Aircraft noise - have your say...

[fazer71]

I'm not plane aware, just not fookin deaf ...

First flight 4.25am this morning, already awake in anticipation.

More ever couple of mins until 6.15am then the low large older louder jets fly over.

As for shouting whilst talking on Lordship Lane sure that's a slight exaggeration,

but raising your VOICE & STRUGGLING to HEAR the other person over the jet NOISE, is TRUE.

Pre Dec 2012 it wasn't an issue Brockley etc and East Dulwich didn't suffer but now we all do.

[edcam]

No, we don't all suffer. If you were already awake before the "plane noise" started then the problem isn't the "plane noise".

[Otta]

fabfor Wrote: (on a separate thread about ghosts)

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

> Must admit that I've had bogus experiences and I

> do behave irrationally a lot of the time. That's

> exactly what I'm doing now "preaching to the

> deaf", so to say. I'm certifiable!

All we need to know.

[*Bob*]

edcam Wrote:

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

> No, we don't all suffer.

I disagree. We do all suffer. On here, every day.

[edcam]

*Bob* Wrote:

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

> edcam Wrote:

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

> -----

> > No, we don't all suffer.

>

> I disagree. We do all suffer. On here, every day.

Is there a self help thread for this?

[Penguin68]

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> Presumably some of the well-balanced,

> non-obsessives will be attending tomorrow's

> meeting to advise on cbt, etc.? ROFL

>

> I doubt it - if you don't care, you don't care

> enough to attend meetings.

EXACTLY!

So why interfere? Trolling? Busybodying? Vandalism?

I don't care about the noise, I do care about people obsessing about the noise, and like many I was suckered in by the title - 'have your say' and stayed because I didn't want a general silence in the critique area otherwise to be read as silent endorsement of what I suspect are quite minority (if very strongly held) views. Perhaps the OP should have entitled the thread - 'I hate aircraft noise in ED, only contribute if you agree with me' - and then we would have known to stay away.

[*Bob*]

edcam Wrote:

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

> Is there a self help thread for this?

You're on it

[fabfor]

So,

"I don't want people to think that wanting less aircraft noise, especially at 4.30 am in the morning, is a majority view".

Time and time again, when challenged to explain their rabid participation on this thread, this is essentially what the busybodies/obsessives come up with.

Pathetic!

Delusional thinking doesn't get much more obvious than that.

[Otta]

Hahaha, this is great, keep it up.

Wait, what's that noise?

[edcam]

Otta Wrote:

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

> Hahaha, this is great, keep it up.

>

>

> Wait, what's that noise?

Just heard a leaf falling from a tree. Deafening.

[Penguin68]

Just out of interest I, and most of the other 'doesn't effect me' posters have been clear to state that we recognise that those who are worried by the perceived noise are not lying, are not 'making up' their response to what they see as noise - but we are saying that the noise isn't worrying us - even if most of us say that if we concentrate we can be aware of planes overhead. So, people wanting less noise at 4:30 in the morning, when most of us are asleep and not being disturbed by aircraft noise are, possibly, in a minority. That is not to say that the poster isn't disturbed by the noise, just that people who do not share ths disturbance (in ED) may well be in a majority. We don't feel your pain, but are happy to accept that you do.

I have not accused anyone of being 'delusional' - I have suggested that there may be self-help remedies available to mitigate the very real percieved effects of aircraft noise. Delusional would be to start a thread complaining about excessive elephant trumpeting in ED keeping me awake.

[*Bob*]

I appreciate there is a valid discussion to be had on this matter (there even was one going on.. once.. about a hundred years ago), but one contributor (or a couple, bouncing off each other) monopolising the 'general issues' page with fascinating daily updates on whether or not they had a good nights sleep; whether they expect a good nights sleep tomorrow; which way the wind is blowing today; which way the wind will be blowing tomorrow; what they had for breakfast; whether they had a poo before breakfast - or let it bake until later than morning etc etc - this sort of thing is not a 'general discussion'. This sort-of thing is called 'bumping'. This thread is now a self-perpetuating cycle of (mostly) two posters bumping, a dozen people sick of the sight of said bumping - and the rest rubbernecking at a semi-amusing bunfight.

Let 'general interest' dictate what people see on the 'general issues' page. The obsession of a minority doesn't need to be in everybody else's face right at the top of the board - on a daily basis, just because the minority believe it should be. That's poor online etiquette. And if you do absolutely insist on being in people's face on a daily basis - expect some irritated faces shouting back at you - and for people to get increasingly rude. You've asked for it.

Personally I have nothing new to add at present but am doing a little digging which I may report back on at a later date. You know, like when I have something vaguely new and relevant to add. Maybe others should consider doing the same?

[Louisa]

Amen *Bob*.

Louisa.

[fabfor]

Well said, penguin68 and *bob*. But - again delusionally ( the evidence is right here!)- you deny the fact that there are other posters who want less aircraft noise.

The indignant objections still amount to:

"I don't want people to think that wanting less aircraft noise, especially at 4.30 am in the morning, is a majority view".

[Otta]

*bob* didn't deny that there are more than 2 people that might be bothered by the noise, he even pointed out that once upon a time there was a proper discussion going on. What he is saying is that boring daily updates offer nothing new to the discussion, and are basically fair game for people that are fed up with them and choose to take the p!ss a bit.

[fabfor]

Otta Wrote:

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

> *bob* didn't deny that there are more than 2

> people that might be bothered by the noise, he

> even pointed out that once upon a time there was a

> proper discussion going on. What he is saying is

> that boring daily updates offer nothing new to the

> discussion, and are basically fair game for people

> that are fed up with them and choose to take the

> p!ss a bit.

Isn't that EXACTLY what trolls do?

"Who the cap fits, let him wear it!"

[numbers]

no, fabfor, that is not EXACTLY what trolls do at all. But I get the feeling you won't listen to anyone but yourself.

Have your say folks (some more than others), you're on the right thread.

[????]

Come on, I think this thread would have more value and be more relevant if everyone posted evertime they heard a plane flying over SE22...I am at work now (WC1 - nice and quiet) but when I get home I'll get right on to it

[fazer71]

This was Vauhxhall East Dulwich is NOW the same.

[fabfor]

numbers Wrote:

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

> no, fabfor, that is not EXACTLY what trolls do at

> all. But I get the feeling you won't listen to

> anyone but yourself.

>

> Have your say folks (some more than others),

> you're on the right thread.

This just amounts to using "no" as an argument.

And speaking of listening to others, how's this from Wikipedia:

"In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally[3][4] or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[5] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[6]"

Now relate this to my use of the word "EXACTLY".

QED?

[fazer71]

Brockley meeting. 18th March 2014

I attended.

Heathrow were there ?but not the air traffic control people? they did a long presentation of aircraft data with a nice PowerPoint lots of charts satellite images and flight path data with images from webtrack.

Brockley Forest Hill and East Dulwich in the worst bit a joining circle of highest noise.

At the end of the presentation Heathrow view was nothing has changed since 1998 ?other than an increase in the landing approach height for some aircraft.?

Residents from Forest Hill and Dulwich Village also attended and surprisingly others from Coulsdon which is way out under the holding stack zone.

Heathrow admitted they?ve had a big increase in complaints since Nov 2012

?It?s also my experience that is around the time I noticed noise levels had increased becoming intense and intrusive in East Dulwich so no coincidence. I?m not the only person who?s noticed so I?m not going Mad ! phew?

Heathrow have absolutely no idea why people are noticing the noise more than prior to Nov 2012.

It is very odd that the complaints have increased after the END of the trials.!

SO It?s a mystery for Heathrow and for us.

Possible answers.

1. Webtrack data is wrong / inaccurate and the flight paths have changed. Heathrow stand by their data but can we trust it? (V possible)

2. Following the trial people have a heightened sensitivity. This is Heathrow?s current possible answer. IMO doesn?t make sense. (unlikely)

3. The density of the air over South London has changed more humid causing an increase in sound transfer. (V unlikely)

4. Some element/s on aircraft or engine design has increased the high pitch whistling noise. Heathrow don?t believe anything technical on the aircraft has changed. An instrument hole on the wings of the A320 is known to cause a whistling noise they are looking at shielding the hole to stop the noise. It is also possible the engine turbines on newer aircraft emit the sounds which annoy at approach speeds a noise the older jets didn?t make. It?s also possible that some other technical change has created the noise, a combination of elements. Also this may be a noise which falls outside the test noises which aircraft manufacturers need to control. (V possible)

Heathrow appear to be taking the post Nov 2012 noise increase issues very seriously they assured us they are working to find the cause and an answer.

They will put sound monitoring equipment in Brockley. (too late imho no data available for pre and post 1998)

In the opinion of the many locals Webtrack data is inaccurate or just not precise enough to show the changes. Heathrow say you can?t compare Webtrack with looking in the sky as the human eye can?t judge how high and how far away the aircraft are. (umm V possible)

Some believe Webtrack data has been tampered with they don?t trust Heathrow.

V possible as there?s no independent data. Heathrow have everything to gain by tweaking it.

Quite possible Webtrack doesn?t show that the flight corridors have narrowed since Nov 2012 causing noise in certain areas to be amplified, resulting in consistent constant noise in the same locations for those residents (reflection from hard surfaces amplifying noise etc) which may have resulted in the noise impact becoming more and more noticeable for those residents.

Something I learnt which is counter intuitive, a higher approach by a lot of aircraft is more noticeable than a lower approach, as the aircraft are more visible and the spread of noise is carried over a wider area, basic triangulation from a greater height. So the increased height isn?t better and may be contributing.

Overall quite frustrating for those of us who are affected and also for Heathrow (at least the bit of Heathrow who attended) as they don?t have an answer but they know something is definitely different.

[ruffers]

To me 4 seems really unlikely. The entire world plane fleet isn't replaced overnight so unless we can tie a major change of fleet to November 2012, the date reports are that the noise complaints increased significantly, then that can only be a minor factor at best.

3, agreed, very unlikely.

So that leaves one and two and a significant increase in complaints since November 2012, which leaves me asking what happened then?

[Otta]

Why do you both think 3 is very unlikely? That one seemed plausible as weather is changing quite drastically iver the last couple of years.

I'm no scientist, but it doesn't sound too outlandish to me.

[edcam]

Sounds like the conclusion of that meeting is that nothing has changed but there are more moaners, some of whom are unhealthily obsessed with the subject.

[*Bob*]

So what Heathrow have confirmed is that the flight paths haven't changed for at least 15 years, apart from the trials?

Well - you heard it here first folks (slaps forehead)