SE23.com - The Official Forum for Forest Hill & Honor Oak, London SE23
Online since 2002  -  10,000+ members

Home | SE23 Topics | Shops & Services | Wider Topics | Offered/Wanted/Lost/Found | Advertising | Contact
Geddes Hairdressing & Barbering Studio One Armstrong & Co Solicitors


Post Reply  Post Topic 
Pages (4): « First [1] 2 3 4 Next > Last »
Flight Paths over SE23
Author Message
Tersie


Posts: 272
Joined: Feb 2007
Post: #1
21-02-2008 10:25 AM

Just heard on Radio London that NATS are proposing changes to flight paths in and out of all aiports. Take a look at this website and pop in your postcode and it will show you both the existing and proposed route. I have taken a Look and the new proposed main path will go straight over central Forest Hill. Thought you might be interested in taking a look to see how it could affect you. It seems that all the planes will be over 1000ft....I have popped in the station postcode as a reference. (See below)

The Red lines - the 'centre line' of the published routeRed circles (where seen) - the biggest circuit for holds (most aircraft in the hold will follow a smaller circuit)Black lines - outer boundaries for the spread of flight paths during normal operations (the majority of flight paths will be within this area)Coloured areas - the spread of where aircraft might be seen during normal and off peak operations - Red balloon - postcode marker

Exsiting flight path:
http://www.consultation.nats.co.uk/map/2...ss=se232ld

Proposed flight path
http://www.consultation.nats.co.uk/map/2...ss=se232ld

Find all posts by this user Reply
PVP


Posts: 271
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #2
21-02-2008 11:13 AM

I think this is going to be bad news - at the moment flights come and go from City airport from 2 corridors, one north and one south of the City. The new route is putting all the traffic on the Southern route, i.e. right over our heads, every flight.

I think it is time to mobilise for another letter writing campaign!

Find all posts by this user Reply
BarCar


Posts: 292
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #3
21-02-2008 01:11 PM

pvp Wrote:
I think this is going to be bad news - at the moment flights come and go from City airport from 2 corridors, one north and one south of the City. The new route is putting all the traffic on the Southern route, i.e. right over our heads, every flight.

I think it is time to mobilise for another letter writing campaign!

According to pages 23 through 31 of the East London consultation doc (if I'm reading it correctly) this Easterly route is only applicable for 36% of the time.

So while it would result in an increase of traffic over SE23, the bulk would still be using the Westerly runway - landing from the East over the Thames estuary

I'd certainly be in favour of alternating all Easterly approaches (from the West) using the current flight paths as a model - so that on alternate days they loop from the North or the South (like the agreement in place at Heathrow).

It's going to be worse for anybody living directly under the P-RNAV routes (the red lines) since much more traffic will stick accurately to those paths rather than spreading out over the coloured zones.

What's not clear to me is how bad a plane at "above 1000" feet sounds. It appears that most of our current traffic is above this height so we are really talking about an increase in quantity not noise.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Applespider


Posts: 283
Joined: Feb 2006
Post: #4
21-02-2008 02:40 PM

From the map, it looks like I'm directly under the red line for City which isn't entirely unexpected since the existing flight path seems to take them over the house more often or not.

To be honest, I don't particularly notice the noise unless it's something particularly large (which isn't that likely going in and out of City). I did get a lovely view of Concorde and the Red Arrows on Jubilee Day Wink

Find all posts by this user Reply
ermsey1


Posts: 9
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #5
21-02-2008 02:44 PM

We live on Sunderland Road and get City bound planes scooting overhead all the time. I hardly notice them at all as they are small planes with small engines - quite alot of them have propellers rather than jets. The big boys going in to Heathrow make alot more noise it seems to me. Unless I'm mistaken they seem to stack over Bromley and then come in just a bit north of FH, and they can make a right racket. Although not nearly as bad as when I lived in Wandsworth - regularly got woken up at 4.30am by the early morning flights there, and thats never a problem here.

Find all posts by this user Reply
shzl400


Posts: 729
Joined: Oct 2007
Post: #6
21-02-2008 04:06 PM

I still miss Concorde going over our house every evening...

Find all posts by this user Reply
NewForester


Posts: 377
Joined: Feb 2008
Post: #7
21-02-2008 04:17 PM

The proposals see the number of flights increasing from a 2004 base of 44 flights a day (2.6 per hour) to 58 flights a day (3.4 per hour) in 2009 and 70 fpd (4.1 ph) in 2014. We will, however be on the main flight path for all flights as opposed to an unspecified proportion of these. Also, these averages are worked out over 17 hours; if the runway is only used 36% of this time, then we could see the actual plane numbers increase to 12 fph when in use. IF the flights are currently split 50-50 between the two easterly routes, this represents a tripling of flights overhead.

We are already in the red zone, so the lowest planes will not be lower than they are at present; indeed they may be slightly higher as we will be further from the airport due to the wider turn... However, these changes are being made to increase the number of jets which use City airport. The noise tables give a range of 57-72 dB(A) for an arrival at these heights, which is "moderately loud" (equivalent to a hoover or a car passing close by at motorway speeds). A heavy diesel lorry at 25 mile per hour, 23 ft away is rated 85db(A) which is twice as loud.

It would seem as if they have pushed all the City traffic south to make way for the Stansted Easterly arrivals (which we will also be subjected to occasionally)

Find all posts by this user Reply
Westwood Bear


Posts: 3
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #8
21-02-2008 04:49 PM

It looks as if all the flights are being funnelled right over our heads. I find existing levels of flights highly irritating and it is hard to believe that they are planning to make it worse. I live on the posh estate on the west side of the hill (UDB) and on a summer's evening, as I sit in my garden sipping champaign and eating caviar, I find the noise of low flying aircraft quite puts me off my food.

But seriously for a moment, surely I am not alone in thinking that an increase in the number of low flying aircraft will affect our quality of life?

Find all posts by this user Reply
andrewr


Posts: 296
Joined: May 2006
Post: #9
21-02-2008 06:43 PM

I don't really understand the concern here. Although the 'proposed' map shows a red line for the centre of the flight path, there is virtually no difference in the areas on either map. Interestingly the current published approach chart for the Easterly runway at City shows a path which would take all aircraft well to the east of us. However, this would only be used for a 'procedural approach' when the radar is out of action. In practice aircraft are 'radar vectored' on a more direct approach either from the north or the south of the airport with those from the south going virtually over the top of us. The procedure does not permit aircraft to descend below 2000' (above sea level) until they are lined up with the runway. I doubt that this would be changed under the new arrangements. Where we sometimes get hit with a lot of aircraft is when Heathrow is landing towards the west, and City to the East. This happens when there is a light easterly wind because Heathrow has a preference for landings and takeoffs to the west, accepting a tailwind of up to about 10mph. This is because most noise is created by aircraft taking off, not landing, and they don't want to take off over London any more than necessary.

When I investigated noise concerns amongst residents of 'the posh estate' a few years ago, I found that aircraft noise was very low on their list of concerns and generally accepted as part of living in a big city.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Les


Posts: 95
Joined: Jan 2004
Post: #10
21-02-2008 07:33 PM

I think the principal concern is that the enhanced 'PRNAV' navigation system will focus aircraft effectively over Forest Hill, rather than the current vectored widespread.

I put in my postcode in Westwood Park and found the red centreline directly overhead - according to the text there will be little variation from this path for PRNAV equipped planes (albeit only about 50% will be equipped with this).

Am I the only one who actually LIKES the howling sound generated by the BA146s when they go to full flaps? Highly distinctive, and sometimes scares my country-dwelling family when visiting!

Find all posts by this user Reply
Ghis


Posts: 321
Joined: Jan 2007
Post: #11
21-02-2008 08:48 PM

shzl400 Wrote:
I still miss Concorde going over our house every evening...


Me too...
We used to come out to see it in the summer.

Find all posts by this user Reply
michael


Posts: 3,199
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #12
22-02-2008 12:20 AM

My response (I hope you like it and may submit your own feedback):

Whilst I am a supporter and user of London City Airport, I am concerned that the proposals will route all flights to city airport directly over Forest Hill, this hilly part of London is particualrly suseptable to noise from low flying aircraft. Whilst the planes to city are significantly quieter than those into Heathrow, the density of flights that will end up routed over Forest Hill will be significantly higher due to the drawing of the new 'red route' and boundaries.

I would far prefer that routes into City airport continue to use routes both north and south of the Thames rather than solely flying over south London, following the route of the south circular, which already leads Forest Hill to be a particularly noisy area.

Find all posts by this user Reply
PVP


Posts: 271
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #13
22-02-2008 10:10 AM

Michael,

As ever you make the point very well!

Find all posts by this user Reply
Londondrz


Posts: 1,538
Joined: Apr 2006
Post: #14
22-02-2008 10:19 AM

The Wisper Jets and Turbo props that go into the City airport dont really put me off even though I live on the lofty side of the hill. What I have noticed though is that the early morning Heathrow flights seem to be a lot lower and noisier. I have asked the wife to turn the landing light off so will see if that makes any difference.

Find all posts by this user Reply
andrewr


Posts: 296
Joined: May 2006
Post: #15
22-02-2008 03:42 PM

Looks like I am still missing something! The shaded red area on the proposed map is still both north and south of the Thames and I would have expected planes to use both routes in the interests of efficient arrivals. At the moment, I believe that most planes to City using the southern approach route over us anyway. Vectoring spreads them a little if they are busy in order to maintain separation, but this will be the case in the future as well. Lie many others, I'd rather have the intermittent noise of an overflying plane than the continual droan (or worse) of traffic on a busy road.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Johnc


Posts: 138
Joined: Jan 2007
Post: #16
22-02-2008 04:45 PM

shzl400 Wrote:
I still miss Concorde going over our house every evening...


I always viewed with a tremendous sense of pride. Nothing like in the skies before or since. I loved the throaty roar it blared out.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Londondrz


Posts: 1,538
Joined: Apr 2006
Post: #17
22-02-2008 04:54 PM

All take off and landing zones have to be fairly wide for the planes to avoid wake turbulence i.e. the disturbed air that comes off a plane as it passes through the air. Follow closely behind another plane and it is a very unpleasant experience which is why the red corridor is so wide.

Find all posts by this user Reply
robwinton


Posts: 335
Joined: Jun 2006
Post: #18
22-02-2008 05:23 PM

yes, well I lived in a badly insulated flat in Richmond for a while and you literally could not continue a conversation with someone sitting next to you in the room when it flew over. Luckily it wasn't too often, but if you want to complain about noise, try living with that (much as I liked the plane itself)

I really don't think there is much to worry about here. They are not going to care about a few objections from residents in the East of London when lots of others are suffering far more than us.

I think there are better things to spend our time campaigning for, such as the pools, the trains and the shops.

Find all posts by this user Reply
michael


Posts: 3,199
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #19
22-02-2008 05:26 PM

andrewr Wrote:
Looks like I am still missing something! The shaded red area on the proposed map is still both north and south of the Thames and I would have expected planes to use both routes in the interests of efficient arrivals. At the moment, I believe that most planes to City using the southern approach route over us anyway. Vectoring spreads them a little if they are busy in order to maintain separation, but this will be the case in the future as well. Lie many others, I'd rather have the intermittent noise of an overflying plane than the continual droan (or worse) of traffic on a busy road.


Andrewr,
I suspect you know a lot more about air traffic control than I do. but the difference between the maps is the black and red lines. The thing to notice (other than a red line going right over your house), is the black line that only goes round south london, rather than both north and south. This balck line represents 'where the majority of aircraft fly during normal operations and the red line is the published centre line of the route.'

This does suggest a significant increase in flights directly over Forest Hill, although figures are not currently available details which paths are used within the current boundaries. But I think a reasonable estimate is a doubling of possibly tripling of aircraft over Forest Hill. This is based on 20% increase in flights between now and 2014, all the flights that go over North London coming our way, and a narrowing of the vector spreads to focus on the red line.

We are lucky that we are talking about relatively quiet aircraft going into City rather than the Heathrow flight path, but these planes are much lower and the peak operation will be 20 flights per hour, or one every three minutes. Given they take about 1 minute to cover the sky overhead we may be subjected to noise for 1 out of every 3 minutes during peak operating times.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Londondrz


Posts: 1,538
Joined: Apr 2006
Post: #20
22-02-2008 05:33 PM

michael Wrote:

andrewr Wrote:
Looks like I am still missing something! The shaded red area on the proposed map is still both north and south of the Thames and I would have expected planes to use both routes in the interests of efficient arrivals. At the moment, I believe that most planes to City using the southern approach route over us anyway. Vectoring spreads them a little if they are busy in order to maintain separation, but this will be the case in the future as well. Lie many others, I'd rather have the intermittent noise of an overflying plane than the continual droan (or worse) of traffic on a busy road.


Andrewr,
I suspect you know a lot more about air traffic control than I do. but the difference between the maps is the black and red lines. The thing to notice (other than a red line going right over your house), is the black line that only goes round south london, rather than both north and south. This balck line represents 'where the majority of aircraft fly during normal operations and the red line is the published centre line of the route.'

This does suggest a significant increase in flights directly over Forest Hill, although figures are not currently available details which paths are used within the current boundaries. But I think a reasonable estimate is a doubling of possibly tripling of aircraft over Forest Hill. This is based on 20% increase in flights between now and 2014, all the flights that go over North London coming our way, and a narrowing of the vector spreads to focus on the red line.

We are lucky that we are talking about relatively quiet aircraft going into City rather than the Heathrow flight path, but these planes are much lower and the peak operation will be 20 flights per hour, or one every three minutes. Given they take about 1 minute to cover the sky overhead we may be subjected to noise for 1 out of every 3 minutes during peak operating times.



Michael, whilst I share you concern over the increase in flights I have to say that as someone who lives on Waldenshaw Road (slap band in the middle of the City Airport flight path) the plans do not disturb my summer evening BBQ's at all. I can honestly say that the noise impact from the BAE jets and the (I believe Fokker) turboprops is minimal.

BTW, I dont work in the aviation industry so have no axe to grind anlthough I also miss the demise of concord. 6.58 every evening like clockwork, when it flew over I new it was time to open a bottle of wineSmile

Find all posts by this user Reply
Pages (4): « First [1] 2 3 4 Next > Last »

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields