Aircraft noise -

[Sweptwind]

At Heathrow, easterly winds need to be greater than 5 knots before they switch to easterly operations. It's called the 'westerly preference'. This doesn't apply to City.

There was a consultation a couple of years ago where Heathrow proposed ending this arrangement - planes would land from the west when wind speed was under 5 knots and blowing from East.

[uncleglen]

My aunt lived in Isleworth and I had to stay there as a young child in the '60s- before the double glazing etc....it was horrendous

[pop9770]

thread on aircraft noise on streetlife .com

With more info and views

[holwil86]

Visit Flightradar24.com and use the playback feature - the icon that looks like a clock on the right-hand side menu. You can plug in a start time and playback speed. This shows planes actively passing over East Dulwich from around 05:00 but the frequency increasing from 05:30.

[ChrisHolliday]

The last three days have been horrendous?.literally no interval between planes! Surely the cretins that organise the flight paths can vary them so that we have some peace!!!!!!! In response to my letter to Helen Hayes and the Transport office I have been informed that there has been no material increase in the number of flights over East Dulwich! I would really like to see this data because from first hand experience that's absolutely crap!

[DulwichFox]

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> US Air-force B52s used to fly over my house in

> Oxford on training flights - very low level

> flights (things used to be shaken off shelves) and

> they were carrying nuclear weapons. Civil aircraft

> flight paths over ED are a doddle...

I did a POEU (Post Office Engineering Union) course at Alvescot Lodge late 1970's Near Brize Norton where the B52's were based.

They were LOUD.. The Earth shook when they went over..

DulwichFox

[pop9770]

D fox

What has that got to do with Heathrow plane noise over east Dulwich

Really very peculiar comparison

Do you work for Heathrow airport these days?

[TheArtfulDogger]

I suspect foxy was making a comparison and pointing out it could be worse if the b52s played overhead

A I'm not talking love-shack baby

[DulwichFox]

pop9770 Wrote:

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

> D fox

>

> What has that got to do with Heathrow plane noise

> over east Dulwich

>

> Really very peculiar comparison

>

>

> Do you work for Heathrow airport these days?

Why dont you ask Penguin68 who brought up the subject of US Air-force B52s..

Or did you just want to bash the Fox without reading all the posts..

D.F.

[pop9770]

Talking about aircraft noise in Southwark and not historical off topic ???

From Southwark News

Khan is very quiet

Heathrow Airport is truly a monstrosity of commercial infrastructure ever devised for London the ?Greatest Capital City In The World??

London?s Labour MPs (and others no doubt) are to be given a free vote on Heathrow expansion. A free vote means MPs can ignore their constituents wishes and vote for what suits them personally or politically and where kowtowing to the corporate lobby is almost certainly a factor in MPs voting on Heathrow.

Let?s be reminded that a bigger Heathrow will mean more noise day and night, more pollution, more vehicle congestion all around and leading into and out of Heathrow. In short Heathrow expansion will be more of a nightmare than it is at present. And, let?s not suppose that expansion just effects the immediate environs of Heathrow Airport.

Anyone who lives under flight paths that blight whole swathes of London knows what a horrendous effect is incurred to the quality of our lives with endless aeroplane noise. Shamefully Labour supports Heathrow expansion ? so did Sadiq Khan when a Labour MP before becoming London Mayor. But, Khan turned-turtle when campaigning for that prestigious municipal office he now smugly occupies. He wasn?t stupid to realise Heathrow was a very contentious issue his main mayoral rival Zak Goldsmith had already been extremely, and rightly, hot on for years. Khan could ill afford to loose anti-Heathrow mayoral votes ? so he cynically bit his ?faithful lip? and went for a London lie.

But, now how quiet is our London Mayor on Heathrow expansion as it (Heathrow) is about to be voted on in parliament, and which he?s professed a half-hearted ?no? to expansion ? unlike his predecessor Boris who lambasted horrendous Heathrow for a more user-friendly alternative built away from populations?

Now, when it matters, not a whisper from London Mayor Sadiq Khan about ?the greatest city in the world? soon to be overflown and polluted with even more noise and other environmental blight even more often, and often, and often?

Brace ourselves for the nightmare of noise and fuel polluting aeroplanes over our capital while the London Mayor and our MPs (bar a few) raise barely a whisper against Heathrow?s expansion about to roar ever more often over our London rooftops.

Bobbie Carnegie, Peckham

[edcam]

pop9770 Wrote:

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

> Anyone who lives under flight paths that blight

> whole swathes of London knows what a horrendous

> effect is incurred to the quality of our lives

> with endless aeroplane noise.

I live under the flight path and it doesn't bother me in the least. I accept that some people are disproportionately bothered by it but I do wish they'd stop trying to suggest everyone is like them.

[pop9770]

edcam

Yes not everyone has the same hearing and ability to sustain annoyances so obviously not everyone is affected by aircraft noise to the same degree.

Thanks for stating the obvious.

I would say though on balance many more are affected and as a consequence suffer a poorer quality of life as a consequence.

Maybe the question those who do not suffer should ask themselves is do they feel it is acceptable to support inflicting pain on others less fortunate than themselves or are they happy to look themselves in the mirror and live with double standards?

[uncleglen]

don't forget Khan is going to target owners of older cars inside the North and South Circulars- to offset the pollution from aircraft and construction dust I reckon.....

[singalto]

Ironically, Khan admits to having an older, more polluting car himself!

I noticed an aircraft flying over ED at around 3am today. I thought they started just after 4.30am.

[pop9770]

That's good

But what about the noise?

Would be nice if he proposed ending all flights before 8am and after 11pm

But they'll never do that or will they once there's a third runway ... It Should be possible

Just shows how Heathrow airport is in the wrong place 100% wrong

[TheArtfulDogger]

pop9770 wrote

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

> Maybe the question those who do not suffer should

> ask themselves is do they feel it is acceptable to

> support inflicting pain on others less fortunate

> than themselves or are they happy to look

> themselves in the mirror and live with double

> standards?

Sorely tempted to say YES in this instance pops

[Penguin68]

The views of those who understand aircraft engineering is that the current new generation of planes (and those being planned) are less noisy and (particularly) less polluting than previous generations and those planes currently mainly still in service. This was in the most recent report on airport expansion. On at least a like-for-like basis things are thus getting better and their estimate was that even with a new runway (and more flights) things would still be better in future than they are now.

The expansion plans are clearly an issue for those living close to either Gatwick or Heathrow, but Dulwich is not really seen as falling into that category. For I would guess many people the aircraft noise is not really an issue, it isn't for me and (although I am old) my hearing is tested as being good (and absolutely, not just for my age). For those people for whom it is an issue, the level of irritation and upset they suffer (which is entirely 'real' for them) is perhaps exacerbated by their own focus on the noise. It is like a dripping tap in the night, where the drips start to boom and echo if you can't fall to sleep. I am therefore somewhat sanguine that my approach equates to supporting the infliction of pain on others. Are we to legislate for absolute silence across the land because people can be sensitive to particular noises (without belittling their sensitivity).

[edcam]

pop9770 Wrote:

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

> Maybe the question those who do not suffer should

> ask themselves is do they feel it is acceptable to

> support inflicting pain on others less fortunate

> than themselves or are they happy to look

> themselves in the mirror and live with double

> standards?

I genuinely don't believe it's much of a problem here and that it's a minority of people who are sensitive to it. I have friends who live much closer to airports, where the noise is far greater than it is in these parts and on the whole they're ok with it. I know one couple that found it too much in West London and moved elsewhere. Now that I understand but aircraft noise is a fact of life if you live in a major city. And it's really not that bad here.

[pop9770]

As I expected one rule for you and another for others.

Very sad selfish society still all the rage ..

[edcam]

pop9770 Wrote:

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

> As I expected one rule for you and another for

> others.

>

> Very sad selfish society still all the rage ..

Sorry but this post doesn't make any sense. In what way am I saying "one rule for me and another for others"? We live in a city with a lot of aircraft overhead. There are a lot of things that irritate me but don't irritate others. I don't expect anyone to pander to my preferences.

[pop9770]

edcam Wrote:

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

> pop9770 Wrote:

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

> -----

> > As I expected one rule for you and another for

> > others.

> I don't

> expect anyone to pander to my preferences.

Yes you do you expect others to accept poor air quality noise pollution because you are happy to live with those life damaging conditions.

I'm saying it is not acceptable for others.

If you were affected then you wouldn't put up with it, but you expect others to put up with it even if it blights their lives.

Double standards.. Clearly..

[pop9770]

Oh and aircraft noise is only a problem in London no other major European city has aircraft flying over millions of people every few minutes from 4am until past midnight.

[edcam]

pop9770 Wrote:

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

> edcam Wrote:

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

> -----

> > pop9770 Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > As I expected one rule for you and another

> for

> > > others.

>

>

> > I don't

> > expect anyone to pander to my preferences.

>

> Yes you do you expect others to accept poor air

> quality noise pollution because you are happy to

> live with those life damaging conditions.

>

> I'm saying it is not acceptable for others.

>

> If you were affected then you wouldn't put up with

> it, but you expect others to put up with it even

> if it blights their lives.

>

>

> Double standards.. Clearly..

But it doesn't blight the majority of people's lives. Most people barely notice it. We'd know about it if it was a major problem. Have you thought about moving? I can see it's a huge problem for you but really, for most people, it isn't an issue.

[pop9770]

Edcam

Have you not noticed the difference this morning?

No noise

I think you are making assumptions ..

[edcam]

pop9770 Wrote:

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

> Edcam

>

> Have you not noticed the difference this morning?

>

> No noise

>

>

> I think you are making assumptions ..

Nope. No difference.