Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Pearson Wrote:

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

> Jeez, we live in a global capital city...

> if you can't handle aircraft noise move to Orkney

> or somewhere else suitably quiet.


Peason: many other 'global capital cities' have a complete ban on night flights. In fact entire countries do. A ban on night flights does not seem correlated with poor economic performance in any sense. And we seem to be talking about 16 planes waking up hundreds of thousands of people too early, most (80%) days of the year. Not some occasional occurence.


oilworker: binmen never arrive before 5.30am! Not around this road, anyway. And that's once a week, not 80% of the year. Foxes is once in a blue moon; likewise cats fighting. Milkmen: have you seen a milkman since 1975?

I think the noise problem is intermittent in East Dulwich. When the planes are audible, there tends to be an almost continuous flow, with one flight increasing in volume as the previous one fades (really infuriating if you listen to this at 5 a.m. in the morning with a hangover). But there seem to be long periods when there are no planes at all. Maybe Heathrow has different flight plans in different seasons. The problem seems to be worst in summer, perhaps because it's holiday season?

We get the first flight of the morning from Singapore going directly over the roof at about 5:00am. Sometimes it wakes me up, sometimes it doesn't. It IS noisy.

But it's nowhere near as noisy as it was when I lived in Ealing. Trust me, a fully laden 747 taking off directly over your building which wasn't on a hill like the current one, makes a LOT more noise, and indeed vibration than one coming in to land depleted of fuel and on final approach. Plus on certain days they were taking off every 90 seconds or so. I agree we have the right to complain, but we'd also be the first to gripe about not having decent transport links as well.


It's one of those black or white issues, you are either bothered or you aren't. We pay the price of living near the busiest airport in the world. Back home in Yorkshire, rather than complain they all go out and point at the tin tube with wings in the sky. So long as the angle of approach isn't 90 degrees over SE22 I guess I'll put up with it. UNLESS they start doing 24 hour flights, now that would be a different matter.

On Overhill Rd, we get the first flight of the morning from Singapore going directly over the roof at about 5:00am. Sometimes it wakes me up, sometimes it doesn't. It IS noisy.

But it's nowhere near as noisy as it was when I lived in Ealing. Trust me, a fully laden 747 taking off makes a LOT more noise, and indeed vibration than one coming in to land depleted of fuel and on final approach. Plus on certain days they were taking off every 90 seconds or so. I agree we have the right to complain, but we'd also be the first to gripe about not having decent transport links as well.


It's one of those black or white issues, you are either bothered or you aren't. We pay the price of living near the busiest airport in the world. Back home in Yorkshire, rather than complain they all go out and point at the tin tube with wings in the sky. So long as the angle of approach isn't 90 degrees over SE22 I guess I'll put up with it. UNLESS they start doing 24 hour flights, now that would be a different matter.

The thing is that there's no real need to put up with it; the government could make some pretty simple changes which would have a large impact, e.g.

- steeper landings: London City planes land at 5 degrees, Heathrow land at 3 degrees. The difference would be that planes fly over Dulwich at 7000ft rather than 4000ft. Even if they made it 4 degrees it would make a significant difference at our distance from the airport.

- more variation of flight paths: if paths were varied enough such that people got 2 weekends out of 3 plane-free I think they'd be pretty happy.


Of course if they really wanted to sort Heathrow they'd build a new Boris-port in a suitable location by the coast where the noise wouldn't bother anyone (as they'd land over the sea); and the airlines could fly as many flights as they wanted with fewer delays, etc.

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> Now when Concorde used to fly over - that was

> LOUD!

>

> I live under the old flight path as well - it was

> loud, but boy was it beatiful. My heart lifted

> everytime I saw it.


xxxxx


Same here.


If memory serves, it used to come over around 5pm, so sadly I wasn't often in to see it, but it was great when I was.


It was so sad when Concorde was grounded, what a beautiful plane.

Sue Wrote:

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

> In a previous thread on this subject, I believe it

> was said that the flight plan varies depending on

> wind direction? Or that it was varied to give

> residents of different areas some respite!

>

> Can't remember which though :-S


Planes fly into the wind to land at Heathrow. Prevailing UK winds are westerlies. So most of the time they fly in from the east, over ED.

  • 2 years later...

Top end of lordship lane and I'm struggling with the constant drone of aircraft noise.


This is new having been away over the summer and working abroad on my return I'm finding I'm being woken up from around 5 am with the rumble and high pitched scream of jet engines overhead maybe as low as 300 feet above and the are every 2 minutes.


At first I thought it was just me sleeping lightly but now I know it's a new experience.


What has changed to make the flight path now constant above east dulwich ?

Lived here for 50years and i love the sound of airplanes. I'm lost when i cant gaze up into the sky to see a big bird flying over. If you think its loud here, imagine living in Richmond or Hounslow. Just be thankful that the planes taking off don't come over Southwark. If you can't stand the heat...get out of the Kitchen!

fazer71 Wrote:

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

> Years?

>

> This last few months is the first I've experienced

> the noise in my 40 year in the area I've never

> every previously been woken by aircraft noise.


xxxxxx


It's been bad for longer than the last few months.


Maybe your sleeping patterns have changed?

Some interesting info from the HACAN website, :


http://www.hacan.org.uk/resources/reports/living.under.the.heathrow.flight.path.today.pdf


http://www.hacan.org.uk/


http://www.bmj.com/content/347/bmj.f5432


"20% more chance of dying of stress-related diseases under Heathrow flight path". Serious!!

  • 1 month later...

fabfor Wrote:

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

> Oh dear! There's a parallel thread here:

> http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5

> ,837871

>

> I find it astounding that some residents haven't

> noticed that as the roar of one jet fades,

> another's rises - throughout the day, each and

> every day.


It's only been happening for the last 18 or so months once you realise you hear it constantly.


Been here 40 years and only now is it constant impossible to open windows in the summer.


I'm at the point where I've had enough.

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> Fazer. Anti aircraft noise and pollution and

> congestion

>

> But pro car noise and etc etc

>

> Curbs against one are an outrage and against the

> other are A Priority



Car noise is no where near as intrusive it's moderate by comparison.


Aircraft noise is high pitched and goes through double glazing and solid walls.

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

    • Would wholeheartedly recommend Aria. Quality work, very responsive, lovely guy as well. 
    • A positive update from Southwark Council - “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.“  
    • A solicitor is acting as the executor for our late Aunt's will.  He only communicates by letter which is greatly lengthening the process.  The vast majority of legal people deal by modern means - the Electronic Communications Act that allows for much, if not all of these means is now 25 years old.   Any views and advice out there? In fuller detail: The value of the estate is not high.  There are a number of beneficiaries including one in the US.  It has taken almost three years and there is no end in sight.  The estate (house) is now damp, mouldy and wall paper falling off the wall. The solicitor is hostile, has threatened beneficiaries the police (which would just waste the police's time), and will not engage constructively. He only communicates by letter.  These are poorly written, curt or even hostile, in a language from the middle of last century, he clearly is typing these himself probably on a type writer.  Of course with every letter he makes more money. We've taken the first steps to complain either through the ombudsman and/or the SRA.  We have taken legal advice a couple of times, which of course isn't cheap, and were told that his behaviour is shocking and we'd be in our right to have him removed through the courts. But.... we just want him to get on with executing the will, primarily selling the house. However he refuses to use any other form of communication but letter.  So writing to the beneficiary in the 'States can take a month to get a reply. And even in this country a week or more. Having worked with lawyers in the past I am aware that email, tele and video conferencing and even text and WhatApp are appropriate means for communication.  There could be an immediate response to his questions.   Help!        
    • Labour should be applauded for bringing in the Renter's Rights Act.  But so many of you are carried away with slagging them off. Married couples with busy lives sometimes forget who did what. On this occasion Mr Rachel Reeves was sorting out the rental agreement.  Ms Reeves was a bit flumoxed with all the grief/demonsing/witch hunts she is getting so forgot to check with her other half.   Not the first or last time this will happen with couples. (That's not having a go at the post above)
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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