Jump to content

Increase in Aircraft Noise

david_on_grove

By david_on_grove
in General ED Issues / Gossip

 Share

Recommended Posts

i*Rate

i*Rate

Posted
Posted

SCSB79,


Yes the noise really does bother me. I am trying to make the point that I have a quiet place to live in a side street with very little traffic noise and I do remember when we had the deafening Concorde flights a couple of times a day, but now there is no break from the sound all day. In spite of statistic quoted above, I know from living here for so long that it's never been this bad - that's a fact.

There is no answer to it, it is just part of the world that we live in.

Regards,

  • 4 weeks later...
i*Rate

i*Rate

Posted
Posted

Hi,


This is my final post on this thread, as I think I've made enough comments.


I recently looked up the Civil Aviation Authority website and sent an e-mail to their contact section; I got a reply immediately which was very polite and very detailed. It seems that the local authority have no control over this matter and there is not regulation of the times of flights by airlines. Airlines could fly planes over ED for 24 hour a day if they wanted to but have restricted their flight times at their own discretion. As for actual volume of noise, I believe that you can complain in extreme circumstances. Meanwhile, we in ED will have to continue to cope with being on a very busy flight path as planes are stacked over the Bigging Hill area, then made their way to Heathrow, via the air space over south east London (us).


Roll on Boris' new airport!


Regards and thanks to all - I think that you had the best suggestion ibilly99.

wolis

wolis

Posted
Posted

I think anybody finding the noise bad should pop over to Barnes or Fulham or better still Hounslow for a few hours and when they came back they would find that the noise was really nothing to get worked up about. I lived in Slough in the 60s and that is to the west of Heathrow and right under the flight path of aircraft taking off and climbing very steeply to gain the height demanded. Coming over us the planes are virtually coasting but on that side of town the engines are at full thrust - now that is noisy. Aircraft engines now are much quieter than in those days. I remember the Caravelles were incredibly loud - I once threw myself out of bed and onto the floor convinced that one was coming straight for my bedroom window.


Give me aircraft noise any day rather than the thump thump of brainless music in cafes, bars and even banks. But that should be another story

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
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Advertise Here

  • Latest Discussions

    • Penguin68
      Any updates? - Sidings East Dulwich on the top of Railway rise

      By Penguin68 · Posted

      But actually, replacing council housing, or more accurately adding to housing stock and doing so via expanding council estates was precisely what we should have been doing, financed by selling off old housing stock. As the population grows adding to housing built by councils is surely the right thing to do, and financing it through sales is a good model, it's the one commercial house builders follow for instance. In the end the issue is about having the right volumes of the appropriate sort of housing to meet national needs. Thatcher stopped that by forbidding councils to use sales revenues to increase housing stock. That was the error. 
    • Jenijenjen
      Any updates? - Sidings East Dulwich on the top of Railway rise

      By Jenijenjen · Posted

      Had council stock not been sold off then it wouldn't have needed replacing. Whilst I agree that the prohibition on spending revenue from sales on new council housing was a contributory factor, where, in places where building land is scarce and expensive such as London, would these replacement homes have been built. Don't mention infill land! The whole right to buy issue made me so angry when it was introduced and I'm still fuming 40 odd years later. If I could see it was just creating problems for the future, how come Thatcher didn't. I suspect though she did, was more interested in buying votes, and just didn't care about a scarcity of housing impacting the next generations.
    • Penguin68
      Any updates? - Sidings East Dulwich on the top of Railway rise

      By Penguin68 · Posted

      Actually I don't think so. What caused the problem was the ban on councils using the revenues from sales to build more houses. Had councils been able to reinvest in more housing then we would have had a boom in building. And councils would have been relieved, through the sales, of the cost of maintaining old housing stock. Thatcher believed that council tenants didn't vote Conservative, and home owners did. Which may have been, at the time a correct assumption. But it was the ban on councils building more from the sales revenues which was the real killer here. Not the sales themselves. 
    • tropica
      roof repairs and guarantees

      By tropica · Posted

      I agree with Jenjenjen. Guarantees are provided for works and services actually carried out; they are not an insurance policy for leaks anywhere else on the roof. Assuming that the rendering at the chimney stopped the leak that you asked the roofer to repair, then the guarantee will cover that rendering work. Indeed, if at some time in the future it leaked again at that exact same spot but by another cause, that would not be covered. Failure of rendering around a chimney is pretty common so, if re-rendering did resolve that leak, there is no particular reason to link it to the holes in the felt elsewhere across the roof. 

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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