Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Lucymerc, I think you may have noticed the noise from the City airport planes as we had easterly winds for about a week or so last week. The City airport flights are low - about 1500 feet and pretty loud as a result.


The majority of the time we get the Heathrow planes which are much bigger and louder planes but higher in the sky - around 4000 feet. Despite the height, because they're generally bigger planes, the noise travels much further and impacts a wider area. There are also more of them - flying from around 4.30am until 11pm at night.


It is incredibly frustrating that we are on a flight path whichever way the wind is blowing so get no respite from noise. There appears to be no joined up thinking/ consideration of this by the powers that be.


If you find the plane noise impacts you negatively, please reply to the Government's consultation on the 3rd runway at Heathrow (which will obviously increase the number of planes and therefore noise). See my previous post for details. It runs out on 25 May.

hpsaucey Wrote:

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

> edcam Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Somebody appears to have crept back after their

> > ban.

> >

> > Planes aren't a problem.

>

> Planes aren't a problem to you/where you live hat

> is.

>

> So much local variation in the noise levels. Have

> moved just 10 mins walk from my old house where

> the noise was pretty bad. In new location hardly

> notice them.

>

> Hp


I agree. Can you say where you were and where you moved to?

Rosetta Wrote:

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

> hpsaucey Wrote:

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

> -----

> > edcam Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > Somebody appears to have crept back after

> their

> > > ban.

> > >

> > > Planes aren't a problem.

> >

> > Planes aren't a problem to you/where you live

> hat

> > is.

> >

> > So much local variation in the noise levels.

> Have

> > moved just 10 mins walk from my old house where

> > the noise was pretty bad. In new location

> hardly

> > notice them.

> >

> > Hp

>

> I agree. Can you say where you were and where you

> moved to?



Moved from solomons passage peckham rye park to surrey road a bit south. Think the acoustics in our old shared courtyard made it even worse. Sometimes woken at 4.30 a.m. and impossible to get back to sleep. Thay was with double glazing. Now in drafty single glazed victorian house and no problem.


Hp

Well this only indicates that there isn't a general problem.


hpsaucey Wrote:

-------a------------------------------------------------

> Rosetta Wrote:

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

> -----

> > hpsaucey Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > edcam Wrote:

> > >

> >

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

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > Somebody appears to have crept back after

> > their

> > > > ban.

> > > >

> > > > Planes aren't a problem.

> > >

> > > Planes aren't a problem to you/where you live

> > hat

> > > is.

> > >

> > > So much local variation in the noise levels.

> > Have

> > > moved just 10 mins walk from my old house

> where

> > > the noise was pretty bad. In new location

> > hardly

> > > notice them.

> > >

> > > Hp

> >

> > I agree. Can you say where you were and where

> you

> > moved to?

>

>

> Moved from solomons passage peckham rye park to

> surrey road a bit south. Think the acoustics in

> our old shared courtyard made it even worse.

> Sometimes woken at 4.30 a.m. and impossible to get

> back to sleep. Thay was with double glazing. Now

> in drafty single glazed victorian house and no

> problem.

>

> Hp

edcam Wrote:

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

> Well this only indicates that there isn't a

> general problem.

>

> hpsaucey Wrote:

> -------a------------------------------------------

> ------

> > Rosetta Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > hpsaucey Wrote:

> > >

> >

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

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > edcam Wrote:

> > > >

> > >

> >

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

>

> >

> > >

> > > > -----

> > > > > Somebody appears to have crept back after

> > > their

> > > > > ban.

> > > > >

> > > > > Planes aren't a problem.

> > > >

> > > > Planes aren't a problem to you/where you

> live

> > > hat

> > > > is.

> > > >

> > > > So much local variation in the noise

> levels.

> > > Have

> > > > moved just 10 mins walk from my old house

> > where

> > > > the noise was pretty bad. In new location

> > > hardly

> > > > notice them.

> > > >

> > > > Hp

> > >

> > > I agree. Can you say where you were and where

> > you

> > > moved to?

> >

> >

> > Moved from solomons passage peckham rye park to

> > surrey road a bit south. Think the acoustics in

> > our old shared courtyard made it even worse.

> > Sometimes woken at 4.30 a.m. and impossible to

> get

> > back to sleep. Thay was with double glazing.

> Now

> > in drafty single glazed victorian house and no

> > problem.

> >

> > Hp


'Well this only indicates that there isn't a general problem.' And? this doesn't mean it isn't a problem.

edcam Wrote:

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

> hpsaucey Wrote:

>

> > 'Well this only indicates that there isn't a

> > general problem.' And? this doesn't mean it

> isn't

> > a problem.

>

> Well it doesn't appear to be a problem for most

> people. What do you suggest? That they move the

> flight path over other people's houses?


Ooh you're prickly! Please share your rigorously researched survey of 'most people'.


Your surmising about what you believe I might suggest says a lot ... about you.



Calm down ... Peace, love, zen, its friday and all that.

Actually it was Wednesday when I posted :-) I can't say it's a rigorously researched survey but having lived in the area for 22 years, the only times I've ever come across anyone moaning about aircraft noise in ED is a handful of people on here.


I wasn't being prickly by the way, just amused. I think you've got a little bit of projection going on there hpsaucey, which makes sense, given your "sensitivity" to sounds.

I've lived around here for 12 years. The aircraft noise has sucked the entire time. I can't sleep with my windows open unless I actually want to be awake at 4.30am. I live near a busy road with buses and the aircraft noise is much worse - it's pretty much constant with barely any silence between the flights.


Particularly galling are the rare occasions when planes are landing over East Dulwich into both Heathrow and City (yes this does happen when there has been an easterly that has lapsed into no wind; I've spoken with NATS about it).


[edit - reading and commenting in posts like these makes me feel slightly better about it - a problem shared is a problem doubled and all that ...]

edcam Wrote:

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

> Actually it was Wednesday when I posted :-) I

> can't say it's a rigorously researched survey but

> having lived in the area for 22 years, the only

> times I've ever come across anyone moaning about

> aircraft noise in ED is a handful of people on

> here.

>

> I wasn't being prickly by the way, just amused. I

> think you've got a little bit of projection going

> on there hpsaucey, which makes sense, given your

> "sensitivity" to sounds.



Well, I'm glad you're trying to project amused but prickly. That's good anyway.


No person can judge another person's 'sensitivity' to sound objectively - that would be 'projection' wouldn't it? That is partly the point when you say there isn't a 'general problem' - projection.


And thank fudge I've gained a day and its actually Thursday. I blame the red wine intake.

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

    • Absolute mugs. That's what they take you for.  
    • Trossachs definitely have one! 
    • A A day-school for girls and a boarding school for boys (even with, by the late '90s, a tiny cadre of girls) are very different places.  Though there are some similarities. I think all schools, for instance, have similar "rules", much as they all nail up notices about "potential" and "achievement" and keeping to the left on the stairs. The private schools go a little further, banging on about "serving the public", as they have since they were set up (either to supply the colonies with District Commissioners, Brigadiers and Missionaries, or the provinces with railway engineers), so they've got the language and rituals down nicely. Which, i suppose, is what visitors and day-pupils expect, and are expected, to see. A boarding school, outside the cloistered hours of lesson-times, once the day-pupils and teaching staff have been sent packing, the gates and chapel safely locked and the brochures put away, becomes a much less ambassadorial place. That's largely because they're filled with several hundred bored, tired, self-supervised adolescents condemned to spend the night together in the flickering, dripping bowels of its ancient buildings, most of which were designed only to impress from the outside, the comfort of their occupants being secondary to the glory of whatever piratical benefactor had, in a last-ditch attempt to sway the judgement of their god, chucked a little of their ill-gotten at the alleged improvement of the better class of urchin. Those adolescents may, to the curious eyes of the outer world, seem privileged but, in that moment, they cannot access any outer world (at least pre-1996 or thereabouts). Their whole existence, for months at a time, takes place in uniformity behind those gates where money, should they have any to hand, cannot purchase better food or warmer clothing. In that peculiar world, there is no difference between the seventh son of a murderous sheikh, the darling child of a ball-bearing magnate, the umpteenth Viscount Smethwick, or the offspring of some hapless Foreign Office drone who's got themselves posted to Minsk. They are egalitarian, in that sense, but that's as far as it goes. In any place where rank and priviilege mean nothing, other measures will evolve, which is why even the best-intentioned of committees will, from time to time, spawn its cliques and launch heated disputes over archaic matters that, in any other context, would have long been forgotten. The same is true of the boarding school which, over the dismal centuries, has developed a certain culture all its own, with a language indended to pass all understanding and attitiudes and practices to match. This is unsurprising as every new intake will, being young and disoriented, eagerly mimic their seniors, and so also learn those words and attitudes and practices which, miserably or otherwise, will more accurately reflect the weight of history than the Guardian's style-guide and, to contemporary eyes and ears, seem outlandish, beastly and deplorably wicked. Which, of course, it all is. But however much we might regret it, and urge headteachers to get up on Sundays and preach about how we should all be tolerant, not kill anyone unnecessarily, and take pity on the oiks, it won't make the blindest bit of difference. William Golding may, according to psychologists, have overstated his case but I doubt that many 20th Century boarders would agree with them. Instead, they might look to Shakespeare, who cheerfully exploits differences of sex and race and belief and ability to arm his bullies, murderers, fraudsters and tyrants and remains celebrated to this day,  Admittedly, this is mostly opinion, borne only of my own regrettable experience and, because I had that experience and heard those words (though, being naive and small-townish, i didn't understand them till much later) and saw and suffered a heap of brutishness*, that might make my opinion both unfair and biased.  If so, then I can only say it's the least that those institutions deserve. Sure, the schools themselves don't willingly foster that culture, which is wholly contrary to everything in the brochures, but there's not much they can do about it without posting staff permanently in corridors and dormitories and washrooms, which would, I'd suggest, create a whole other set of problems, not least financial. So, like any other business, they take care of the money and keep aloof from the rest. That, to my mind, is the problem. They've turned something into a business that really shouldn't be a business. Education is one thing, raising a child is another, and limited-liability corporations, however charitable, tend not to make the best parents. And so, in retrospect, I'm inclined not to blame the students either (though, for years after, I eagerly read the my Old School magazine, my heart doing a little dance at every black-edged announcement of a yachting tragedy, avalanche or coup). They get chucked into this swamp where they have to learn to fend for themselves and so many, naturally, will behave like predators in an attempt to fit in. Not all, certainly. Some will keep their heads down and hope not to be noticed while others, if they have a particular talent, might find that it protects them. But that leaves more than enough to keep the toxic culture alive, and it is no surprise at all that when they emerge they appear damaged to the outside world. For that's exactly what they are. They might, and sometimes do, improve once returned to the normal stream of life if given time and support, and that's good. But the damage lasts, all the same, and isn't a reason to vote for them. * Not, if it helps to disappoint any lawyers, at Dulwich, though there's nothing in the allegations that I didn't instantly recognise, 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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