SE23.com - The Official Forum for Forest Hill & Honor Oak, London SE23
Online since 2002   11,000+ members   72,000+ posts

Home | SE23 Topics | Businesses & Services | Wider Topics | Offered/Wanted/Lost/Found | About SE23.com | Advertising | Contact | |
 Armstrong & Co Solicitors


Post Reply  Post Topic 
Pages (2): « First [1] 2 Next > Last »
London City Airport expansion
Author Message
ThorNogson


Posts: 18
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #1
11-07-2022 01:26 PM

Once again London City Airport wants to expand , this time by flying longer hours during the day and also Saturday afternoon and evening , not permitted ever since they opened, to protect Londoners from their noise. Consultation is now open.

Many people will experience their low concentrated flight path over SE23. The Forest Hill Society will be responding, but it seems important that as many residents as possible respond. More details and suggestions on how to deal with the feedback form, designed by a PR firm to get the responses they want to hear, has been published by campaign group HACAN East.

https://twitter.com/hacaneast/status/154...7IGMudC9Bg

Find all posts by this user Reply
samuelsen


Posts: 372
Joined: Feb 2016
Post: #2
11-07-2022 02:59 PM

I think your title is hugely MIS-LEADING.

It's not expansion as people would understand the word to mean but rather the proposed "flying longer hours during the day and also Saturday afternoon and evening". Use of correct language is important so people can quickly relate to what you ae attempting to communicate, their is nothing worse than mis-communication i.e. saying one thing when you actually mean something else, which in effect is what you appear to you have done.

And as you further say "not permitted ever since they opened", so hopefully as it was not originally permitted, it may not be permitted now.

So, perhaps change the title of the thread to ", Proposed extended flying times at London City Airport" which much more represents what they are attempting to do.

Find all posts by this user Reply
ThorNogson


Posts: 18
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #3
11-07-2022 03:27 PM

Well there is evidence.

In their newly published documents we see that if their plan goes ahead with extended operating hours, aircraft movements of around 70,000 per year increase by 2031 to 110,000.
In 2024 they see 5 million passengers per year and by 2031 they reach 9 million.

perhaps we can all make up our own minds to what extent this represents expansion or not.

They want to achieve this by flying more earlier in the morning, more later in the evening and then Saturday afternoons and evenings too. Rather than by doing whatever they need to do for their business within their currently permitted hours.

And they have declined to complete the redesign of their low altitude concentrated path over SE23 and introduce respite routes before applying for or implementing this change.

Find all posts by this user Reply
samuelsen


Posts: 372
Joined: Feb 2016
Post: #4
11-07-2022 04:26 PM

Dear oh dear, and what did I say about use of language??

"They want to achieve this by flying more earlier in the morning, more later in the evening and then Saturday afternoons and evenings too. Rather than by doing whatever they need to do for their business within their currently permitted hours."


"they want to achieve this by having more flights earlier in the morning and likewise in the evening, plus additionally on Saturday afternoons and evenings too.
Rather than by doing whatever they need to do for their business within their currently permitted hours."

Find all posts by this user Reply
ThorNogson


Posts: 18
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #5
11-07-2022 04:51 PM

'their is nothing worse than mis-communication'
I believe you might have meant 'there'. I can explain the difference if it would help?

'plus additionally on Saturday afternoons and evenings too'
your 'too' appears unnecessary - is that tautology? I expect you'll know.

Anyway, patronising use-of-English lessons aside, it would be good to hear any other views about the expansion plans of London City Airport and the effects of its flight path over SE23.

Find all posts by this user Reply
nottinghillbilly


Posts: 518
Joined: Dec 2010
Post: #6
11-07-2022 05:00 PM

Nice one @ThorNogson Thumbsup

Find all posts by this user Reply
jgdoherty


Posts: 360
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #7
11-07-2022 07:32 PM

The use of the word expansion is being applied consistently across a number of published items on the web regarding London City Airport's announcement.

On Fri, 8 July 2022 at 4:00 am Yahoo published this:

Quote:
Fears London City Airport's expansion bid could hinder Southend Airport's recovery

FEARS have been raised the expansion of a major London airport could hamper Southend Airport's bid to recover from the pandemic and return to the lofty heights of pre-Covid.

London City Airport has announced plans to increase its passenger numbers by 50 per cent, rising from six million a year to nine million.


City AM published this on July 4:

Quote:
London City Airport rolls out ambitious expansion plans but no mention of resurrection of Silvertown line or NYC flights

London City Airport has published details of its proposed expansion plans backed up by a 10-week consultation process.

No mention is given to the potential resurrection of the old North London Line Silvertown for London City station which the new Elizabeth Line passes by, nor the possibility of non-stop flights from LCY to JFK (New York Kennedy). Or an approach to the CAA for a very limited runway extension.

The airport expects to welcome three million passengers this year and is predicting a return to pre-pandemic passenger numbers (2019) of five million, as soon as 2024, according to a Business Travel News (BTN) report.

The consultation outlines how the airport can meet future demand of up to nine million passengers by 2031, by making best use of its existing runway and infrastructure, in line with its 2020 master plan and the UK Government’s aviation policy.


Other quotations are present and available, including from London City Airport itself - so @ThorNogson's use of the word expansion is reasonable and precise.

LCY have successfully subverted processes in the past during the public consultation round and it is essential they hear the clear message from Forest Hill residents that the existing regime of low level flights and the noise intrusion and air pollution that goes with it is unacceptable.

And that residents are prepared to make plain their rejection of any increases in these forms of pollution and that their voices be heard.

This post was last modified: 11-07-2022 07:36 PM by jgdoherty.

Find all posts by this user Reply
samuelsen


Posts: 372
Joined: Feb 2016
Post: #8
11-07-2022 10:07 PM

Your title remains mis-leading, it is NOT expansion, suggest you check out a dictionary.

You live in London, expect planes, if you don't like the idea, move to the countryside.

Find all posts by this user Reply
ThorNogson


Posts: 18
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #9
12-07-2022 12:12 AM

‘You live in London, expect planes, if you don't like the idea, move to the countryside’.

Thanks so much for all of your unsolicited personal advice today. It has been interesting. This thread however is to draw attention to the very much more frequent plane traffic over SE23 planned by the airport - and people have the opportunity to say what they think in the consultation.

May I remind anyone still interested that London City flies an exact track across SE23, same homes every time, at under 2000 ft above sea level. That’s about the height of a running track above Horniman Gardens. The number of planes is set under this new plan to increase hugely from today’s numbers.

If you favour ever increasing plane noise from London City at increasingly unsocial hours including Saturday afternoons and evenings, then I imagine you will put that in your consultation response.

This post was last modified: 12-07-2022 12:15 AM by ThorNogson.

Find all posts by this user Reply
michal


Posts: 3
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #10
12-07-2022 11:31 AM

For many years my impression was that LCY was meant to be a small airport serving the business travellers in Canary Wharf and the City. No it seams that it has grown to a normal airport with flights to typically holiday destinations!
I think that in the current climate operating such airport in the middle of a city is abnormal. Instead of expanding, plans should be made on how to close it down. With improved transport links to Heathrow (Elizabeth Line) closeness to Canary Wharf / City cannot be used to justify it's benefits. I would also argue that job creation is no longer a benefit either as there are so many job opportunities in London.
BTW I have left my comments on the consultation website

Find all posts by this user Reply
samuelsen


Posts: 372
Joined: Feb 2016
Post: #11
12-07-2022 12:07 PM

"Thanks so much for all of your unsolicited personal advice today. It has been interesting. This thread however is to draw attention to the very much more frequent plane traffic over SE23 planned by the airport - and people have the opportunity to say what they think in the consultation.

May I remind anyone still interested that London City flies an exact track across SE23, same homes every time, at under 2000 ft above sea level. That’s about the height of a running track above Horniman Gardens. The number of planes is set under this new plan to increase hugely from today’s numbers.

If you favour ever increasing plane noise from London City at increasingly unsocial hours including Saturday afternoons and evenings, then I imagine you will put that in your consultation response".


ThumbdownThumbdownThumbdown

Find all posts by this user Reply
BrandNewGuy


Posts: 6
Joined: Jun 2022
Post: #12
12-07-2022 08:45 PM

The nearest public exhibition of their proposals is in two days' time (!) here: Lewisham: Thursday 14th July, 10am – 2pm, St Mary’s Centre, 37 Ladywell Road, SE13 7UT.

Find all posts by this user Reply
BrandNewGuy


Posts: 6
Joined: Jun 2022
Post: #13
12-07-2022 08:54 PM

I started the online consultation feedback but the first section asking for your address and postcode only has a text box for your address, but not the postcode – and it won't let you proceed until you give both. This was in Firefox, so I opened it in Chrome and the same thing happened. A cynic might suggest that they're not exactly encouraging feedback...

Find all posts by this user Reply
jgdoherty


Posts: 360
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #14
12-07-2022 09:33 PM

Agreed - this not good and frankly unnecessarily difficult.

I have noted earlier commentary on other media along the same lines.

I wonder if you try typing your post code with the first letters in UPPER CASE eg SE23 or SE13 or SE6, whether the field labelled Address may accept that form of input.

Have not tried that yet - but by additionally putting in your full post-code, it may activate a pull down address list to confirm your actual address.

I have seen suggestions that if you do not want LCY to know your actual address, use that of your nearest Railway Station or Post Office.

Find all posts by this user Reply
BrandNewGuy


Posts: 6
Joined: Jun 2022
Post: #15
12-07-2022 09:53 PM

Yep, I tried both those things, but no joy. I've sent a terse email to their PR people Cratus who are running this. I see from their website that they offer potential clients "effective engagement to win support". Not most people's idea of what a consultation is...

Find all posts by this user Reply
ThorNogson


Posts: 18
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #16
12-07-2022 10:07 PM

I’ve been through this too and think it does not require your address, just the postcode, which must be in caps and have a space in the middle. As in, say, SE23 9TP.

Find all posts by this user Reply
jgdoherty


Posts: 360
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #17
02-08-2022 09:21 AM

http://www.hacaneast.org.uk/news

Here are the details of the London City consultation, up on its website:

https://consultation.londoncityairport.com/

Quote:
HACAN East has analysed London City Airport’s Consultation Feedback Questions which are live from 1 July to 9 September as accessed at the link below


https://consultation.londoncityairport.com/feedback



Quote:
We have identified several issues with the questions as outlined below along with a guide on what you can do about this.


Find all posts by this user Reply
samuelsen


Posts: 372
Joined: Feb 2016
Post: #18
02-08-2022 01:57 PM

This is the Capital city of the United Kingdom, we have three airports, City, Gatwick and Heathrow. We are coming out of a pandemic, although cases still remain high and people no longer wear masks and wonder why they still get Covid. During the pandemic everything stopped. The aircraft industry is attempting to get back on it's feet.

If you really don't like planes, go live on some remote island somewhere but FFS stop whinging and Please stop banging on and on about expansion. You continue to use the wrong definition and in fact the WRONG word to describe what is being proposed. It is an extension to current flying hours, NOT, NOT, NOT expansion. All you're attempting to do is Scaremonger.

WHICH BIT OF EXPANSION DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND, FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE, STOP BEING SUCH A MASSIVE NIMBY.

This post was last modified: 02-08-2022 01:58 PM by samuelsen.

Find all posts by this user Reply
jgdoherty


Posts: 360
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #19
02-08-2022 02:36 PM

NIMBY, Massive NIMBY - been called a lot worse.

On here and on the defunct .life forums.

Recognise fully what an expansion plan looks like - and it helps in this case because that is exactly what London City Airport calls it - an Expansion Plan.

Unambiguously and repeatedly.

The argument is not anti-airport.

It is about London City Airport's poor design of flightpaths and poor use of our Air Space and the additional and unnecessary Noise and Environmental pollution.

It is important to challenge unwarranted and constant plans for expansion and extended operations hours and the un-supported arguments used to promote such proposals.

And repeated attempts by London City Airport to return to proposing such plans and press them on our South London populace.

But, hey-ho, not everyone will see it this way or London City Airport's way for that matter.

Find all posts by this user Reply
samuelsen


Posts: 372
Joined: Feb 2016
Post: #20
02-08-2022 03:50 PM

Right, so unless you either live outside all year round, are in the garden 12 hours a day or have your windows open all the time, which I'm guessing you don't, why are you getting in such a flap about this, oh it's because you're an out and out NIMBY

And because they have un-suppoted arguments you want them to provide you with a supported argument, with relevant facts and figures, well why not ask them.

As I said, if you want to live in a utopia with no distractions, move and live in some place in the middle of nowhere, you won't be missed. You live in London, it goes with the terrority.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Pages (2): « First [1] 2 Next > Last »

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields


Possibly Related Topics ...
Topic: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Proposed extended flying times at London City Airport samuelsen 7 1,310 13-07-2022 09:49 PM
Last Post: samuelsen