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 
Proposed extended flying times at London City Airport
Author Message
samuelsen


Posts: 372
Joined: Feb 2016
Post: #1
12-07-2022 10:45 PM

London City Airport has put forward a proposal for longer flying hours during the day and additionally on Saturday afternoons and evenings.

This is not an expansion rather a proposal for extended operating hours.

The NIMBY minority oppose this proposal.

Find all posts by this user Reply
JKShepley


Posts: 6
Joined: Nov 2016
Post: #2
13-07-2022 08:37 AM

Honest question: how do you know only a minority opposes it? It was my understanding airport expansion/extensions are generally unpopular for key reasons: the environment, noise, and pollution. I always imagined opposition would be in the majority in an area disproportionately affected but I would be genuinely interested in evidence to the contrary.

Edit: for transparency, I don't have too strong a feeling about it, not enough to complain formally, but I wouldn't welcome it either for the reasons above (I suppose I'm a gentle opposer) and can understand why people would be more bothered.

This post was last modified: 13-07-2022 08:43 AM by JKShepley.

Find all posts by this user Reply
BrandNewGuy


Posts: 6
Joined: Jun 2022
Post: #3
13-07-2022 03:55 PM

Samuelsen, it's an expansion of their hours and passenger numbers, but not their physical expansion. Happy now? Nothing NIMBY about holding the airport to their previously agreed restrictions.

Find all posts by this user Reply
samuelsen


Posts: 372
Joined: Feb 2016
Post: #4
13-07-2022 04:28 PM

No, not really, it's not expansion but rather a proposal to extend operating hours, you can twist the language as much as you like but words have meanings. Expansion and extending are two different things.

And it is NIMBYism, we live in the Capital City of the UK, so you should expect planes to fly over, we have three airports Heathrow, Gatwick and London City. If that disrupts your quality of life there are alternative places to reside so planes don't fly over your property and disrupt your "life".

In the other thread I stated "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 I'm not actually arguing with you, but pointing out that the title of the other thread is mis-leading and un-representative.

I tire of people's constant moaning, I don't like this, I don't like that, this doesn't suit me, oh it's too noisy. Well get on with your life. If you've got time to go protesting and running campaigns, perhaps you've got too much time on your hands, lucky you.

This is SE23, be grateful you live here and not in some other Inner London borough where the opportunities and quality of life is much, much worse. Maybe be grateful for all the green space we have around SE23 and the adjacent SE22 and SE26.

Find all posts by this user Reply
BrandNewGuy


Posts: 6
Joined: Jun 2022
Post: #5
13-07-2022 04:35 PM

No longer interested in your semantics. They are expanding/increasing/extending their hours and increasing/expanding/extending their passenger numbers. Yes, I expect to have flights overhead, but I don't have to accept an increase in the hours of such traffic above the limits that have been previously agreed. That doesn't make me a NIMBY or a moaner, and I'm very grateful for the green space we have, much of which has been defended by local people campaigning to preserve it.

If you have too little time on hands to help keep our area livable, don't blame others who have.

Find all posts by this user Reply
samuelsen


Posts: 372
Joined: Feb 2016
Post: #6
13-07-2022 04:46 PM

Now you're throwing your toy's out the pram as you can't argue the facts.

ThumbdownThumbdownThumbdown

"I'm very grateful for the green space we have, much of which has been defended by local people campaigning to preserve it." No, there have been no campaigns to defend local space, so suggest you get your facts right. I've been here 99% of my life.

This post was last modified: 13-07-2022 04:51 PM by samuelsen.

Find all posts by this user Reply
JKShepley


Posts: 6
Joined: Nov 2016
Post: #7
13-07-2022 07:04 PM

Still waiting for the facts to back up the comment about only a minority being opposed the City airport expansion/extension.Bored

This post was last modified: 13-07-2022 07:06 PM by JKShepley.

Find all posts by this user Reply
samuelsen


Posts: 372
Joined: Feb 2016
Post: #8
13-07-2022 09:49 PM

As I have stated TWICE already "so hopefully as it was not originally permitted, it may not be permitted now. So I'm not actually arguing with you, but pointing out that the title of the other thread is mis-leading and un-representative", perhaps you need to read a little slower to appreciate what I actually said.

Use of language is the basis of freedom of speech and democracy. Just use it wisely and correctly. And yes I still consider you to be a bunch of NIMBY's.

Find all posts by this user Reply

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields


Possibly Related Topics ...
Topic: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  London City Airport expansion ThorNogson 22 3,394 10-08-2022 02:11 PM
Last Post: samuelsen
  TfL proposed RADICAL changes to bus services in South and Central London samuelsen 12 2,700 09-07-2022 11:36 AM
Last Post: samuelsen