*Bob*

1 *BOOM*

2

3

red devil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ...when it's an estimate When it's one of those 'Ryanair' building quotes. Ohhhh.. you want to sit down in a seat? You want to take clothes with you? You want to make use of the breathable air in the pressurised cabin? You should have said. Well that's all extra, obviously,

Agree LM. Realistically, most of the people that can afford to buy houses around here now are also going to want to extend those houses as much as they can as soon as they can. So if you've done the work on their behalf, you certainly aren't going to be losing out when you sell. And you get to enjoy living in it before you do sell (erm.. after the building work anyway) which - personally - is the only reason I'd do any work in the first place. That said, my own feeling is that it's the 'budget' jobs which will suffer when it comes to maximising returns. Already a few houses recently sold on our street where budget extensions are being re-done by the new owners who see the previous attempts as not up to scratch - this was reflected in the prices they sold for.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't think it's really worth doing for > financial gain. You might get your money back when > you sell, but not much more. What do you do with money 'for financial gain' at the moment anyway? Once you've tried wine, gold and art, obvs

Yeah, it's the escalating costs of 'an increased area' that give people the willies when the unexpectedly high quotes come in. You go and see someone's side extension, it's a nice big room, how much, ?75k all in - great! Let's do that. But if yours is that bit wider, that bit longer, everything multiplies up by the same factor of X.. build, kitchen, floor, glass, the lot. If the new area is just 1m longer and 0.75m wider, that's double the area gain. Should there be a cost difference if you're comparing a terrace infill with a semi, even if the gained area is the same?

Has the length of this particular piece of string been determined yet?

Hi Fazer (*waves*) great to have you back. Be good. There's no Heathrow cover-up, the change in landing path you mention is fairly common knowledge. You're mistaken on the dates though - the change happened 25 years ago, sometime in the 1990s, not ten years ago. stephent - The stacks and approaches are well defined, but (depending on traffic) there is controller discretion which means concentration of flights on a particular route at a local level can vary from hour to hour. So - e.g. personally, I can get an almost continuous stream of aircraft looping over Peckham Rye and then directly over my house for a spell of time and then.. none.

I forgot to add '... and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it'

KirstyH Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Interested in above point on 'airspace redesign' > stephent - I do want to know the noise > implications and flight path consequences. There > is little respite from plane noise at the moment, > I've been told there are supposed to be weeks when > a different LHR runway is used which alter the > fly-overs of this area, but honestly I've not > noticed it regularly. 'Respite' strategies are not designed to address noise issues as far out as us here in SE22. The current north and south runways at Heathrow do alternate for take-off and landing and are about 1km apart - so that means 1km of difference (respite) if you're under the flight path - but 'only' if you're under the bit of the 'direct' flight path where the planes are on their final descent, lined-up with the required runway for landing. Out here in SE22, most of the planes we hear are not lined-up with the runways as above. Closer to the airport (closer than us) you know exactly where the planes will be, depending on which runway they're landing on. Further away, where we are, there is more fluidity; controllers can send aircraft this or that way before they line-up, depend on the amount of air traffic, which stacks they're coming from etc etc. So if you get a busy spell you didn't notice last week, it's not a conspiracy or a 'change in flight paths' - it's just one of those things. One day - or hour - they're particularly loud, the next, they're a bit further away and you don't hear them so much.

What if I wanted to make a wedding cake depicting Jeremy Corbyn burning bibles and fellating a horse whilst a group of blacked-up Jehovah's Witnesses egged them on? Would a lesbian baker be entitled to object? Think about it..

I?ve given up getting particularly hot under the collar about this on the whole. If someone wants to go and watch something generally harmless, get into a jovial mood, laugh at stuff and then come home to their insipid, pointless lives then big deal, so what. My Mum too loves the dreaded Mrs Brown. It doesn?t make her a moron, she just likes it. The only definition of something being 'funny' is that it makes people 'laugh' and different people laugh at different things so there it is. That said, it?s the dirge of TV comedy panels that gets me riled, because they?re on EVERYWHERE ALL THE TIME - and seem to only be frequented by the same rotating cabal of mediocrity who are simply fortunate enough to have been touched with the magic Avalon Management stick. Watching them is like being trapped in Jongleurs on a bad night - an experience I have had more than once but never want to repeat.

aint gonna fall for no banana in the tailpipe

Let's be realistic about current prices of food these days: a takeaway from most of our high street Injuns costs ?11. A few quid more for a main course eaten 'in' a restaurant? Come on.