Jump to content

Recommended Posts

ianr Wrote:

> 4:30 4500 Avondale Rise 270

> 4:33 4400 Avondale 270

> 4:36 4400 Avondale 270

> 4:39 4300 Avondale 270

> 4:42 4200 Court Lane 285

> 4:51 4100 Burbage Rd 295

> 4:57 3700 Avondale Rise almost due west

> 5:00 3200 Jn, LL + ED Grove ~ 275

> 5:03 3800 Avondale 270

> 5:05 4500 Avondale 270

> 5:09 4500 Avondale 270

> 5:13 4000 Avondale 270

> 5:16 3900 Avondale 270

> 5:19 4500 Avondale 270

> 5:22 4300 Avondale 270

> 5:30 4400 Just s of Avondale ~ 270

>

>

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX


That's horrific - I thought it was just my imagination that they were so frequent.


I've also been labouring under the delusion that it was just a few planes going round in circles over East Dulwich :))


Right, I'm going to chase Tessa Jowell for a proper reply to my email .....

Exactly. Are you expecting them to re-route the flights? Reduce the number of flights in/out of London airports?


I just consider it part and parcel of living in a major capital, served by 5 international airports.


Although interestingly, I see there is a proposal to replace Heathrow with a new airport on reclaimed land in the Thames estuary. Presumably that would somewhat reduce flights over residential areas.

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

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

> but Sue - what is it exactly you are going to

> say?

>

> I don't want these flights - give them to someone

> else?


xxxxxx


My understanding is that they are coming in a lot lower than they used to and that that is part of the reason for the excessive noise.


I think there are a lot of issues involved, both on a local (nimby) level and also far wider, and one of them is what the government is doing or intends to do about the increasing use of air travel at a time when climate change would seem to be the world's main priority.

Sue


I hear you but I don't think you can lay it at the governments door - any government is going to have deal with howls of outrage from everyone addicted to cheap flights. Once again, responsibility for the problem is as much with the people as it is the government


Personally I'm with Jeremy - it's a price we pay for living in a word city. I'm pro flight-reduction on an environmental basis but the case has to be made - and I don't think it's a case that can be made on a local basis - it's all or nothing on this one I reckon

lozzyloz Wrote:

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

> What would you have the government do?

>

> It seems to me that any viable alternatives will

> only come with future improvements in technology

> related to energy and transportation.


xxxxx


Well, may be too late by then, but hey, that's a rather bigger issue than too many planes flying low over my house at 4.30am and disturbing my sleep.

Sue Wrote:

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

> That's horrific - I thought it was just my

> imagination that they were so frequent.


I suspect that snapshot will be close to the _current_ maximum density for ED, and that there's a large amount of variation, both within and between days. Perhaps I should ask BAA if there's an easier way of abstracting data, to get a fuller picture of the current load and distribution ... Perhaps one of the campaigning groups has already been down that route ...


I remember inbound flights in the mid-70s going over Kew up to every 90 seconds. From Wimbledon Common nowadays, you can see them slipping into a stream with just a minute's separation.

So if you are discounting the bigger argument, and we are left with "I don't want them over my house at 4:30am", you can't bottle out and NOT say whose house you DO want them over at 4:30am


(sorry Sue - I'm not trying to pick on just you - I think you are making the same points that many people are making)

Sean sezI hear you but I don't think you can lay it at the governments door - any government is going to have deal with howls of outrage from everyone addicted to cheap flights. Once again, responsibility for the problem is as much with the people as it is the government


SeanMac, not sure I follow the logic that says Sue can't petition the government to reduce flights because people don't want fewer flights? Doesn't she count as people?


Also, support for the Thames estuary airport = less noise over very densely populated areas. The idea is that circling planes do their circling over the Channel.

I'm personally not saying that they should start reducing flights, but there must be something they can to in terms of staggering flight paths over the London approach. Going through the replay on that website, they all follow pretty much exactly the same path over ED on any given day. I realise that wind is a factor, but 9 flights in 30 minutes all taking the same flight path seems pretty excessive. Why can't they come in on slightly different paths, at least to reduce the frequency in the affected areas.


I would like better understand exactly what has changed in the past 5 years. I suspect it's mostly altitude, as I always remember flights going directly over ED. Most of those flights are at around 4000 feet! Seems they are all coming in over the North East/Peckham Rye side of East Dulwich. That explains why it's so noisy for me!

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

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

> So if you are discounting the bigger argument, and

> we are left with "I don't want them over my house

> at 4:30am", you can't bottle out and NOT say whose

> house you DO want them over at 4:30am

>

> (sorry Sue - I'm not trying to pick on just you -

> I think you are making the same points that many

> people are making)


xxxxxx


I'm not discounting the bigger argument!


I don't want them over anyone's house at 4.30am!


I also don't want to keep rehashing the same points as have been made earlier on the thread, but it's a long long thread to trawl through :-$

Moos:


I'm not saying Sue can't or shouldn't petition for fewer flights. I'm just saying that the government are unlikely to take any action over said petition when so many people want to fly and will do more than petition if prevented. Nor am I saying those people should be heard more.. I'm simply stating the likely outcome.


But really it seems people that people care about the noise over their house and not about the number of flights in general. When they get to the airport people tend to want MORE planes. I could be wrong and most people pn here WANT fewer flights in which case I stand corrected


Then again, as Sue says, all these points have been made on another thread (or earlier on this one). And apologies if I said you were discounting teh bigger argument - it was what I took from your statement "but that's a bigger issue too many planes flying low over my house at 4.30am and disturbing my sleep."

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

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

>

> one). And apologies if I said you were discounting

> teh bigger argument - it was what I took from your

> statement "but that's a bigger issue too many

> planes flying low over my house at 4.30am and

> disturbing my sleep."


xxxxxx


A rather bigger issue THAN too many planes ....., I said :))


What a difference a word makes :))


Edited to put in a space after "than"

I can't see why we can't live in an "international" city and aspire to have less air pollution. Other international cities seem to manage it. It shouldn't be a question of well if you want to use planes then you have to put up with being woken up at 4.30am. There are a number of long term solutions e.g. the thames estuary plan and I'm sure that there are a number of short term solutions such as less reliance on Heathrow and varying routing etc.


I don't see this as NIMBYISM as it is a london problem

Air pollution in London is far better than it was last century but that's not to say there isn't room for improvement. Like it or not air travel is here to stay and despite a recent lull in capacity it will continue to grow. It's one of the things that makes London an international city. I tend to favour Boris' suggestion of a new airport in the Thames Estuary but I don't think that's not going to come at a big price. Many people will be staying awake at night worrying about the new transport links to make it viable, the upheaval that it causes, environmental damage, job losses at Heathrow and so on. There isn't an easy solution except that quieter and less polluting aircraft will make the pill easier to swallow.

Can I add that you can't get rid of the early morning flights without having the flights start later in the far east. All you'd be doing by saying 7am is the earliest would be making Johnny Foreginer suffer (much louder) take-offs at 2am.


If people take fewer low cost flights, there'd be fewer flights QED. If you reduce flights without reducing demand then the price goes up and many people don't get seats - cue public outrage. You should be grass roots campaigning against your peers, not the government! [see Plastic Bags]


Perhaps you could contact Eurostar for deals for ED residents who choose rail over flights to go to Europe (although it won't effect intercontinental flights). Run the deals through this forum. You'd probably also need to get hotels deals to cover all those businesspeople who have to spend an extra day away from their family to have morning meetings.


Or, of course, ban international travel.

Well, this took over two months to come (after a chaser yesterday) but there are two documents on Tessa Jowell's website which are interesting (they're currently the first two on the page), though the letter from Geoff Koon appears to be just passing the buck, basically.


Dear ,


Thank you for your email and I apologise for the delay in responding.


I have placed a copy of a response that I received on my website. You can see this at:


www.tessajowell.net/campaigns



I do hope this is helpful and please do let me know if you feel I can be of further help in the future.



With best wishes,


Yours sincerely,



Rt. Hon. Tessa Jowell MP

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

    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
    • Another recommendation for Silvano. I echo everything the above post states. I passed first time this week with 3 minors despite not starting to learn until my mid-30s. Given the costs for lessons I have heard, he's also excellent value.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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