Hill and it is noticably quiter in the mornings. Saying that, I think that the road that we lived on in ED was directly under a flight path and it drove me crazy when I had a young baby to look after.
We live on Goose Green and recently it has become unbearable - flights every morning from 5am onwards. God knows how we will sleep in the summer when we have the windows open. Earplugs don't seem to cut the noise out, so I'm not sure what other options are!
  • 2 weeks later...
James Barber - Beyond joining HACAN, can't the council take this up? Or London Assembly? I too am completely disturbed by the flight noise at 4:30 EVERY MORNING. My health hasn't been well, and I'm sure broken sleep has contributed to this. It seems very extreme to have to consider moving away, as it would uproot a whole family. And while its not new, I'm quite certain its gotten worse in the last couple of years.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Danny Denton and his team have just replaced our rear roof in East Dulwich, they were a pleasure to work with. Danny was communicative throughout the process, knowledgeable, hardworking and competitively priced. I would recommend him without hesitation.  Thanks Danny! LMB
    • I think we have lost all perspective - The BBC clearly misquoted Trump (which is obviously wrong), in a programme that broadly gave an accurate account of what happened on January 6th - that he inspired the attack on the Capitol. His speech did repeatedly call on people to fight. He repeatedly claimed that the election had been stolen. He has since pardoned many of those involved in that violence. The 'journalist' at the Telegraph who 'broke' this 'story', more than a year after the Panorama documentary aired, also misquoted Trump's speech and gave a false impression of what was actually said. In both the case of the BBC and the Telegraph, the editing was misleading and sloppy. In my opinion however, the editing of the speech by the Telegraph is actually more misleading than the BBC's. The jist of the speech was not one calling for calm, but one calling for supporters to fight: "...fight like hell and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore". Trump used the term "fight" twenty times, and the term "peacefully" just once. During Trump's speech, his supporters chanted "Take the Capitol", "Invade the Capitol", "Storm the Capitol" and "Fight for Trump". The Telegraph have not acknowledged their misleading editing / misquote of course. Trump has escaped punishment for his role in a violent insurrection. Many of the rioters who stormed the Capital have been let off / pardoned. The only people to have taken responsibility for anything, or to have faced any consequences for their behaviour, are the BBC. The BBC have apologised and both the BBC Director General and the News CEO have lost their jobs. They (we) also face a 1 billion dollar law suit from a corrupt, criminal, President (an unprecedented act from the supposed 'defender of free speech / the free world'). The idea that the BBC's errors are being 'swept under the carpet' is self evidently nonsense. It is very clear that the Telegraph would love to end the BBC, as would the Times etc. They are not motivated by the national interest, or a quest for truth (neither is Trump - a firehose of BS). For Trump to be suing any media organisation as the sitting president of the United states, (let along a publicly owned UK broadcaster - effectively, the British taxpayer) is outrageous. That the whole country isn't telling him exactly where to go, shows a distinct lack of patriotism in my opinion. 
    • Trying to get to the bottom of the confusion. The events team email, the council website and the letter we all got through the door, says the consultations are this evening. I went along yesterday because it looks as though word of mouth had sent some people there on the wrong day (myself included). So not an error by the council on the date, but definitely a problem in letting people register their interest in attending. Hopefully that clears things up.
    • The ‘tree people’ conjures up a very Tolkienesque image.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...