Over the past few days I have noticed significant aircraft noise overhead. As I write (08.50) it has been loud and continuous from about 05.45 with planes coming in from the north east and south east, straightening up overhead and then continuing in a queue towards heathrow. I have noticed it a lot since the bank holiday weekend. Is it just me being over sensitive or has there been a change of late - any views anyone ?
If you have a look at other local forums - you’ll find lots of threads on this subject. The general consensus is that weather conditions affecting both the transmission of noise and approach routes, and being outside more at times when you are likely to notice it are factors. And once someone notices the noise, they are more alert to it.
Could relate to this:
Those changes happened in January so I’d say they are normal patterns by now.
I don’t notice it much but @RachaelDunlop is right - once you notice it then you can’t stop hearing it. Most of the traffic seems to be the Heathrow route with planes coming in from the East directly over us. Wind direction is a factor on how planes approach the airport so it is possible that some days are much heavier over us…
The direction that aircraft fly at Heathrow depends on the wind direction, as aircraft must take-off and land into the wind. Wind direction around London is mainly from the west. Most aircraft arrive over London from the east and take off towards the west; we call this westerly operations which occurs on average 70% of the year. During easterly operations, aircraft will arrive from the west over Windsor and this occurs on the remaining 30% of the year
A lot of incoming flights delayed, sometimes canceled, probably due to a very busy holiday period. When planes’ timetable is disrupted, they have to wait in the que to land, sometimes flying round and round different areas until the tower finds a gap and gives permition to land. If this explaination is right, it should get back to normal after holiday rush drops.
All part of living in London really. But agree with the consensus that spending more time with windows open, or being outside you notice it more. Weather does indeed affect it, and like a spot on someones face, once you know its there… lol
In these cases, their flight plan is known, and the receiving airport has a rough idea what the new eta is, and schedules them accordingly. However as you say, during busy times they indeed enter the stack, which is a pre determined route, usually quite oval in shape, and adjusted depending on the approach to the airport for that day.
Runway directions are also switched occasionally due to weather as stated above, and runway usage varied under agreements with the locals to the airport to give them some respite.
I haven’t really noticed too much - does it depend on which bit of FH you are in?
I have to say it’s noisy motorbike engines that bother me more than aircraft. There’s one very noisy one that goes down my road often at night or very early in the morning that sounds like it’s about to fall apart. Sorry, off topic!!
This morning was very noisy and woke me up at 6.15am so i got a screenshot of the problem
There were about three planes in a row, about 3 minutes apart making the same manoeuvre - decending from 6k ft to 4k ft while turning overhead from an approach from Thornton Heath to a heading towards Heathrow (they were flying toward the north north east and rotated round to west north west). This was really quite noisy despite having windows closed - not just noisy but across a range of frequencies from low to high due to the desceleration descent amd turn all happening simultaneously and surrounding the area.
There is a massive difference betweem the noise of these planes and the usual hum of planes flying in straight paths at 6k ft (which make less noise for me than motor bikes on the south circular - some distance away).
Anyway, just wanted to record that here as it was a particularly noisy. I’m not sure if there was a particular reason today (lots of tourists coming home creating a large stack, timing and position of surise creating a sharper turning circle, clear atmospheric conditions preventing any dampening, etc) but it is tough for those of us living above 300ft!
Just heard one overhead while reading this. The silence of the morning made it far more audible.
However given the speed at which they pass over, and the altitude, it’s just par for the course of living in London to me. Windows open, listening to the birds singing away, and occasional traffic and air traffic.
Also worth nothing, that while typing still, I heard another… Strangely it has come no closer than being overhead Catford. The weather and silence of the morning really do amplify things.
Food for thought… Not too bad on the grand scheme of things.
Noise travels more in cooler air, and my, is it cool or what!!
I definitely think atmospheric conditions play a large part, but we also had 5 planes in 10 minutes turning along a flight path that took them over SE23 at around 6:15am. The proximity of these plane to each other meant that the noise intensity was greater as you could hear more than one at a time.
I’ve now installed a decibel level app, which should be amusing. Not sure of the accuracy but I just tested with a plane going past at 30dB inside (barely above silence) but 60dB-70dB sticking my phone out the window. This morning the noise level felt noticeably louder than this (i.e. 50-60dB with the windows closed).
What is nice is that most of us can now get tools to measure these things - with Flightrader and Sound Meter available for free apps for phones.
Ah, cool - I was wondering how you got those images.
Having lived here for more than 15 years it is definitely getting worse. Repeated consultations have not led to improvement. Here’s the latest, which it might be worth responding to (or might not). Only takes a min
https://consultations.caa.co.uk/policy-development/aviation-noise-impacts/
Sometimes you get Heathrow and City approach at the same time. I think when there’s no wind or a N/S crosswind then they can land at Heathrow from the East and City from the West as the City approach comes over FH, then turns under the Heathrow traffic, and heads back east over the City of London and CW.
I actually like watching the planes, so they don’t bother me at all 
I don’t mind the planes between the hours of 8am and 9pm.
I wish the night landings would turn and descend earlier to reduce the noise over major populated areas.
#FirstWorldProblems Hard old life but all part and parcel of living in London.
On a side note, I am interested to know what other sounds of the area people enjoy or dislike. Birds, helicopters,sirens, traffic etc. Genuine question.
I think this is a key point. They are noisier while turning and if you are below the turning point for LHR then they can be really noticeable. AIUI, this point is meant to move so as not to bother the same people all the time.
Quite right Brett. I think that 5 planes in 10 minutes turning over a single spot at dawn is unreasonable.
I completely accept that planes over head is part of the noise of living in a major city, but there are ways of managing flight paths to reduce the impact.
Really we should be looking to expand airports around London, particularly Gatwick, rather than the airport that requires all flight paths to be all over the entire city. But there are easier ways to reduce the decibel levels of aircraft by adjusting turning and descending routes between planes.
Lovely quiet morning.
It is, isn’t it. Perhaps there are giving us a morning off
Only fair to share. Consideration is key. Others out in the west are having a noisy morning.
As somebody who moved from west London precisely because of plane noise, and who’s lived here for over 3 years now, I can definitely say that plane noise in Forest Hill and Sydenham has become unbearable. The City Airport’s more condensed paths started early this year and can be audible but, for some reason not discussed anywhere (and believe me, I check Hacan, all local forums, have all the flight tracking apps and yes, the decibel meter), all planes heading for Heathrow fly at much lower altitude than before. They’ve always been there but much higher. It’s this year’s problem which I believe is here to stay as most people simply don’t notice or don’t mind (besides, there is no law regulating aircraft noise). Summer months have little to do with it, hot weather affects take offs more than landings. I meditate every morning and this year it’s been like sitting under a plane highway, without much respite. Wearing ear plugs 80% of the time when at home. Finally, I cancelled my plans to extend the house I live in and came to terms with the fact that it’s time to move as the area became another Heathrow-infested neighbourhood. Quite frankly don’t understand people who claim it’s part of living in a city - no other city has a problem with plane noise on such a scale.
I loved in FH for 16 years. At no stage was it unbearable. I lived in London, noise was a constant, we got on with it. We swopped Heathrow and City Airport for F15’s and Apache helicopter gunships. You make what you will out of it.
I would say that statement is very variable, most major cities have major international airports. If you ask the right group of people, I am sure they would rather more peace and quiet too. The statement is simple and factual really. Sirens, planes, lorries, and many other noises are something city folk grow up with, and somehow learn to filter out a lot of the time.
Also worth taking into account the sheer density of London, and it’s age compared to its airports. Very much an afterthought so the paths came in over residential areas.
I would love to know what solution people would suggest. Is this a “not over here, over there” situation where we don’t want it, but it’s OK for others to put up with it instead?
Like @londondrz I have lived here for decades now, and as things have increased, so has my tolerance. I’m happy to be woken by the police helicopter at 3am.
Just out of interest, how many objecting to the noise fly at any point, and do you make a point of only flying on flights that take off and land during “reasonable hours”?
I agree with the point you’re making - but I do think a new Thames Estuary airport (AKA Boris Island) would have been a sensible development.
If eastbound flights can shifted from Heathrow to this new easterly airport, 8M people would have quieter lives, with a very small number of people inconvenienced. So it may be seen as NIMBYism, but it would reduce harm to the overall population.
I was keen to see how Boris Island would have gone. Shame really. Problem is, it isn’t just flights which move, its all that industries which support and thrive from air travel. If you look at the Gatwick and Heathrow areas they are stuffed full of such businesses. What would become of them?
Suddenly imposing air traffic on people who have made a choice about their location, grown up with peace, and suddenly have constant air traffic. Is that fair? Just because people in London are fed up with it.
I barely notice aircraft noise. Maybe because I suffer from tinnitus I have become good at internal filtering of unpleasant noise or maybe my hearing isn’t that good. However my wife doesn’t really notice that much either. Certainly I never hear it indoors and even in the garden i don’t notice it - until I hear one that is and then as mentioned I can’t stop hearing it. It certainly ins’t unbearable or even really unpleasant to me - it has become part of the reassuring background rumble of this great city.
The thing with Boris Island is the huge amount of space that would then be available for housing on the former Heathrow site.
Its been pretty intense this morning. Woke me up before it was light. There is an email address for chap called Dr Darren Rhodes on the CAA website. Apparently he is the ‘head of noise analysis’
Here is a link. His contact details are at the end of the page.
https://www.caa.co.uk/Environment/Noise/Noise
I dropped him an email last week to make him aware of what I see as an increase in traffic/noise and asking for his take on it. No reply as yet. I will let you know what he says if he replies.
For all the unemployed local ex workers to apply for lol
My dad was a fighter pilot. So I grew up on or near air force bases to the sounds of a CF-5 Freedom Fighter in acceleration or the reverse thrust of a C-5 Galaxy on landing. They are loud.
So when I think the sound of aircraft have gotten louder it can say something. And this recent trend of turning aircraft overhead has gotten my military-aircraft grade hearing on end. Last week I was woken in the morning by that significantly louder sound we all seem to notice of late. It is loud. And disturbing.
London already is among the worst affected by aircraft noise pollution in Europe. And Heathrow is the absolute worst offender. A third runway is going to make it worse AND affect even more people.
Spot on. Sometimes you need big solutions to big problems. Unfortunately it seems impossible to get consensus in this government regardless of the colour on your party flag. The speed at which the Thames Hub proposal was discarded by the airports commission was truly sad.
The Thames Hub was much more than creating a new airport to increase air capacity. It was to create a transport, energy and communications hub for the future. A UK air hub on top of a rail hub connecting the airport to the north and the south onto Europe. Seamless connection to roads, and potential access to ports.
Plus keeping my note on track… reducing noise for 95% of Londoners.
Tokyo got it right by moving flights from Haneda to Narita. It made life in Tokyo much more bearable. Really dont see why London cant do this.
Absolutely right @starman. I remember sitting next to an off duty BA air hostess on approach to Heathrow who, more in the context of the view, remarked on it being highly unusual for flights to approach over a major city. Yes, there are other examples but for comparison JFK and Schipol both route their flights over water.
Schipol has 6 runways and passive provision for another 4 yet we spend years prevaricating over a 3rd runway at an airport in the wrong place. The lack of joined up thinking on this is infuriating.
Narita isn’t exactly local for Londoners though mate. Nice idea, but flawed 
Seriously though, the idea of quieter skies is more or less a fantasy. We can moan all we want, but likelihood of any major changes, pretty darn slim. Especially with Boris Island being so fiercely opposed.
Boris Island was a nice vanity project but was never going to get off the ground (no pun intended) - not least due to huge amount of ordinance quite near it, the massive costs involved and the complete dismissal of it by everyone in the business. It was a no go from the start.
OK can we all move there instead and get away from this noise lol.
Maybe whack a huge new town there? Would have needed to have been built anyway, and would solve the housing crisis surely, with good commute in of course.
Strictly speaking it was a proposal spearheaded originally by DoT which he then co-opted. There have been more than one proposal for the Thames Estuary and the one I’ve previously championed was put forward by Foster + Partners at a much later date, offering a potentially more reasonable and comprehensive solution.
I wouldn’t judge the proposal soleby by the response of business who are more inclined to take the path least resistant. Vision of this scope is best directed by government who should have the longer term interests at hand. Should…
While business may not have approved, there would be no shortage of private capital with investors in infrastructures (pensions, sovereign wealth) clambering for the very type of large projects.
Sadly recent decades have shown that it is the done thing to scrap everything the last government did as a new party takes charge.
Not mentioning it anymore in case it gets split to politicos.
Except in this case successive governments of all hues have done nothing.
When we moved to Nowheresville Norfolk people said how quiet things would seem. Not so much, all the animals wake up early, the birds are bloody loud, lots of tractors and bird scarers and lots and lots of military jets, prop planes and helicopters. My favourite being the Ospreys which fly over our house at 50 feet causing everything to shake. I love it 
Apart from the police cars and ambulances I think Norfolk is noisier than London during the day. At night you can hear a pin drop.
Ospreys !! 
I love Ospreys! I love them more in Norfolk!
Our Ospreys 
Oooooooooooh! 
Very loud, very vibes and very very low.
Air force brat here. I thought of the Bell Boeing V22 first. Even though my parents live on Osprey Lane so called for the large number of nesting ospreys in the area.
Show off 
I have been away while this thread has motored along, but I’ve been following the aircraft noise issues for a few months now. I’ll write a little more soon, but campaigning, which used to cover Heathrow routes only, has spread to cover City too, firstly the East End boroughs with HACAN East, and now a new group, HACAN South East, which I am planning ion joining. Here is the invitation I received the other day to take an interest in the new group.
"Dear Friends,
There is increasing concern about flight paths and aircraft noise from Heathrow over South and South East London. Some areas have also been experiencing more noise from London City aircraft following the concentration of its flight paths last year.
More positively, Heathrow will be holding a public consultation later this year to get people’s views on the design principles which should inform the root and branch review of flight paths it will be undertaking (whether or not it gets permission for a third runway). It will be asking communities for their thoughts on the importance of things like respite.
We want to make sure that the community voice in South and South East London is as strong as possible and so we are proposing to set up HACAN South East as a sister body to HACAN and HACAN East.
We would like to invite you to an the inaugural meeting of HACAN South East London on 26th September at 7.30pm, Kennington Park Community Centre, 8 Harleyford Street, SE11 5SY (just beside the Oval Cricket Ground).
Do come along! It will be a chance to hear from campaigners about the latest developments at Heathrow and London City airports. And it will be a chance to give your views on what the new body should concentrate on.
Best wishes,
Amina Gichinga
Community Campaigner, HACAN East
Some issues that I see re City Airport gleaned from HACAN and my own observations by following the plane tracker apps available online.
Westerly wind. When the wind is from the west, (70% of days), we in SE23 are untroubled by City airport flightpaths, Heathrow and City both land from the east.
But I think on these days we are affected by Heathrow flightpaths instead.
East wind. But on 30% of days they both land from the west and it is these City aircraft that go over our gardens. It starts very early, I find it relentless and different to how it used to be. The reason it is far more noticeable is that aircraft now have to use GPS navigation. Now, from 2016, through automatic navigation aircraft follow a very exact and identical flightpath by the time they reach Forest Hill as they then turn north and then east to land at City. This means a procession of planes at exactly 2000 feet. I think this is too low. It also means that on 30% of days we get 100% of aircraft on an identical line, in this case over my home. It seems to be accepted that these ‘concentrated flight paths’ are not working and we are waiting to find out what other proposals can be made. The most sensible one seems to be a variation of the concentrated line - giving ‘respite’. The idea being that maybe the line is different on different days so the noise is spread over a wider area and most homes do not get several days at a time of constant noise. Other kinds of respite would be good too - recognition that it is needed is something to be argued for.
The second issue re City is that the noise impact on homes is not coordinated with Heathrow. There is nothing to say that on the days we do not get City flights we get instead a Heathrow concentrated line instead. So no respite ever.
HACAN are trying, I think, to get residential noise proper and proportionate consideration alongside other issues like the economy, business and leisure flight needs, the needs of airports to make money etc etc. It is hard to get the individual resident’s voice heard when dealing with large institutions with different priorities. There does seem to be some political support on addressing the noise issue, but pressure on councillors, MP’s etc will raise awareness and can’t do any harm.
I think that the incoming flight paths to Heathrow have changed. I don’t think we had Heathrow flights directly over Forest Hill previously.
I contacted the Aviation Environment Federation http://www.aef.org.uk/
this was their response:
Dear Mr [Devonshire Forester]
Thank you for your query, which has been forwarded to me, and apologies for my delay in replying.
AEF is aware of flightpaths trials carried out by Heathrow in 2014, and that ever since, communities not previously affected by noise are now suffering, although Heathrow says that operations have reverted to pre-trial practices.
I am not sure about the exact routes of flightpaths, but I know that, while the number of flights to and from Heathrow has only increased marginally, some flightpaths are being used more intensively. Also, some of the aircraft being operated are heavier, and are noisier in comparison. This might account for the increased noise that your neighbour, and you, are experiencing.
In order to comply with the 1982 Civil Aviation Act, Heathrow Airport must consult with local authorities, airport users and interest groups who have an interest in its operations. Heathrow Airport Consultative Committee (HACC) is made up of several local authorities, and other interested parties, which serve as local representatives. The organisation called the Heathrow Association for the Control of Aircraft Noise (HACAN) is listed there, and it might be an idea to contact them to discuss what is being said in meetings about airspace use and noise nuisance (HACAN is likely to have more detailed knowledge of what is happening locally than I do). A full list of HACC representatives is here.
AirportWatch has produced a useful history and summary of an independent report into operations in and out of Heathrow, which you can read here. If you’d like to read the full report, you can do so here.
I am sorry that I can’t be of more immediate help to you, but I hope that the above will be of some use.
Best wishes,
Deborah Lovatt
Community Outreach Manager
Aviation Environment Federation
Big one came over and woke me at 4.34 this morning. Another just as I was nodding off again made me fully awake so just got up. Infuriating. Not sure what good posting this does but makes me feel slightly better. thanks 
I just tune it out. Then if I video something in the back garden all you can hear is plane noise.
I still miss the evening fly past of Concorde - now that was loud.
Its very quiet this morning and has been for the past hour or so. The reason seems to be that the planes don’t seem to be coming from the South.
Does anyone have a take on what’s different this morning ?
One woke me up at around 4-5am this morning. It’s getting beyond a joke now
You could write to HACAN (see my post above)
When I have time, I will try to find out whether Lewisham has representation on HACC.
The wind is from the West so today planes fly directly in to City from the East. They only go over us when wind is from the East and they come in over Catford, Forest Hill then turn North and finally turn East over the river for the landing.
back in June 2017 this was a response from London City airport to my enquiry. It contains useful info on who does what and on how to track the course, origin, destination and height aircraft that came over your house on any particular day. I still haven’t quite got a handle on when we get the Heathrow flights over Forest Hill ones, but am fairly sure of what is happening with City airport flights. Whether Heathrow or City it all starts over us from 5am.
"Dear Mr Nogson
Firstly, may I say how sorry we are that you have been given cause to contact us, and that you are being disturbed by aircraft noise. London City Airport (LCA) takes its community responsibilities very seriously and the issue of aircraft noise is certainly of great importance to us. . Your complaint has been logged under reference xxxxx
We have one runway at London City Airport (LCA), and depending on the direction the aircraft are departing, which is dictated by wind direction, the runway is given a different designator, 27 (westerly) or 09 (easterly).
Arriving aircraft only fly over parts of your area when we use runway 09. The direction aircraft must take off to depart or approach the airport to land is dictated by the wind direction i.e. if there is a wind blowing predominantly from the East to the West at the airport then easterly operations will occur. As you might appreciate, the airport cannot control these elements so the direction aircraft will fly can change from day to day.
Also, it is worth noting that only 30% of all departures/arrivals during a year are easterly operations (known as Runway 09 departures/arrivals) since the prevailing wind at the airport is predominantly from the West during the year. Therefore, 70% of flights from London City Airport do not fly near your area.
Aircraft movement over your area is determined by wind and you will notice that when the airport is operating on Runway 27 (westerly) you will not see any aircraft using LCA over your area. However you mentioned on the 28/06/2017 you noticed aircraft movement over your area. LCA was operating on runway 27 on that date so you would not have had any LCA aircraft over your area. You were definitely disturbed as a result of other Air traffic on that particular date.
The routes flown by aircraft departing from and arriving to LCA are prescribed by Standard Instrument Departure (SID) and Standard Instrument Arrival Routes (STARs). These departure and arrival routes are established by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), and are designed to ensure safety within the UK’s skies. These routes are not decided by London City Airport.
If you have questions about the general use of airspace over your area, the best people for you to talk to would be the CAA’s Aviation Related Environmental Enquiries (AREE) department who can be contacted via their website http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=288
Recently London City Airport has launched a flight track keeping system (TraVis) which is used to view flight movements of departing and arriving aircraft operating at London City Airport within your area. This can be found on the LCA website via https://www.londoncityairport.com/home/page/track-aircraft-in-your-area. TraVis is a great tool for understanding LCA aircraft movements and the flight paths when on runway 09 and 27.
TraVis will provide you with details of wind direction, runway usage, altitude etc. You can look up the required date and time and it will track aircraft movements. However there is a 60 minute live data delay.
The associated routes for the Airport are still the same and LCA hasn’t changed its flight paths. However a change in how aircraft navigate when departing and arriving from the Airport has been introduced. This alternative form of navigation is called RNAV or Area Navigation. This is, in very general terms, satellite navigation for aircraft. This change came into effect from 4th February 2016 after it was approved by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).
The change in Navigation referred to as LAMP is not optional – it is part of NATS’(National Air Traffic Services) wider programme to modernise the air route system over London and the South East issues on behalf of the CAA. This will require all aircraft to be equipped to navigate using RNAV by November 2017 and a mandate for the airspace to provide RNAV routes to be effective by winter 2019.
As part of this change being adopted, a Post Implementation Review was required where LCA collated information for the 1st year after the implementation of RNAV in order to report to the CAA about the feedback and performance of this alteration of aircraft navigation. This has now been provided to the CAA with a decision from the CAA expected in the Autumn. There is an opportunity for you to contact the CAA direct on this matter with any statements or objections, by emailing infoservices@caa.co.uk. "
Thor
The web-site Flightradar24 (https://www.flightradar24.com ) not only lets you see current aircraft movements but also has a playback option.
This permits you to set a playback window and show what aircraft flew through your sector at that time.
You can then isolate any aircraft and identify it, its departure point and its intended destination.
The attached image highlights what was flying over us this morning just after 5:00am. The loops should be interpreted as time spent in any stack.
thanks, so we now know:-
Wind from the west : Forest Hill gets Heathrow landings from 4.30-5.00am. coming in from a stack to the south of us.
Wind from the east: Forest Hill gets all City airport landings at 2000 ft from just a little later when they start coming from a stack to the east of us.
We don’t know what each route is doing to reduce constant, repetitive flights over individual areas (‘respite’).
we don’t know to what extent Heathrow and City with CAA coordinate planning of routes and respite.
My theory is that there is not coordination so City can argue we ‘only’ get 30% of their flights, while Heathrow can say we have respite from their flights 70% of the time. While on the ground in Forest Hill we actually get planes 100% of the time and don’t much care what their destination is.
This is what I will take to the HACAN South East first meeting.
When we moved to FH in 2001 we knew it was on a flight path but made the decision to move there. When we moved to rural Norfolk a few months ago we knew our world would smell of poo but still moved. To a certain extent we can make a decision to move to an area despite a negative factor, we can also choose not to move there.
Would still love to know more about the suggestions for a solution to this ‘problem’. Other than a 10 yeah plan to build in the Thames Estuary of course. What else can be done. And what else would people like to see happen?
Well engine design has made engines a lot quieter and the older, louder planes are banned from Heathrow. Hopefully engine designs get to a point where you can barely hear them about mopeds, quads, sirens, parakeets, etc…
I don’t think this is true. City and Heathrow take off and land in the same direction. Most of these go east to west, and in these cases South East London is on one of the Heathrow approaches (not usually directly over Forest Hill).
When winds are reversed (the 30% case) we find ourselves on the landing route for City (not Heathrow), but usually (70%) they just come down the Thames. I have flown in from Amsterdam and taken this route - it is a great route as you get to see all of south London and turn over parliament (get a seat on the starboard side of the plane if making this approach).
as seen in this thread, there have been significant changes in flightpaths and in the frequency and accuracy with which they are used, so things are not how they were as recently as 2016. I moved here 20 years ago, and one point is that the height (2000 ft) of City Airport aircraft over this area, and the intensity of use of their flightpath has changed to adversely affect this area. Indication in one of the letters above is that Heathrow has changed too. I don’t recall anyone asking us about this or seeing an impact assessment on noise levels in SE London.
Macro ideas like new airports are not going to help, possibly in our lifetimes? however, some ideas:-
No doubt plenty of ideas out there, but the most important thing is for places to discuss these issues, and for the voice of residents to be heard and taken seriously through representative organisations when these things are planned. A sort of environmental impact assessment to be published when plans are being made, with consultation to borough councils, special interest organisations (like HACAN) and so on. With due respect to the mighty intellect of we SE23 contributors I doubt that we will find a simple solution here, but if we don’t chip away at the undesirable or unintended impact others have on our environment, our worlds will continue to smell of poo forever.
yes you are right about Heathrow on the westerly wind days I think. It’s not so cut and dried - some but not all landers go over us, and they join the final approach from both the north and the south. the flightradar 24 site shows this well. They do fly over FH quite high though- about 4000ft it seems, much higher than City flights.
I know what you mean about landing at City lovely views indeed but if you use the City flight tracker for an east wind day (randomly just looked up 13 July about 08.00) you will see the new (since 2016 that is) concentrated flight path that goes west over Gravesend, Dartford, Bexley, Sidcup, Forest Hill, Brixton, then north to Vauxhall and Southwark, then turns east to the airport. All City destination flights seem to follow this exactly, wherever they are from. The path is directly over Forest Hill which is why I am banging on about respite!
https://www.londoncityairport.com/home/page/track-aircraft-in-your-area#
Think I will give everyone a break and give this a rest for a while- will report back from the 26 Sept HACAN South East meeting if anything interesting happens.
A quick update. HACAN coordinated a public meeting in Kennington on 26 Sept at which most of the issues in this thread were voiced and more. There was support for a new body from London Assembly member Caroline Pidgeon who is deputy chair of the Mayor’s transport group.
This was followed up by an inaugural meeting of HACAN South East this week at which we set up the new working group, as a federated group to HACAN, with some experienced campaigning and financial support from HACAN and access to their very strong knowledge of the issues, key organisations and individuals involved in flightpath planning. HACAN SE will also take up a couple of places on the committee of HACAN.
The reason to set up HACAN South East is to bring a local focus to campaigning and lobbying to the London SE area, in particular recognising that HACAN tends to be focused on Heathrow issues, while London SE areas have both Heathrow and City flightpaths to think about.
I will continue to attend HACAN SE meetings- our next steps will include setting clear objectives for the group, and developing plans to influence decision and policy makers on flightpath issues that affect SE London. Part of what is needed will undoubtedly be keeping communities like ours informed of issues and upcoming opportunities to engage.
Aren’t there any local forums in Norfolk?
I am not sure, why?
Apologies to late sleepers yesterday as I roared overhead on BA92 around 0612.
I moved here in 2013 and it was rather sweet and quiet. Jump to present day and it’s absolutely awful. To the point I want to leave! My garden is no longer a place of sanctuary - we get fuel bommed and over the top noise pollution - and to top it off, it’s going to get worse if they want to extend Gatwick. Even though it should be Heathrow. Let’s see.
I have a similar tale to tell 
I wasn’t aware of gatwick flights in the neighbourhood. Any particular time?
what is that?
It’s my over exaggeration at the amount of planes there are now. The amount of pollution and noise.
As mentioned above, HACAN South East has been set up to influence authorities on London aircraft movements with South East London in mind. Particularly on Heathrow and City Airport landing path routes, frequency, concentration, heights and noise.
Here is a link to the new HACAN South East pages, setting out their standpoint.For any who are not quite sure where all the planes overhead are going the pages explain quite well I think.
Interested to hear what other local residents think to their arguments. Over to you.
http://hacan.org.uk/category/hacan-south-east/
“What we are campaigning for:
The voice of SE London to be heard loud and clear
An end to all-day flying with the introduction of multiple routes, rotated to give each community a meaningful break from the noise
An end to London City’s concentrated flight paths
Heathrow and London City to work together when planning flight paths
Aircraft to be as high as possible over the area
An end to night flights
No third runway at Heathrow”
[Extract from recent report - my bold]
"The overall number of flights is much the same as when we last surveyed the area 10 years ago but this masks significant changes in certain places: - the number of flights in the east of the region has increased dramatically: daily flights in the Brockley corridor grew by 135 between 2011 and 2017; Greenwich saw an increase of 165 a day.
flights numbers in the ‘southern corridor’ – which is focused on the southern runway – have risen significantly - increased concentration has meant more flights for particular communities.
We concluded many more planes are joining their final approach corridors further east than
before and are more concentrated within those corridors. We also found evidence of increased night concentration."
http://hacan.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Corridors-of-Concentration-Report.pdf
Here is a link to an action group with specific concerns for South East London
Call me a nerd, but I like watching the planes.
Ditto, even better when you point a nerdy app at them and see where there are coming from or going to, as well as their height and speed lol.
A friend lives near Heathrow, now that is slightly more of an issue for noise.
It’s been a while. Did you ever receive a reply?
Perhaps it’s just me going (even more) mad, but there seems to have been more aircraft noise than normal the past few evenings… wind direction maybe?
I have noticed it a bit more over the past few days for sure.
Also noticed a neighbour has a drone which makes frequent passes over the garden. Not sure which is more annoying, at least the planes have a purpose.
Can one of our plane spotters tell me the height at which the planes fly over Forest Hill please? If it varies, then the data for jets that have been flying over this afternoon say from 17.00 - 17.40
Thanks
yes, they go at 2100 feet over Catford, and by the time they fly west over the railway line at Forest Hill they are at 2000 feet before they turn north .
This is where you can see the planes, with a one hour delay. click on a plane at any point and you can see height data.
https://travislcy.topsonic.aero/
Is this exclusively City Airport traffic? Is there a way to include Heathrow traffic, or is that a separate link? The large jets I was noticing most of the afternoon were big planes, I think likely incoming to Heathrow.
Thanks for the link. I didn’t realise LCY was so busy!
It’s definitely got a lot worse - and tonight feels particularly noisy!
I never used to notice them but there are evenings now where I need to close the window to hear the TV. Tonight feels particularly noisy.
It doesn’t seem to be every plane that is that loud. Are some aircraft models worse than others? And if so, can’t anything be done to encourage airlines to buy and operate quieter ones into Heathrow/City?
And likely to get much worse with the planned expansion of City Airport
We rarely hear them sufficiently to make a difference to us (Honor Oak near Blythe Hill Fields). However the sirens drive me a bit nuts going up Brockley Rise! I’m kind of astonished it’s clearly having an impact on neighbours. We hear a few overhead in the garden at the weekend but never loud enough to wake us inside, unlike the bin lorries which regularly rattle me awake every Wednesday morning at 5.45. Interested to hear about the consultations though as it wouldn’t be great to have a lot more air traffic. How will the new runway at Heathrow impact on this do you all think?
Yeah I can really hear it tonight too. First time all year I’ve really noticed it. Maybe the air is a certain thinness or something (any experts out there?).
And I looked on flightradar and it’s not even that close. So it has to be the air.
4 posts regarding noisy/early bin collections were split to a new topic as they where off topic within this thread: Noisy/Early Refuse collection
Or the windows open?
There’s an element of that in noticing it more in the summer. But I have my windows open most evenings in the spring and summer and don’t notice it.
Do they rotate approaches slightly so that different people are impacted at different times? So this week, I’ll hear them most between 7 and 8pm, next week I might get 9 to 10pm. And my neighbours a few hundred metres away might get the 7 to 8 slot?
Last night they were flying directly over the house. Sometimes they seem to be a few degrees off which can make all the difference. I’d assumed that’s mostly to do with wind direction.
You’d think with all the noise we suffer we’d of got a bit of the RAF anniversary flyover.
But no.
Good point.
Assuming that the 3rd runway will take the same amount of traffic as each of the others, then we’ve got a 50% increase in aircraft noise a-comin!
The City (LCY) flights are around 2,000-2,500 feet. The Heathrow flights (LHR) more like 4,500. The vapour trails are around 36,000.
But the new runway will be further north so the approach won’t be over FH. I wonder if they’ll even use it for landings from the East as that would put more flights right over central London. I’m sure that’s all part of the consultation process docs etc.
I think you’re right. I’ve been totally wrong about the destination of the aircraft which fly directly overhead, thinking they were headed to Heathrow. But since looking at the tracking link provided by ThorNogson and others, it’s clear that the constant stream of aircraft over Forest Hill is heading to LCY.
There’s a another programme https://www.flightradar24.com/ which gives live data without the 1 hour delay, and shows a whole range of aircraft - London is incredibly busy, I don’t know why flights form Birmingham and Manchester need to fly over London on the way to various European destinations. Also a lot of private aircraft.
That would be a waste of “half” a runway. Most LHR landings are from the east (onto runways 27L and 27R) so there is zero chance of them not using 27North or whatever its designation will be.
They could use the existing ones for landings, the new one for take offs. Frankfurt have one like this.
Good point. That’ll teach me to post early on a Monday morning.
The last few days have been examples of this - as you correctly say, every incoming flight to LCY passes directly over Forest Hill. (BBC weather says we currently have an East North East breeze.) There have been outbound Heathrow flights audible e.g. over Bromley, but not directly overhead.
2000 ft does seem low (I think that’s why I mistakenly thought they were larger aircraft). but does anyone know how the elevation is measured, and how accurate the info is on the trackers that are available to us?
Looks like we might both be right (or wrong)
The easterly approach for the 3rd runway only comes in from the North. So that’s good.
In a nutshell, it’s probably because, unlike what it might look like on flight tracking maps, the sky has more than two dimensions. Planes from Birmingham and Manchester in particular will be much higher up when flying over London, so you wouldn’t be able to hear them and probably not see them on most days. And because most planes fly at lower levels in and around London as they start or land at one of the six nearby airports, I would have thought the sky higher up is comparatively “empty” so the two don’t affect each other.
That said, air traffic control above London is regarded as the busiest on most complex in Europe at least, if not the world.
The reasons other flights high up are routed above London is most likely to do with their predefined routes and fuel economics.
yes it does seem low, but I can’t see why City Airport’s own height data should be inaccurate to any significant extent.
You are right that we have had an extended period of easterly winds, so it has been much more noticeable how relentless the City flights are at just 2000 ft over Forest Hill. I have now counted a typical weekday’s City flights over Forest Hill for easterly wind operations on Friday 8th June. Starting at 6.30 in the morning with an inbound from JFK Forest Hill was overflown 142 times ending just after 10pm. The highest volume hours were 6-7pm (15) and 7-8pm (14). During this time, all flights followed the exact same route heading west over us, give or take just 100m or so deviation north or south.
You have also noted the Heathrow flights taking off - most near us go by at about 5000 ft or higher to the south of us. However, because they tend to be bigger than City planes, and are also climbing, the noise level is higher and therefore quite noticeable from further away. Combined with the City planes we have drawn a very short straw when the wind blows from the east the way things are.
This City Airport concentrated flightpath was introduced with no consultation with those it overflies in 2016.
The flightpath over us goes from south of Catford town hall, along just a few metres south of Stanstead Road, then directly over Horniman Gardens then on to Dulwich Common. Just two aircraft deviated from this route during that day, both flew a little further north, cutting Brockley Rise further north up towards HOP. Here is a map screenshot.
I don’t mean to suggest inaccuracy.
The Flightradar24.com site has two kinds of altitude measurement - “calibrated” and “GPS”. I don’t understand the difference between these and would like to know how they work. It is interesting that incoming LCY flights are around 4,000 ft at Northfleet/Gravesend, then 2,000 at Catford. The 2,000 is maintained from Catford, over Forest Hill and then Dulwich. Now, I assume that Forest Hill itself has an elevation of 300-400 ft above Catford. Does this mean, therefore, that all the aircraft are ascending on approach to Forest Hill, in order to clear Forest Hill at 2,000 feet? Or is the ‘calibrated’ height based on something like a nominal sea-level ground zero value? Hope that makes sense.
ah yes I see what you mean. I did have a little look around this and there are several ways that airlines express their height. The one I believe they are using in this case is 2000 ft above mean sea level (MSL). So at Catford (elevation about 100ft above sea level ) they are 1900 ft above the ground, while if you are standing on top of the Horniman ridge (300ft above MSL) they are just 1700ft above you. They maintain a constant level flight at 2000 ft above MSL throughout.
Another method to express height is height above ground level, which I believe they are not using in this case and would as you say mean they would have to ascend to clear the Horniman ridge by 2000ft.
One reason that City flights stay this low is to ensure height separation from the departing Heathrow planes heading east, and also from any arriving Heathrow planes circling in the landing stack at Biggin. Here is a map of easterly operations at Heathrow where you can see the departing planes in green which are at a much greater height than 2000ft when they get into Forest Hill airspace. You can also see arriving planes in red and the stack at Biggin. Planes leave that stack and head west before turning north and then landing at Heathrow.
We noticed it early in 2017. Is there an actual start date in 2016? Some posters (Rachel Dunlop) have the start as January 2017.
Today the altitude is 100ft lower, according to Flightradar24 they are maintaining 1,900 ft ‘calibrated altitude’ or ‘indicated altitude’.
Sorry for long post put FYI here is the corporate cut and paste BS line from City Airport after I complained about a particularly grating early awakening one Saturday. I didn’t bother responding as I I felt so powerless to affect change. I did join HACAN though.
London City Airport (LCA) takes its community responsibilities very seriously and the issue of aircraft noise is certainly of great importance to us. Your complaint has been logged under reference 119.2018
I would like to stress that London City airport has strict hours of operation, which are legally binding by its section 106 planning agreement with the London borough of Newham, these are as follow:
Between 06.30 and 22.00 hours on weekdays
Between 06.30 and 12.30 hours on Saturdays
Between 12.30 and 22.00 on Sundays
Between 09.00 and 22.00 hours on Bank Holidays
There are exemptions for aircraft using the Airport in an emergency and aircraft are permitted to take-off or land during the period of 30 minutes after the Airport closes for traffic where they have suffered unavoidable operation delays.
As well as a 24 hour closure period at weekends, an additional stringent restriction of a total of 2 aircraft movements between 06.30 and 06.45 hours and a further 4 between 06.45 and 07.00 hours is in place. Again this is legally binding under the airports section 106 planning agreement with Newham.
In recognition that aircraft operations can have an impact on London residents we have the most stringent noise management scheme of any airport in the UK, regulated by the London Borough of Newham (LBN). Examples of the steps we take to control noise are:
• Restricted use of aircraft types operating at LCA (i.e. only aircraft that can meet strict noise limits as per the noise categorisation system agreed with the LBN)
• Continuous operation of our Noise and Track Keeping (NTK) system
• Continued dialogue with airlines and aircraft operators aimed at adopting improved quieter operating procedures
• Maintained dialogue with local communities facilitated by the LCA Consultative Committee
LCA is a business airport and you will notice peak times. Most operations are in the morning between 7am and 10am and there is also a corresponding peak in the evening from 6pm to 8pm.
It is also worth mentioning runway usage at LCA. We have one runway at LCA, and depending on the direction the aircraft are departing, which is dictated by wind direction, the runway is given a different designator, 27 (westerly) or 09 (easterly).
Aircraft associated with LCA over your area are arrivals on Runway 09. Arrivals on Runway 09 typically fly east to west at a distance of approximately 6km south of the airport. Aircraft fly at an altitude of 2,000 feet at the point where they fly near your location.
The direction aircraft must take off to depart or approach the airport to land is dictated by the wind direction i.e. if there is a wind blowing predominantly from the East to the West at the airport then easterly operations will occur. As you might appreciate, the airport cannot control these elements so the direction aircraft will fly can change from day to day. Aircraft movement over parts of your area determined by wind and these areas will notice that when the airport is operating on Runway 27 (westerly) you will not see any aircraft using LCA over them. Recently the airport has been operating on runway 09 due to easterly winds and hence the reason you have noticed arriving aircraft into LCA.
Also, it is worth noting that only 30% of all departures/arrivals during a year are easterly operations (known as Runway 09 departures/arrivals) since the prevailing wind at the airport is predominantly from the West during the year. Therefore, 70% of flights from London City Airport do not fly near your area.
Finally, may I say again how sorry we are that you have been given cause to contact us, however I hope that this information has been of some assistance to you.
Kind regards
Harman
Harman Dhillon
Technical Operations Support Officer
Email:
Harman.Dhillon@londoncityairport.com
Website:
www.londoncityairport.com
That feels pretty accurate to me - although at times I feel that free line is a few minutes further north when they overfly my house. It is ridiculous that it could be changed without any consultation at all. Where did those plans go beforehand? Or did they previously fly high enough that we didn’t notice
The elevation is an excellent point; with us being on a hill, they’re lower than 2000 feet when they pass overhead which also contributes to the noise.
I’d be interested to know what they do on days with very light airs or where they are north/southerly winds. The wind is about an F1 N at the moment and they still seem to be coming across. Is that to try to help balance the 70% so they can keep that stat as low as possible for those affected on the other approach?
I believe City when they say they only begin operations at 6.30am - that means the earliest we should experience an arriving plane in the morning over Forest Hill is about 6.25 am, and that is borne out by my City incoming plane count of last Friday- and it would be an easterly wind day ( 30% of days). If you were woken before that, then it wold have been a Heathrow arrival flight on a westerly wind operations flight - they start earlier and have some night flight exemptions- this means we experience some much bigger Heathrow planes from 4.30/5am on occasion.
Many online sources confirm the City concentrated flight paths began in Feb 2016. I think it has taken me (and many others) a while to work out where the planes are going, coming from, how it varies according to wind direction, etc. This last couple of weeks seems to have been mostly east wind operations, giving us a consistent period of City arrivals which are specially noticeable when we have windows open and are outdoors.
not sure - there must be a clear operational process to make the decision but I haven’t found it anywhere yet. The 30%/70% is quoted widely. London City use it to defend against complaints from our area, saying we only get their arrival flights 30% of the time, ignoring the fact that we get all of their arrivals during that time (142 in one day last week) at a low altitude , along with some Heathrow take off noise to the south of us.
The other 70% of the time we get a proportion of Heathrow landings ( a whole different ball game) , from very early in the morning, which of course is nothing to do with City!
It seems the CAA is sitting on a report from City which required them to review the first year of operations of concentrated flight paths. Our main hope (re City flights) is that the CAA may require City to make some changes to offer respite to overflown communities. Which is something that Heathrow, to their credit, does.
It would be good to be clear about this. Wikipedia has a number of altitude measures
There are several types of aviation altitude:
* Indicated altitude is the reading on the altimeter when it is set to the local barometric pressure at mean sea level. In UK aviation radiotelephony usage, the vertical distance of a level, a point or an object considered as a point, measured from mean sea level ; this is referred to over the radio as altitude .(see QNH)[2]
* Absolute altitude is the height of the aircraft above the terrain over which it is flying. It can be measured using a radar altimeter (or “absolute altimeter”).[1] Also referred to as “radar height” or feet/metres above ground level (AGL).
* True altitude is the actual elevation above mean sea level. It is indicated altitude corrected for non-standard temperature and pressure.
* Height is the elevation above a ground reference point, commonly the terrain elevation. In UK aviation radiotelephony usage, the vertical distance of a level, a point or an object considered as a point, measured from a specified datum ; this is referred to over the radio as height , where the specified datum is the airfield elevation (see QFE)[2]
* Pressure altitude is the elevation above a standard datum air-pressure plane (typically, 1013.25 millibars or 29.92" Hg). Pressure altitude is used to indicate “flight level” which is the standard for altitude reporting in the U.S. in Class A airspace (above roughly 18,000 feet). Pressure altitude and indicated altitude are the same when the altimeter setting is 29.92" Hg or 1013.25 millibars.
* Density altitude is the altitude corrected for non-ISA International Standard Atmosphere atmospheric conditions. Aircraft performance depends on density altitude, which is affected by barometric pressure, humidity and temperature. On a very hot day, density altitude at an airport (especially one at a high elevation) may be so high as to preclude takeoff, particularly for helicopters or a heavily loaded aircraft.
These types of altitude can be explained more simply as various ways of measuring the altitude:
* Indicated altitude – the altitude shown on the altimeter.
* Absolute altitude – altitude in terms of the distance above the ground directly below
* True altitude – altitude in terms of elevation above sea level
* Height – altitude in terms of the distance above a certain point
* Pressure altitude – the air pressure in terms of altitude in the International Standard Atmosphere
* Density altitude – the density of the air in terms of altitude in the International Standard Atmosphere in the air
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altitude#In_aviation
It’s a bit exasperating, I want to just ask what is the distance from the aircraft to Horniman Gardens when it is directly overhead. It appears that “Absolute Altitude” would come closest to that. Flightradar24.com offers “calibrated altitude” and (for a fee) “GPS altitude”. Does anyone have expertise about this? Also does anyone have an authoritative source for the elevation of Forest Hill or One Tree Hill?
We’ve now got a change of wind direction to westerly, and the pattern of arrivals has changed. The first Heathrow flight I noticed went over at 5.58 - flying higher than LCY traffic, but these are jumbo jets so audible at 4.800 ft. At time of posting these are approx every three minutes.
yes so no City flights for our area today, both City and Heathrow moved overnight from easterly to westerly operations, and we experience the early morning wakeup courtesy of Heathrow.
a local Ordnance Survey map will give detail, but this online topographical map of London is a really nice resource and is probably accurate enough for your purposes - will give you a height for any point you click on.
Point of order.
Does Forest Hill actually exist as a geographic feature?
do you mean is there a hill actually called ‘Forest Hill’? I don’t know of one…
If the wind is westerly, which is prevailing, then approaches to LHR arrive from the East. The route changes so that it doesn’t impact the same areas all the time.
Having said that, there are days when we have LHR and LCY flights over Honor Oak! The Heathrow flights are turning at this point so that also makes them a bit noisier.
One issue that is interesting from this is the 2000ft approach. I can see how a separation is needed but am wondering now why by so much. Planes routinely pass each other vertically by 500ft. If the City approach was raised to 3000ft then this would significantly reduce noise especially from the prop planes. Not that I think it is excessive round here - you should try west London!
What do you call the hill that the Horniman sits on?
If planes are going over FH at 3000 ft, (instead of 2000) they would have a much steeper descent later as they come in to land. I suspect (but don’t know), that steeper descents are noisier in the locality of the airport, and are probably more dangerous, more difficult, less fuel efficient, and not as comfortable for passengers. Flight paths, and descents are very much a compromise of many different factors.
When planes take off from UK airports they generally ascend quite steeply, to reduce the noise pollution below. a long ascent is much more fuel efficient than a short steep one, but then flight at constant altitude is more efficient than rising or falling, so the quicker the plane is at height the better. Obviously all this, and many other factors taken into consideration.
Forest Hill is ‘a modern and artificial name, not in use until the 1790s’ It does not refer to an actual hill. It was originally a name given to the houses on the west side of Honor Oak Road. Only in after the 1840s did the name spread southward until, eventually, it covered not only London Road and Dartmouth Road, but the whole suburb .See John Coulter, ‘Sydenham and Forest Hill Past’, p.61
Agreed with all of that but they all must come down to the ground at some point! The actual final descent to the runway is clearly not happening over our area anyway, so 2000ft could be arbitrary but as you say more likely is considered. Just wondered about the reasoning.
Agreed. So what do you call the hill that the Horniman sits on?
‘Innominate Hill’?
I call the hill that the Horniman Museum sits on Horniman Hill.
Just to throw in a slightly controversial view here: I use Heathrow and City fairly frequently and I assume most people also do when they go on holiday. It’s like people complaining about pollution, except when they drive their diesels in town. if you live in London and fly, then you really have to accept that other people will also be doing it while you’re living under it. there’s really no escaping it.
Planes are getting much quieter and fuel efficient, and diesels are slowly on their way out. Not much you can do about it in the mean time.
London is about 1,500 km² in area. LHR/LCY flight paths probably only fly over a very small percentage of that. So when choosing a place to live in London it does seem a bit reasonable to expect that your house remain relatively clear of flight paths if they had not been underneath one previously. Or if there is to be a substantial change that there would be consultation on the matter.
Or the British government could be brave and create a new London hub airport with minimal impact to homes. But that’s another topic.
@clausy , I agree in part. Except that when I chose to buy my house, it wasn’t under a flight path.
But without any consultation, I’m now expected to just suck up 17,000 planes per year flying immediately overhead which has potential to impact the value of my home.
The airlines and airports are benefitting from increased capacity but are getting away Scot-free in terms of impact to others. Shouldn’t they have to pay some form of compensation for retrofitting noise proofing or paying for the reduction in property value?
The concentrated flight paths are not a way of sharing the pain, they allocate ALL the flights to rigid corridors so that ALL flights fly over exactly the same houses. No variation.
I’m not a pilot but I’m fairly sure that air corridors are there for safety reasons. If everything was random there’d be more danger of a mid air collision.
No-one is suggesting random airspace. With rigid corridors, there’s a single 100m wide channel down which all flights go causing everyone under it to bear all the flights.
Staggering them so there are three or four 100m corridors that are used in rotation for a few hours at a time means that 4 times as many people share a quarter of the pain but get respite the rest of the time.
I see a lot of planes going over, and I don’t really mind.
But then sometimes there will be one that makes a sudden loud droning noise, dropping in pitch over a few seconds.
Does anyone know what causes that? Is it the flaps being deployed? Or some kind of manoeuvre?
We’ve got the London City incoming back again now. Wind looks changeable over the next few days. If the BBC forecast is reliable, and I’ve understood how the fight patterns work, we’ll have the aircraft overhead tonight, not tomorrow, but back with us Sunday. Looks like an abrupt change in the middle of Monday.
This evening’s traffic has a slightly different pattern - the LCY flights are flying lower, and we also have Heathrow incoming flights - more directly overhead than usual - at 5,000.
The pattern of both LCY and LHR overflying Forest Hill continuing: often at the same time, one at 5,000 and the other around 1,700.
This is such fascinating reading. I am regularly woken up by the first LHR flight of the day and can’t get back to sleep. It’s such a pain. But I’m very interested in the whole LCY thing. Is there someone we should be complaining to?
When we bought in FH we checked the house out and visited and various times and days. It was apparent we would be living under a flight path but made our decision to buy on the area and convenience. The flights annoyed us to start but, like the noise of the south circular, soon faded into the background. We chose to live there so the only people we could complain about are ourselves for making the noise.
I might be perverse but not only does aircraft noise not bother me, I actually quite like it. Even at 5 a.m. People coming and going, going to and coming from interesting places…All’s right with the world, it makes me feel. I was born and brought up in the area, so maybe that’s a factor. I also think, unlike most other local annoyances, it will probably be impossible to do anything about it, so best to come to terms with it.
I’m less bothered about the Heathrow flights at 5000ft. Those have been around for years and aren’t particularly obtrusive unless it’s very quiet. It’s only really the big jumbos that you hear and they tend not to be back to back. Those ones are relatively easily zoned-out.
The City ones at 2000ft are hard to miss if you are unfortunate enough to live directly under their flight path. They can be up to 15 noisy planes an hour and, unless you have great double-glazing, are hard to ignore. I suspect if you live 500m or so either side, they seem more similar to the Heathrow ones in terms of noise which is why there’s such a difference in opinion as to disruption and inconvenience.
If you bought your house more than 18 months ago, then there was no choice in the matter - as before that, these properties weren’t on a flight path!
Plane spotters will have noticed that tonight we have the winds that maximise impact of arriving flights over our area. London City are on easterly operations meaning they land from the west - ie following the concentrated flight path flying west over Horniman gardens in the usual procession at 2000 ft.
But the special treat is that Heathrow are following westerly operations, meaning they land from the east. This gives us a regular but less frequent supply of larger jets from the Biggin Hill stack going over at higher altitude - about 5000 feet, on a less concentrated pattern, joining the procession over the Thames towards LHR.
This doubling up occurs when winds are light and from the east - Heathrow and City change their operation directions at different wind speeds.
For those who think nothing can be done, or who like it, fair play to you. For those who think differently then both HACAN at a national level, and Plane Hell Action (for SE London) aim to pick the moments when people might best make a contribution by engaging in consultations (over future flight path planning for example), complaining eg to City to add to the noise we make about concentrated flight paths, and to MPs and CAA etc, drawing their attention to the fact that City and Heathrow do not work together effectively to prevent doubling up like tonight, and could work together to share necessary noise over suburban London in an even manner.
I didn’t really notice the noise much. Lived in various parts of London (here for 2 and a bit years), all under flights paths of some sort. However in the last couple of weeks I have noticed the flight noise more. Trying to figure out if it is because the wind is coming from a certain direction or I have been reading too much of this thread and now noticing noises I didn’t before!
Thanks ThorNogson for those useful groups. I’ll take a look and see what they suggest. I did eventually find a form on LCY’s webpage to complain about aircraft noise but it’s not exactly easy to come across. They do have to report the number of complaints so it’s worth doing so.
They have been well below 2,000 in the last few days. The Flightradar24 frequently gives 1,600 as the altitude. If 1,600 is the altitude above sea level, then we can subtract another 300 (the altitude of Forest Hill itself) and we arrive at 1,300 as the altitude of inbound LCY aircraft overflying Forest Hill currently.
very interesting - just had a look at a few flights overflying us on the way to London City around 7 - 7.30 am this morning. if you use Travislcy, the City airport tool, to track a flight it shows 2000ft altitude over Forest Hill for pretty much every flight. If you use Flightradar then the same aircraft at the same time show at 1624ft (‘calibrated altitude’). I have no idea why these are different.
The problem with this thread is that I never used to hear the planes and now I can’t hear anything else when I am in the garden!
For those residents minded to complain, this is the direct link to City airport’s website:
https://www.londoncityairport.com/corporate/Environment/Environmental-Complaints-Enquiries
I read that Sadiq Khan voiced his opposition to concentrated flight paths last year - anyone hear any update on whether he has voiced his concerns more recently and/or actually tried to do something about it?
It’s funny - I really don’t notice any planes to an annoying degree.
Was working from home yesterday and on a phone call with the windows shut - chap on the other end of the call says “Oh it sounds like you’ve got a plane going overhead”. So yes, I’d say they’re loud and intrusive!
Hi, the noise issue will only get worse if the proposed expansion of Heathrow goes unchallenged so if you agree please sign n share.
Are you directly under the LCY flight path?
I’m not sure - we’re on Devonshire Road, between woodcombe crescent and ewelme Rd.
Then yes. You are directly under it.
the June update from HACAN East says the long delayed CAA report into City Airport concentrated flight paths is due out very soon.
'The report by the Civil Aviation Authority into City Airport’s controversial concentrated flight paths is still not out. It was expected last summer. The CAA’s website now says they hope to publish it before the end of this month. The reason for the delay is not clear. The CAA is required to assess the first year of operation of the new flight paths which were concentrated in February 2016 and to make recommendations.
The new concentrated flight paths caused a four-fold rise in complaints to City Airport. People have also written in large numbers to the CAA. ’
Both Heathrow and City flight paths over SE23 today. This afternoon seems to be a flight at least every 5min. Took some approximate noise readings with phone app:
Heathrow flights (at higher altitude) 50-55db
City flights (at lower altitude) 60-65db
Certainly the City flights are loud enough to drown out the radio and conversation.
The LCY flights seem to be flying in lower than usual, at around 1,700 or below.
The Heathrow flights also seem lower today (according to Flightradar24) one just flown over Brockley Road at 3,725 ft
It’s been non stop over Honor Oak from 6am to 6.30am this morning, and loud enough to wake me through double glazing. Miserable.
Take it as a positive it’s only going to get worse if the Heathrow expansion actually gets built in post brexit Britain which I seriously doubt. however in my past used to sell triple glazing which combines the benefits of secondary and double glazing in one package at an extra cost if you qualified the necessary face value.
Spoke with a contact at HACAN (national campaigning group on aircraft noise) today about the different heights quoted on different tracking systems for exactly the same aircraft. According to HACAN, the aircraft altitude data monitored by Flightradar is not as reliable as the altitude data shown on Travislcy (for City Airport flights) and Webtrak (for Heathrow flights) which use Air Traffic Control systems as their data source and quote height above Mean Sea Level (MSL).
Flightradar24 themselves say that not all aircraft are equipped with their data source, ADS-B (so these aircraft will not show on their system) and that ‘ADS-B is a relatively new technology under development, which means that today it’s rarely used by Air Traffic Control (ATC).’
If correct, then that means London City flights showing as 2000 ft on WebTrak and Travislcy actually pass over Devonshire Road (150 ft above MSL) 1850 ft above the ground, and over Horniman gardens (300ft above MSL) at 1700ft, that’s just 500 metres, above the ground.
Hope that made sense to someone!
This morning (1st Aug 2018) and yesterday, the disturbance (from 05.00) is from incoming Heathrow aircraft e.g.BA74 from Lagos
This is the flightpath pattern from Heathrow for planes through July - I have marked Forest Hill station on the map. Using their Webtrak MyNeighbourhood tracker.
The green takeoffs, fly to the south of us , mostly along the south edge of Crystal Palace Park, then to Penge and Bromley. By the time they reach due south of us they are at 5500 ft or higher, and there is just a rumbling noise to observe.
The red arrivals (on 70% of days of the year) are creating significant noise levels in the corridor shown - as they turn around Forest Hill from the south west and the south east. These are also flying lower, typically at between 4300 and 5000 feet and descending.
It looks as though in our area Honor Oak Park gets the worst of it, as planes fly further north they are also lower and noisier. But I get woken by the early ones from 5am flying over Wynell Road/Perry Rise.
Very interesting map. Personally speaking it’s the City Airport flights which operate on a highly concentrated flight path and come over at significantly lower altitude (<2000ft) which cause me the most disturbance. This screen grab shows the concentrated flight path they use - it never deviates by more than about 100m so the same people are affected all the time. Concentrated flight path was introduced in 2016 and I understand there has been a >500% increase in noise complaints to City Aiport since then.
yes indeed, on 30% of days City flights are relentless- in June, see post no 112, further up this thread I mentioned a count of 142 aircraft in one day between 6.30am and 10pm with a max of 15 in one hour.
On the days we don’t get the City arrivals we get the Heathrow arrivals, bigger planes, higher altitude, starting at 5am.
On extra special bonus days, when the wind is from the east at less than 5 knots, we get both sets of arrivals- because Heathrow and City change their runway operations directions at different wind speeds.
My considered view is that anyone concerned about this should be lobbying hard for a change to concentrated flight paths. There could be more than one of them - giving respite when it is not your turn
They could fly 1000 ft higher for longer and still maintain 1000ft separation from Heathrow craft.
Concentrated flight paths could run north of the river as well as south, giving more respite options.
One immediate place to lobby is City Airport who have a consultation open on their noise management strategy 2018-23. The draft on their website makes no mention of concentrated flight paths as far as I can see, despite the massive increase in complaints.
Their only concession that noise is an issue away from the immediate surrounds of their airport is that they say City bound planes are becoming quieter, and that excessive noise from individual craft will be fined.
More information about this consultation here. We have till 5th September to make some noise about this ourselves.
https://www.londoncityairport.com/corporate/noise-and-track-keeping-system/noise-action-plan
Yep I have already previously complained to City Airport and got the standard reply (which was published somewhere earlier on this thread). The CAA report into City Airport concentrated flightpaths is due any time now (it’s already overdue). I understand from the HACAN East that there seems to be cross-party support at a London assembly level against concentrated flight paths, but whether or not that will make any difference to CAA or whether those politicians will actually take up the mantle remains to be seen.
Thanks for this. I will definitely respond. I have been in touch with London City about noise, and in all the correspondence with them, this consultation was never mentioned!
Thanks for sharing the consultation link - I’ve also now sent my response.
I waved as I flew over yesterday afternoon, given it was a flight to Stanstead I don’t think I disturbed anyone
I’ve sent my response too. Thanks for sharing this.
I’m not intending to be lazy (I am), and I’ve printed off the consultation to review… but would anyone wish to share their submission for minor cribbing purposes?
I don’t think there’s too much formality to the consultation - knowing how these things operate you really only need to indicate your opposition to concentrated flight paths (if indeed that is your position) so that when they collate the responses you go in the “Opposes concentrated flight path” statistics.
In case it helps:
I heard this morning that the CAA are now saying their much delayed response report covering the first year of City Airport concentrated flight paths will come out in early September. Hope it’s not a complete whitewash…
I’m collating some information for HACAN which I hope will help with their response and have been looking through what has been happening locally. Below is a draft summary only, but the information is accurate to the best of my knowledge and there are points here that, added to @anon17648011’s excellent summary, can be made by anyone who wants to contribute to the consultation.
o Noise from arriving City Airport aircraft combined with arriving Heathrow aircraft blights thousands of South East London homes, with no respite.
o City Airport’s air superhighways, from Feb 2016, have resulted in a perfect storm of constant daily aircraft noise for many South London residents.
o Respite means scheduled relief from aircraft noise for a period of time. There are community noise blackspots in Lewisham that receive no respite from 6.30am to 10pm nearly every day of the year.
Summary
This report looks at the impact of aircraft noise on residents of South East London, focused particularly on SE23, Forest Hill, Honor Oak Park and Sydenham, a densely populated area in the west of Lewisham. It draws on public sources of information from London City Airport and London Heathrow Airport.
When the west wind blows, this area has been overflown by a proportion of Heathrow arrivals for many years. Noise from these aircraft, on about 70% of days of the year begins as early as 5am and continues through the day until late in the evening. The flights are not on a concentrated line, but around 160 per day pass within a mile radius of Forest Hill station.
When the wind changes to light easterly, up to 5 knots, Heathrow continues this routine. But London City airport changes direction to a concentrated flight path – a kind of air superhighway- where some 150 planes overfly the South Circular road at low altitude from east to west, just 1700m above one of London’s best known parks, Horniman Gardens.
The combined effect of both airports on these days is a maximum of around 310 planes over SE23 homes per day. Using online airport tracking sources, the minimum daily is estimated at either 150 City bound or 160 Heathrow bound, depending on the wind strength and direction. There are no days of residential respite.
With each flight at 70 - 75 decibels conversation beneath has to stop, and enjoyment of any local outdoor space and gardens is badly disturbed. Before February 2016, London City planes used to be disbursed over a wider area, but now they fly over exactly the same homes at exactly the same altitude with no residential respite.
City Airport and Heathrow Airport make no acknowledgement of the combined impact of their two operations, operate different tracking and planning systems, obscuring our ability to make sense of how together they are creating an environment with community noise blackspots and no respite.
Using London SE23 as an example, this report aims to make clear to policymakers and the two airports what has gone wrong through introduction of concentrated flightpaths (City Airport) and separate development of the two London airport flight paths. It is time to repair the damage that has been done by taking coordinated action:-
• ending London City Airport concentrated flightpaths or redeveloping them to create fair distribution and coordinated respite for all London residents.
• compelling City Airport and Heathrow to work together on flightpath planning, to prioritise and jointly provide noise respite to residents currently taking an unfair burden of their joint aircraft noise.
• eliminate community noise blackspots where residents endure the noise operations of both airports, sometime simultaneously.
• acknowledge the problem within institutions such as the two airports, Department for Transport, the Civil Aviation Authority, NATS and local authority environmental health departments; ensure they take a much stronger and coordinated planning and regulatory lead to alleviate constant aircraft noise disturbance without residential respite.
It may be a long game, influencing flight path changes but here is another opportunity to contribute. the All Party Parliamentary Group on Aviation (170 members, I wonder if our MP Ellie Reeves is on it) is to hold an enquiry into how the Civil Aviation Authority manages our airspace. The Chair, Grant Shapps is making some encouraging noises about the lack of any ‘democratic or Parliamentary filter’ for CAA decisions. So an opportunity for those who have an opinion and some energy to write to him about, for example concentrated flight paths over SE23, lack of residential respite, lack of coordination of respite between City and Heathrow and so on.
More about this here.
http://www.generalaviationappg.uk/parliamentary-group-announces-inquiry-into-civil-aviation-authority-airspace-change-process/
Those who have responded to the London City consultation - has ayone received an acknowledgement?
Just an acknowledgement, no reply as yet
A response literally just arrived! Very very lengthy, zero help that I can see, think it was posted on 18th June by @ThorNogson but most important line is "There is an opportunity for you to contact the CAA direct on this matter with any statements or objections, by emailing infoservices@caa.co.uk "
I would be happy to be involved with any action to help improve air traffic noise in se23 and SE26. I was woke up this morning at 5.30am with constant noise of planes above.
Many thanks to Tim Walker, a local resident, who has done an immense job on monitoring and collating evidence:
" … an important report by Forest Hill resident Tim Walker outlining what happens when London City and Heathrow airports combine to create community noise hotspots in south east London."
http://www.hacaneast.org.uk/news/
“South East London – No Respite from aircraft noise”
Why a local resident has to do this work, rather than the salaried Environmental Health Officers who are supposed to be monitoring noise problems and looking after our well-being …
This is a fantastic report - what would be useful is if someone could summarise in one post what people can do to take action now - including details of any e-mail addresses or online forms - I assume this should include at least City Airport, Civil Aviation Authority and relevant local politicians and London Assembly Representatives?
Great idea, very much a personal view, but it’s a start, and maybe others could add to this by editing it as new opportunities come along…
Aircraft Noise over SE23 - Actions with current deadlines
When it comes to what to say, make good use of the campaigners who are trying to keep abreast of the issues - there are some suggested sources at the end.
1. City airport noise management plan consultation 2018-23, by 5th September.
Why? Because this is a once in 5 years plan they are obliged to consult on.
Email to :- environment@londoncityairport.com
What to say?
HACAN East is on top of the issues and has made a response. You could use or back up their arguments. Simply repeating the points you agree with is fine, your voice adds priceless weight to the campaign.
You could add that their consultation is not nearly wide enough, and should be widely publicised across areas affected by their low altitude concentrated flight paths (Southwark, Lewisham, Bexley, Kent all at under 2000feet).
For SE23 specific arguments see below.
2. Grant Schapps MP, soon – they are compiling terms of reference now
Why?
Because he will be chairing a Parliamentary enquiry into the CAA’s airspace change process. A chance to let him/them know issues that concern residents - get our voices heard. They are currently compiling terms of reference.
What to say.
Things about concentrated flight paths, lack of coordination of respite between airports, and the need for noise respite to be included in flight path planning.
Actions with no current deadline
1. Write a complaint about noise to City Airport
Why? Every complaint is logged and has to be reported on. Every complaint adds pressure to respond and take action. You will get a fairly standard response.
What to say . Use your own experience of City planes and how they affect you. Maybe complain that they need to work with Heathrow on flight noise issues, areas like ours are overflown by both sets of planes at the same time.
email: environment@londoncityairport.com
2. Write to your MP
Why? A bulging postbag on aircraft noise lets your MP know that the issue is important, and helps him/her prioritise, familiarise with the issues and be prepared to intervene when the opportunity arises – eg on issues to do with concentrated flight path noise, the CAA, NATS and the 2 airports.
What to say?
Let your MP know of your own concerns about Aircraft noise. Express the hope that he/she shares your concerns. Point your MP towards arguments you agree with – see info sources below.
There are 3 Lewisham MPs.
ellie.reeves.mp@parliament.uk
(Ellie voted against the 3rd runway)
vicky.foxcroft.mp@parliament.uk
janet.daby.mp@parliament.uk
3. Write a complaint about noise to Heathrow Airport
Why? Every complaint is logged and has to be reported on. Every complaint adds pressure to respond and take action. You will get a fairly standard response.
What to say? Apart from impact on your life, something about the need for respite in our area, and the need for joint respite planning with City Airport.
noise@heathrow.com
4. Write a complaint about flight paths to the Civil Aviation Authority
Why? Complaint numbers will help CAA realise that they should not just be accountable to airlines and businesses. They are about to be hauled in front of a Parliamentary enquiry.
What to say? Your experience of concentred City flight paths and being overflown by City and Heathrow planes at the same time. Ask that CAA take responsibility for planning residential respite from aircraft noise.
Directorate of Airspace Policy, K6 G7, CAA House, 45-59 Kingsway, London WC2B 6TE
Email: complaints@caa.co.uk
5. London Assembly
The Mayor of London joined in the clamour against concentrated flight paths (July 2017), but not his top priority.
Caroline Pidgeon (chair LA transport group) has campaigned against concentrated flight paths.
Caroline Russell (LA member) is also a strong ally in aircraft noise campaigning.
Information Sources
I do not presume to tell anyone what to say, but to save time here are some suggestions.
In its 2018-23 Noise Management Plan, London City should:-
Commit to informing all residents within the 51 and 54 contour areas – and their elected representatives - of the latest airport developments on a regular basis
confirm whether it can commit to the retention of the existing cap and operating hours through the years 2018 to 2023
Look again at the concentrated flight paths, with a view to providing respite for communities
Commit to doubling the number of noise monitors
Explore the possibility of London City aircraft flying higher
Spell out cooperative working with Heathrow
Summary conclusions
(declaration of interest- I wrote this report)
This is great, thank you. I have e-mailed Ellie Reeves (in addition to the complaints I had already sent to CAA and London City). Please can I urge anyone else who is at all concerned by this to send emails to each of CAA, London City and their MP. It only takes a couple of mins and the same e-mail can be used for each. To make it super easy I’ve pasted a template below which people can adapt and personalise:
Dear [ ]
Are you aware of the concerns among residents of South East London, particularly in Lewisham, regarding the ever increasing aircraft noise caused by the combined effects of City Airport and Heathrow flight paths?
In particular, the introduction by City Airport of concentrated flight paths in 2016 has caused utter misery for residents living under these flight paths who are now subjected to incessant noise from low flying (often <1500 feet above ground level) large commercial jets between 0600-2300. The noise is loud enough to interrupt sleep and conversations and as many as 150 planes a day (not including the Heathrow traffic) overfly a specific route each day, meaning the same residents are affected without respite. When combined with the up to 160 daily flights into Heathrow which pass over Lewisham it is clear that SE London now has an aircraft noise problem that needs to be recognised and addressed.
You will be aware that noise intrusion has been demonstrated to have negative health effects, particularly on mental health, stress, anxiety etc. Furthermore, it is a breach of individuals’ human rights, specifically:
Article 8 ECHR - Right to respect for one’s private and family life and home.
Protocol 1 Article 1 ECHR - Right to peaceful enjoyment of one’s property
A local resident has recently prepared a comprehensive report on the issue of aircraft noise in Lewisham (link below). Please would you review the full report and let me have your response. I have pasted the key findings of the report below for convenience.
Full report - http://hacan.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/No-aircraft-noise-respite-for-London-SE23-August-2018.pdf
Yours sincerely,
some excellent news to report. I learned today that a subcommittee at City Airport have decided to install one of their mobile noise monitors somewhere in Forest Hill. I understand their awareness of noise issues in Forest Hill is at least partly because of the number of complaints/letters coming from our area. So a big pat on the back for everyone, especially SE23 Lifers, who has picked up their keyboards and written to City Airport.
A small step forward, but quite a significant one, because it will be the first time they have monitored noise outside the immediate vicinity of the airport in Newham.
There are still a few days left for more of us to join the SE23 fanfare, by commenting on City Airport’s Noise Management Plan consultation, see @anon17648011 excellent post above this one. Deadline is 5th Sept.
Great news! And thanks @ThorNogson for leading the way on this. I think it’s essential the noise monitor is installed somewhere on the concentrated City Airport flight path otherwise the results won’t be representative.
Just as a further update I got a nice response from Ellie Reeves MP to my letter and she confirmed she was writing to the Transport Secretary to pass on mine and other local complaints and seek an explanation.
Thank you to everyone for the advice here. I have added my voice to my MP, City, Heathrow and CAA
I do hope this makes the difference we all want (was rather embarrassed having our first guest stay in the spare room last night when I realised how many planes we are getting early morning)
But I like planes. I can’t believe you lot are all going to spoil my plane spotting hobby. 
I do however remember living in Richmond 20 years ago and the 10pm Concorde used to come over so you’d miss the news headlines and the window frames would rattle.
Anyway I do honestly like the planes but I really don’t see why Heathrow/City can’t co-ordinate so they don’t have both overhead at the same time. If they’re landing at Heathrow from the East then they can land at City from the East too. Why is that so hard. And it somehow bugs me to see 2 planes in the sky in relatively the same place.
I think 3 inbound Heathrow flights flew over as I wrote this.
thank you @thornogson for all your efforts
I think this must be a pretty localised problem. We live off Thorpewood Avenue, above FH library, and have had no special issues with aircraft noise recently.
This is partly the point: the introduction of concentrated flight paths by City Airport mean all their inbound planes fly low over the same narrow corridor (essentially following the south circular from Catford) which for Forest Hill means that if you live to the north of the station you are subjected to unrelenting plane noise, whereas if you live to the south of the station it’s probably less noticeable.
I think everyone here accepts that living in London involves accepting noise as a daily part of life; the question is whether aircraft flight paths should be spread out so that everyone endures a bit of noise but with everyone also getting respite (which was the case until 2016) or whether the airports can concentrate flight paths subjecting the same people to unrelenting noise (post 2016).
Had an enjoyable sunny afternoon at Horniman Gardens yesterday afternoon - but in just the short time I was there, over 20 London City aircraft flew exactly the same line directly overhead, almost exactly 400m above our heads (using City’s own data). They are quite noisy (I have measured some at over 70 decibels) for about 30 seconds each time.
I realise many people don’t notice, or don’t mind. But City Airport is ambitious and plans to expand, their planes are going to get bigger and more frequent. Is this just not too low for aircraft to fly over SE23?
Given the constraint on planes from City Airport and their need to be able to avoid the QE2 bridge that seems slightly unrealistic. More frequent, sure. Bigger, not so much.
really they will be - see below quote from their Noise Management Plan. They say they will be quieter, but then again they seem to think flying 400m above our heads in a concentrated flight path is ok…
In July 2016 LCY’s planning application The City Airport Development Plan (CADP) (LBN ref: 13/01228/FUL) was granted planning permission for eight new aeroplane parking stands – to accommodate larger yet quieter next generation aircraft – a parallel taxiway to optimise runway capacity during peak operating hours and a terminal extension to ensure that LCY’s convenience and speed-oftransit propositions are maintained.
Not sure if I understand the issue, if they are quieter, which is the way general aviation is going, then it matter not how many fly over.
The frequency of overflights is one issue, but only when they create intrusive noise disturbance on the ground. I have few objections to silent aircraft. Combined with electric cars we can perhaps look forward to a more peaceful future.
I still think 400 m is too low - maybe there’s a safety issue to explore there too.
Dont normally comment about Air-planes flying over, But i must say in the last 2-3 days they have been a Pain ? Seem to be as early as 5am to right through the day, Particularly Saturday as i was in the Garden for a few hours.
Every time the same route it appeared coming over our house East -West . VERY LOW??
Give use a break that time of a morning to have a weekend lay in ?
If its not the Planes ,Its the Milkman, or the Builders or in our street the Bloody Dustman on a Tuesday ? Now you’ve really got me RANTING…
Thanks very much to you for this. We’ve written to Vicky Foxcroft, London City Airport and Heathrow as suggested.
@bigmacca1 Yes those low flying East-West planes are the City Airport concentrated flight path planes that I’ve been banging on about. They follow a precise route every time at low altitude which means that if you’re under the flight path on given days you will get over 100 flights passing less than 500m above you. Feel free to add your voice to the complaints to City Airport, the CAA and your local MP as detailed in posts above.
Yep. And the city airport cut and paste response is that it only happens 30% of the time (due to winds). But during that 30% its non-stop.
And as I pointed out to them, 30% is still 120 days per year of 100 planes so 12000 plus planes!
3% is a nuisance anomaly. 30% is a significant minority.
and here’s some new information. London City Airport and Heathrow Airport operate separate tracking systems, making it difficult to document the noise impact of their combined operations. But using some runway usage data obtained from London City Airport combined with observations from Heathrow’s online tracking system I have found the following for the period 16 June – 16 July 2018, ie summer when we are outdoors or windows open.
On 18/31 days, up to 150 City airport arrivals overflew south London along the concentrated flight path, that is on 58% of days, not the 30% usually quoted by London City (I suppose that’s an annual average). They overflew parts of Kent and Bexley at under 2000 feet, then residential areas of Lewisham, Southwark and Lambeth mostly around 1700 - 1800 feet.
In addition, on 7 of these 18 days, that is 23% of days in this month of observation, Heathrow arrivals overflew many of the same parts of Lewisham, Lambeth and Southwark in a slightly more dispersed pattern at around 3500 feet at the same time, starting from 5 am.
On 13/31 days we only had Heathrow arrivals but no City ones.
So no days at all for SE23 with no arrivals flying overhead and the double airport arrivals overflights are rather more frequent than I had thought.
sorry, just had to tell someone…for those whose eyes are glazing over. you can always mute this thread!
I also just emailed City back in their response to my complaint - it’s now 23.31 and within the last four minutes have had four loud overflying aircraft, at least two of which must have been from City given the height and location of the sound. It’s getting unbearable. Aircraft noise is now loud enough to routinely wake me up at 5.45 and are now still regularly and noisily overhead at 23.30 - so no respite for SE23ers living in the north of the postcode. City aircraft must be starting earlier than they are allowed to and also landing later than allowed as they are clearly flying overhead at times which do not comply with their stated overflying hours. I am just exhausted and want some sleep. Even closing our good double glazing doesn’t keep the sound out.
The amended email to City, which we will also amend and send to Heathrow and local MPs:
We would also like you to take the following into account when considering this complaint and your proposals for joint discussions with Heathrow.
Between 16 June and 16 July 2018, ie summer when we are outdoors or windows open .On 18/31 days, up to 150 City airport arrivals overflew south London along the concentrated flight path, that is on 58% of days, not the 30% usually quoted by yourselves at London City (I suppose that’s an annual average). They overflew parts of Kent and Bexley at under 2000 feet, then residential areas of Lewisham, Southwark and Lambeth mostly around 1700 - 1800 feet. Given our home is at over 700ft above sealevel, that’s 1000 foot overhead which is very loud indeed even for the smaller aircraft London City operate.
In addition, on 7 of these 18 days, that is 23% of days in this month of observation, Heathrow arrivals overflew many of the same parts of Lewisham, Lambeth and Southwark in a slightly more dispersed pattern at around 3500 feet at the same time, starting from 5 am. On 13/31 days we only had Heathrow arrivals but no City ones. So no days at all for SE23 with no arrivals flying overhead and the double airport arrivals overflights are much more frequent than your sound assessments seem to take into account.
We moved here in 2014 and since the concentration of flightpaths have experienced genuine misery in summer months. Living in a basement flat, the need for ventilation and therefore keeping windows open is more important for family health than trying to keep noise down, something which simply wasn’t an issue before.
It doesn’t feel like this complaint is being taken particularly seriously by London City - your siting of a noise beacon in Dulwich, which is much lower and not on the direct flightpath as we are and as far as we understand it also not overflown by Heathrow, suggests that you seek to find that the noise is not too bothersome.
We love to fly and do so frequently. This isn’t the complaint of people who think there should be no flights over a densely populated city. But the lack of respite from the joint operations between yourselves and Heathrow have made the narrow corridor in which we live extremely uncomfortable. We have raised this with our MP and HACAN and hope that City will consider a widening of flightpaths over a broader area in order to prevent the misery we are currently living with given the noise pollution created by the joint impact of both City and Heathrow. Please append this issue to our current complaint issue as we would appreciate a further response.
great letter.
re last nights flights after 11pm I heard them too, I’ve had a quick look to see what they could have been. They were not City flights - City changed to landing from the east at about 21.40, so looks like nothing over us from them after that time.
But Heathrow were landing from the west, and therefore taking off to the south of SE23, just south of Crystal Palace Park at 6-8000 feet. They passed Crystal Palace at 23.04, 23.12, 23.15 23.20 and 23.22 and that tallies with your observations. these are big, heavy aircraft departing and climbing rapidly, making them noisy. I think Heathrow would regard them as far away from us not to be troubling. But if you have your head down, windows open and facing in their general direction as I do you would say different.
Here’s a screenshot from Heathrow’s tracking site at 23.14 showing a couple of these aircraft.
You are doing a great job Nogson.
a man needs a hobby…
They are coming up from the South and turning to head West directly over my house this morning. right now. Great big buggers, one after the other. Had to come in from the garden. Its hellish.
Just had a note from LCY - the consultation is now closed, lets see what it brings.
Thank you for your feedback on London City Airport’s Noise Action Plan 2018-2023. The consultation has now ended and all responses are being fully considered. A summary of how feedback has been incorporated into the document will be made available as an appendix to the final version, which will be published on the website later this year.
I finally had a response, more than a month after sending my comments - “all responses are being fully considered” - we’ll see.
Had my acknowledgement today too. I have learned informally that City received 37 responses to the consultation. Their initial look at these indicated that the top three concerns were 1. the concentrated flight paths 2. the heights of aircraft, especially in SE London and 3. a desire for more noise monitors.
37 seems a low response - but not surprising since the consultation was hidden in a corner of their website. I think that SE London has made an impact though! From what people have said on here a fair number of SE23 Lifers responded.
Good that we are making ourselves heard. Whether they change anything from the draft is the measure though isn’t it? Is the consultation a weary regulatory duty imposed on them by Newham, or is City Airport really interested in addressing community concerns?
Meanwhile I have been invited to give a presentation to the Heathrow Community Noise Forum next week (following publication of my report, ‘No aircraft noise respite for London SE23’). An opportunity to put our points across in another influential place - the forum is chaired by a Heathrow director, and is attended by CAA, NATS and other air industry organisations. Don’t think City Airport attends though.
Incredible amount of hard work gone in on your part Tim.
Good luck with your presentation to the Heathrow Community Noise Forum.
Relentless noise this morning from 4.30ish. Really hope all these efforts bear fruit.
I asked for info about the consultation to go on Lewisham Council website … as you would expect, I’m still waiting to hear about that, after the consultation has closed.
Quite sure this event did not happen over our airspace - but it looks so very dangerous.
Despite the encounter between the aircraft being visually spectacular, it seems nothing dangerous has occurred as it has all got something to do with “Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum”
BALPA says, 'It appears in this video that there is at least 1,000ft vertical separation, in which case this situation is perfectly safe.
As mentioned in an earlier post I wrote to Ellie Reeves MP on this issue. She’s kindly passed on the response she received from Baroness Sugg. Sadly the response is predictably generic and unhelpful and doesn’t give me any confidence that local concerns will ever receive genuine consideration… but for what it’s worth I’ve pasted the text below:
"Thank you for your email of 24 August to the Secretary of State, enclosing an email from your constituent, about aviation noise over your constituency. I am replying as Minister responsible for aviation.
As you will be aware from my letter to you dated 24 July, the changes your constituent is referring to are part of Phase 1a of the London Airspace Management Programme (LAMP) to modernise the UK’s airspace…
Lewisham is impacted by aircraft arriving at Heathrow when the airport is on westerly operations (around 70% of the time, and wind direction dependent). Aircraft arriving at Heathrow are required by Air Traffic Control (ATC) to join the airport’s Instrument Landing System (ILS) at least 7 nautical miles (nm) from the airport, and at a height of at least 2,500 feet. The ILS is essentially a navigational beam that extends east and west of Heathrow’s runways and it is used to safety guide aircraft to the touchdown point.
The international standard ILS glide path angle is 3° and, as a result, aircraft must be at a set height for a given distance from touchdown. Whilst Lewisham is not directly under the ILS beam, it is close to it, and although the area is further than 7nm from Heathrow Airport, ATC does sometimes require aircraft to join the ILS at greater distances to ensure safe separation of aircraft.
Going forward, the Government is working with NATS and the CAA on a major airspace modernisation programme which is mainly aimed at southern England, including Heathrow airport. The use of new technologies and procedures offers considerable potential to improve the overall efficiency of our airspace which will benefit the airports, airlines and their passengers, as well as the overall environmental performance of the industry. The environmental benefits of modernisation include enabling aircraft to climb higher quicker, allowing aircraft to descend at sharper angles, reducing the amount of stacking, and for the provision of flightpaths offering respite or relief from aircraft noise. We aim to publish the outline airspace modernisation plan by the end of this year and the timetable for implementation is 2023/4.
With regards to the interaction between flightpaths for London Heathrow and London City airports, it is possible that the implementation of City’s new flightpaths in 2016 could have led to a change in how aircraft were guided by air traffic control in the area. This could in turn have changed the noise impacts experienced in Forest Hill. This type of change will potentially be in scope of the new “Planned and Permanent Redistribution” policy, yet to come into force, but which will put in place a CAA approval process for air traffic control changes which have a noise impact similar to a full flightpath change. This issue was discussed at September’s Heathrow Community Noise Forum and I want to assure you that my department is currently taking steps to ensure the smooth introduction of the new policy.
I hope you and your constituent find this reply helpful."
Admittedly, I live over the border in Dulwich constituency but the planes fly directly overhead and as per the last line, I didn’t find that letter remotely helpful
Here’s my take on some of the positive things that have happened over the last few months as a result of letter writing and actions by SE23 residents.
In August I published a report (‘SE London, No Respite from aircraft noise’) mapping aircraft activities over our area and criticising the lack of joined up thinking by the authorities; links can be found further up this thread.
As a result of this, I was invited to address the Heathrow Community Noise Forum (HCNF). My presentation, summarising the issues (as I see them) for SE23 was to a Heathrow director and managers, the Deputy Director of Aviation at the Dept for Transport, and similar level bods from Civil Aviation Authority, BAA, local councillors from across west London and Heathrow campaign groups. Details of what I said are here. https://www.heathrow.com/file_source/HeathrowNoise/Static/Community_Presentation_South_East_London_No_Respite_From_Aircraft_Noise_Sep_2018.pdf
As a result, we now know that the interests of SE London are known by Heathrow, and our objective that they work with London City on this and on ‘London’s airspace modernisation’ has been heard.
I was invited to join the HCNF, and I notice that the Aviation Minister, Baroness Suggs, referred to the HCNF discussion of SE23 issues in a letter to @anon17648011 shared on here yesterday.
Only 37 responses were made to the recent London City Airport Noise Management Plan consultation, I estimate about one third using information shared on SE23.Life. Yesterday, City published their detailed response. The good news is that they have adapted their noise plan to make recognition of the need to work with Heathrow on flightpath crossing, pay attention to noise of arrivals over SE London, the complaints of low flying across SE London and many others. So we have successfully placed our issues on their agenda. There is a lack of new measurable outcomes, but hey, we are new to this and it’s a start.
Separately, at the Forest Hill Society AGM last week, it was resolved that FH Soc would take forward local aircraft noise issues as part of its portfolio of community interests where it will seek to influence affairs. I will be accepting the invitation to the Heathrow Community Noise Forum as a representative of FHSoc. A small group from FHSoc are developing our plans. These will include seeking engagement on air noise and pollution from our Council and elected representatives. It will also include sharing information with other civic societies with similar experiences of Heathrow and City planes – to that end I have been invited to talk with the Dulwich Society in early December. If any local people here, FH Soc member or not, would like to be involved in discussing and developing a simple plan for FHSoc with us, please pm me.
Some of you will know of Plane Hell Action, based in Camberwell, which campaigns for SE London interests on City and Heathrow issues. Through them and the No Respite report, we will be meeting with the GLA Environment Committee Chair and GLA representatives later this month to view overflying aircraft together and to put forward SE London’s environmental interests on Heathrow and City flights over London.
It can be dispiriting to receive standard letters from the air industry and government – they are well resourced, have well rehearsed lines to take, and polished PR. I hope some here will agree there are small signs that we are beginning to effectively represent our area - I have to say in the absence of any interest from LB Lewisham so far.
Some news received from London City Airport today. They confirm that they have recently installed a noise monitor in Forest Hill to monitor noise levels created from aircraft using Heathrow and London City airport (we don’t know exactly where). Also that there are joint meetings taking place between the two airports to discuss altitude restrictions and to explore whether any changes can be implemented to help alleviate the noise experienced by residents in the area.
In the short term these are two things we have been asking for, so a good result for all who have taken the time to register concerns with both airports and with our MPs - including Ellie Reeves who I know has been very supportive in following up complaints from our area with London City in particular.
Great news. I hope the noise monitor is located somewhere representative - under the LCY concentrated flight path or up at the Horniman.
Poor news and my sympathy this week for all who were troubled thru the summer by noise from London City aircraft flying a concentrated flight path at 1600 feet over Forest Hill, Dulwich and Herne Hill. The long awaited CAA report on the changes of 2016 is out, and they say it will not change. The upshot is that fewer people are overflown than before, but much more frequently and that is exactly what was planned.
"Environmental Conclusion
The noise impacts are consistent with the impact anticipated in the airspace change proposal. On that basis, we consider that there has been no increase in the number of people significantly affected by noise as a direct result of the airspace change.
As anticipated, there has been a net reduction in the number of people overflown, whilst there is also a proportion of the population that are being overflown more often.
This Module, in conjunction with Module B, has not achieved the reduction in annual CO2 emissions that was expected. Instead these two Modules have resulted in an increase in CO2 emissions."
Here is a short summary blog. http://www.hacaneast.org.uk/blog/
More positively, representing the Forest Hill Society I attended a meeting with the Environment Committee of the Greater London Assembly this week, where I and others were asked to brief GLA Members on exactly what has happened, and how combined noise from two Airports affects residents. This ahead of their forthcoming meetings with the two Airports. It seems important that we keep briefing our elected representatives on how aircraft noise affects us, but this is a long term game.
Thanks for all your efforts on this ThorNogson. It is pretty tortuous from very early morning up here behind the Horniman.
Meeting the brand new Heathrow Community Engagement Board with a small group of south Londoners later today. HCEB is what?
‘Our purpose is to ensure that all key stakeholders of Heathrow Airport have the opportunity to contribute to decision making concerning on-going operations and any proposed future development of Heathrow Airport. We plan to promote meaningful and inclusive engagement, which has a demonstrable impact on decision-making at the airport. It will scrutinise and challenge Heathrow Airport’s consultation plans and activities, making recommendations for improvement. We will also hold Heathrow Airport to account for the commitments they have made as part of the development consent process.’
The SE23 issues about Heathrow I have in mind to talk about are:-
A GLA Member from west London told us last week that noise and frequency are worse in west London. Well yes, obviously… but irrespective of that, trying to ensure that the environmental interests of SE London are heard and not overlooked by those who may incorrectly think Lambeth, Southwark, Lewisham, Greenwich are not relevant to the discussion.
any additional thoughts very welcome.
I do find the 05:30 flights coming in from the Far East and Africa rather disruptive. Haven’t quite worked out how the daylight saving changes impact this, but there seemed to be more activity at 04:30 this morning than usual (with Heathrow landings coming in from the east). This was a bit surprising as the cloud cover usually absorbs most of the noise.
However, having only recently flown back from GMT+3, I might still be a bit jet lagged, and getting back into the swing of noisy skies.
The problem, as others have said, is the frequency of planes taking exactly the same route. When they are about four minutes apart and are audible for at least a minute (possibly two from high vantage points), it doesn’t give much time to get used to the constant rumble or the silence.
I do think the number 1 issue is the “flight path superhighway” into City. As far as I know it’s unique in its frequency, low altitude and victimisation of the same minority of residents. We’re Londoners, of course we all expect and accept all sorts of noise, but to arbitrarily (and essentially without consultation) build a “plane motorway” 1300 feet above the heads of SE London residents that focuses all the misery of flight path noise onto the heads of an unlucky few seems to me to be completely unjustifiable. Given the clear association with stress, anxiety and mental health, what’s it going to take the CAA to reconsider? A spate of suicides under the City flight path perhaps?!
[EDIT: Sorry I note the board you are meeting today is concerned with Heathrow engagement and therefore the City flight paths are perhaps only tangentially relevant, but I stand by the comments anyway]
yes, agree totally, that has to be the no 1 London City Airport issue.
Although HCEB is only concerned with Heathrow, we made sure they are fully aware of what I suggest is a recent failure of airspace planning and consultation that has allowed Heathrow planes to fly further east since about 2013 bringing more planes over Brockley/Crofton Park/Forest Hill, and also to overfly London City plane route, which concentrated in 2016. This created a rugby ball shaped area from Catford to Herne Hill of double overflight- which in turn means people in this area never have a time with no overflying planes. Hard to accept that if this had been realised DfT, CAA and NATS might all have said fine, lets just do it anyway…
That aside SE London people on the ground had a very good hearing about Heathrow yesterday, and I believe our issues are now properly understood by this new independent body at this early stage of their planning.
Great news: Vicky Foxcroft has also developed an interest in this. I am pleased, as she didn’t respond to my email to her some weeks ago. There’s a public meeting in Brockley on 15 Nov - can I encourage everyone able to attend to come? Details here: https://www.vickyfoxcroft.org.uk/in-lewisham-deptford/2018/11/05/join-me-heathrow-public-meeting/?fbclid=IwAR3GOBk-8dMqzdsQrFTki_gRL_-PLceJjWtXvVtLYy2LUxx_lqmr3y6tA_U
Some may recall that the GLA environment committee met with me, representing FH Society and other SE London people a couple of weeks back to explore what the aircraft issues are in our area?
Late notice, but the GLA Environment Committee are today putting questions to execs from Heathrow and London City at 10am. I expect them to ask about noise and pollution, Heathrow expansion and low flying over our area, and about double overflight. A transcript will be available in due course, but it will be webcast here. https://www.london.gov.uk/media-centre/london-assembly
Should give us a pretty good idea of the corporate approach to environmental issues from the two airports.
I watched the relevant section of the meeting on noise and was encouraged to see the committee taking it seriously and asking some tough questions. I was less encouraged by the stock evasive answers given by the representatives for Heathrow and City, so much so in fact that I felt compelled to contact Liam McKay (liam.mckay@londoncityairport.com - that email address is on their website in case anyone is concerned about data protection!) the COO of City (who was appearing on their behalf) directly and I also copied in Caroline Russell (caroline.russell@london.gov.uk - ditto) the chair of the London Assembly Environmental Committee.
I won’t recite my letter in full but the central point was this:
"In between the regular deafening roars of aircraft, I heard Ms Russell ask you on 3 separate occasions about the impact the implementation of concentrated flight paths has on people living under them. On all 3 occasions you evaded the question, providing a rehearsed answer about the benefit to the many people who do not live under them and now have a reduced airport impact. That wasn’t the question Ms Russell was asking, so I’m going to try again on her behalf:
What is City Airport’s position on the thousands of residents who live under or near the concentrated flightpaths who were unaware of the imposition of the flightpaths and now find their lives completely ruined by the intolerable frequency and intensity of aircraft noise?"
Just in case anyone else feels compelled to contact Mr McKay you know where to find him… 
Liam McKay from City Airport made these points. London City plan and have permission from Newham Council to increase flights from 84k to 111k per year, that is by 32%. They plan to expand more into leisure flights, moving away from just being a business airport. They do not plan to change the concentrated flight path route; these new flights will all follow the same routes as now. During this year, 50% of their flights have overflown Forest Hill, not the usually quoted 30%. The size of planes landing at City is set to increase, he says the bigger jets will be about 4 decibels quieter.
The only good news here is that it genuinely seems that our pressure has encouraged them to work on a ‘case study’ with Heathrow which they refer to as the Dulwich area, regarding double overflight of arrivals from the 2 airports. There was a lot of talk about wanting to ‘understand the issues’. This might lead to something, and they promised to be open and transparent about this case study.
The City airport corporate view is quite clearly that by concentrating flightpaths they have removed flight noise altogether from a very large number of people. They seem unconcerned that they have achieved this by simply moving all the noise to a much smaller number of people, some of whom were not previously overflown at all. Predictably, complaint numbers have fallen as a result , but they get more repeat complaints from the same people.
Meanwhile Brendan Kelly representing NATS said he did not know about the noise impact of London City concentrated flight paths because he lives in west London. I will be writing to him.
Any idea why all they require is permission from Newham Council? Their planes have considerable impact in several other boroughs including Lewisham!
If they intend to continue on with the policy of overflying tight corridors, then they need to put their hands in their pockets and, at the least, offer help with new windows etc for those impacted. Otherwise, they get all the benefit of more cash from airlines and passengers without any increase in their costs.
Some really helpful posts on here. I have drawn on stepover’s and emailed Mr McKay at City Airport complaining along similar lines. Be good to inundate him.
the airport is located in Newham, so all airport planning has to go through them. Newham Council is a huge supporter of London City, because of the money and employment the airport brings to their area. It is not just Newham that has to approve - on aviation matters I believe increase of flight numbers will have gone to the CAA and Government level.
Regarding other Councils, their input is taken in the City Airport consultative committee. online, LCACC pages are where performance data of the airport can be found. Many Borough Councils are represented on LCACC, but Lewisham, Southwark and Lambeth are absent. Their meetings are open to the public but I’ve not yet been to one. List of current members here.
http://lcacc.org/officers-and-members/
Yes on this point - Mr McKay told the committee yesterday somewhat misleadingly that City compensated people who suffered noise disturbance over 57dB (see here https://www.londoncityairport.com/corporate/Environment/Sound-insulation). I have monitored (via a phone app) that City flights regularly exceed 55dB over my house so I emailed them and asked to arrange for them to provide me with noise insulation - to say I found their reply utterly pathetic would be an understatement - reproduced below, essentially you are eligible for compensation if you live within about 500 metres of the boundary of the airport…
The 57dB obligation refers to LAeq - the sound level in decibels equivalent to the total A-weighted sound energy measured over a period of 16hrs. This contour is reassessed annually and is produced by an independent noise consultant. Please see the below image which visualises this:
I’m really concerned about this stat about 50% of City flights over-flying Forest Hill. Every person who has complained has received the same stock response where they assure us that we are only overflown on about 30% of days - it’s now clear this is just a fabrication (and my own personal experience of the noise was clear that they were flying over on much more than 1 in 3 days). If they’re lying to us are they also lying to the CAA? Particularly with the proposed expansion I fear that we could end up with a situation that ALL (or the majority) of City Airport arrivals come through at low altitude over Forest Hill. Do we have any assurance that this isn’t their intention or protection from Government if it is?!
its purely down to wind direction. This year there has been a higher proportion of east wind days, than in the last two years. It remains to be seen whether this is just an exceptional year or part of a longer term changing weather pattern. Their stock response of 30% is historically accurate. I have recently asked for and received two years data on runway usage from them. If only because of their steep landing angle (5.5%, as opposed to normal 3%) I believe they have to land into the wind. But that seems a good question to put to them, and I have no idea if there is any protection, again, an excellent question as they expand. I think they will say it all depends on wind direction.
quite a few people have asked how London City’s concentrated flight paths over SE23 happened. One of London City’s stock responses is that all necessary consultation was carried out. With all links to that consultation broken on City’s website, it turns out that the CAA has it.
https://www.caa.co.uk/Commercial-industry/Airspace/Airspace-change/Decisions/London-Airspace-Management-Programme-Phase-1A/
There was a 12 week consultation in 2014, with a report in 2015. The consultation feedback report (LCAL D consultation feedback report) is an easy read. It also explains precisely which parts of government policy they were following.
Also provides a clear explanation of what exactly has happened, what they thought the impact would be.
Talking with campaigners at HACAN and Plane Hell Action, we are wondering how this can effectively be challenged now since the implementation was recently given the all clear by the CAA?
There are just a couple of things that look hopeful in a recent letter from London City:-
'It is not possible to deviate from a defined procedure to spread flight tracks over a larger areas without going through another airspace change proposal. LCY will be considering their position on this when the CAA post implementation review is published. NATS are however continuing to review London airspace, and LCY will feed into this process, particularly reviewing altitude restrictions '.
Just bumping this topic up the forum to report back on a constructive meeting with Heathrow noise people and Vicky Foxcroft tonight. Very nice to meet @ThorNogson too. Felt like our concerns had been recognised, particularly the need for them to coordinate with LCY.
Vicky has also offered to try and host a joint meeting with both LHR and LCY reps with a joint presentation which is another good step in the right direction.
As soon as this is publicised I’ll post back here.
Just some further correspondence from LCY in response to my further questions about the increase in flights over Forest Hill in 2018 and the potential for LCY to increase flight numbers by around 30% in future which @ThorNogson mentioned in a post last week:
"As mentioned previously, the use the use of our runway is largely dictated by the wind direction and something that we cannot influence. I have attached runway utilisation for 2017 (25.5% easterly operations departures and arrivals) and 2018 till date (39.8% easterly operations departures and arrivals). This data is published quarterly in our reports to LCACC which can be found here: http://lcacc.org/meeting-papers-key-documents/recent-minutes-of-meetings/
The final percentage figure for 2018 will be available in the first week of January 2019.
In 2016 the Government gave the green light for the £480 million City Airport Development Programme (CADP). The permission itself includes only infrastructure improvements which includes; 7 new aircraft stands to welcome next generation aircraft which are more fuel efficient and quieter than our existing fleet operating from London City Airport, a parallel taxi-lane to connect these new stands and a terminal extension. Since CADP started last year the permissible amount of aircraft movement has reduced from 120,000 to 111,000 per annum. In 2016 the airport had 84,955 aircraft movements in total for comparison and in 2017 the airport had 80,299 aircraft movements (arrivals and departures on runway 27 and 09). The airport is operating under the permissible amount and according to the 2009 planning approval there are restricted daily maximum permitted numbers of aircraft movements."
an interesting way to present the information to LCY’s best advantage which is understandable. At the recent GLA meeting I am sure they mentioned 50% as their latest available figure because there has been more easterly wind than has been usual in the summer. Summer means easterly winds, open doors and windows and being outdoors - the year average % of easterly operations will most likely reduce from this latest 39.8% figure over the rest of the year as our winter south westerlies set in. Maybe we will end up at 35% of their arrivals over SE23 in the whole of 2018….
Using these LCY figures, here’s something that might worry anyone concerned about aircraft noise now:-
In 2017 there were 80,299 aircraft movements, half of these are departures, half arrivals, with 25.5% of these arrivals flying over our area, I make that 10,238 arrivals over SE23.
If they increase to the permitted 111,000 movements per year, and if wind ends up at 35% easterly operations for any given year, then 19,425 LCY arrivals appear over SE23 at under 2000 feet on the concentrated flight path. That’s a whopping 89% more than in 2017. Why not call it double?
btw new, quieter aircraft does not mean the same as quiet aircraft. At the GLA meeting 4dB quieter for newer aircraft was quoted. On the ground we really won’t notice that small difference, not when the frequency of overflight is 150 in a day, increasing to 283 in just a few years on the above figures.
Indeed, especially when it isn’t said a) where it is measured and b) whether it applies to like for like types or the actual mix of plane types into London City. For instance, where I live I find planes with jet engines much noisier than those with turboprop engines, yet the current trend appears to be going to more jets.
Flybe, the last major airline into City that largely relies on props, appear to be in trouble and are currently up for sale. If for whatever reason their slots were replaced by others using jets, I wouldn’t be surprised for that to exacerbate the noise situation.
Thanks - just a further update, following the London Assembly Environmental Committee meeting on 8 Nov which was webcast I contacted Liam McKay of City Airport (as detailed in a post above from the same date). Although Mr McKay has provided no reply (despite his assurances to the Committee in his evidence that City Airport was only too willing to engage with the local community), I have received several nice follow up e-mails from and on behalf of Caroline Russell and the Committee including the following today:
“The London Assembly Environment Committee are currently in the process of assessing and drawing up conclusions and recommendations to its recent roundtable with individuals and community groups affected by concentrated flight paths, and formal committee meeting on 8 November with Heathrow, London City Airport and NATS which you refer to you in your email.”
I have offered them any further assistance I or the affected local Lewisham community can provide in compiling their conclusions/recommendations.
You may all be interested to know Gatwick is currently consulting on their long term expansion plans- might be worth a read.
As mentioned in earlier posts I sent an email to Liam McKay the COO of City Airport after his appearance before the London Assembly Enviromental Committee earlier this month. I’ve finally had a response on his behalf from Tessa Simpson (Environmental & Technical Operations Manager) and this chain of correspondence has also been copied to Caroline Russell the Chair of the LAEC.
I’ve reproduced the response below - it’s more of the same standard pre-scripted justifications and doesn’t directly address the particular questions I raised. What’s very clear to me is that City Airport’s approach is to ensure they focus their PR on their immediate vicinity (the economic boost to local area, noise insulation scheme that only applies to residents living directly adjacent to the airport etc.) and don’t give a damn about their wider operations. It’s my view at this stage that the only likelihood of actually forcing them to make any significant changes in the short-medium term would come from a legal action (against LCY directly or a judicial review of the CAA’s implementation of the new flight arrangements) which would rely heavily on human rights arguments about right to peaceful enjoyment of property. I’m not aware that there is currently any group/charity willing to take on that sort of legal action and so I’m very pessimistic about effecting any change.
"I’ve reviewed the information my colleague has previously provided and will try not to repeat anything. Firstly I’d like to just clarify that aircraft associated with London City Airport (LCY) over your area are arrivals during easterly operations. These flights are approximately 2000 ft. and above in altitude when reaching your area. London City Airport has a flight track keeping system (TraVis) which is used to view flight movements and altitudes of aircraft operating at London City Airport should you wish to review this in more detail https://travislcy.topsonic.aero/
_ _
Since the implementation of RNAV navigation, there have been no changes in aircraft altitude. The changes that took place were the first step towards modernising London’s airspace, a process that was mandated by the CAA and not optional for London City Airport. Flight paths were not changed and the programme fulfilled its purpose of improving safety and resilience, whilst climbing aircraft quicker on departure (thereby reducing the noise impact) and reducing the number of people overflown by arriving aircraft by 1.2 million, directing aircraft along the Thames Estuary as far as possible.
_ _
With regards to LCY’s airspace change, we followed the CAA’s legal requirements on consultation. During 2014 there was a 12 week consultation on the changes (4th September – 27th November 2014). The consultation was mainly targeted at LCACC members (London City Airport Consultative Committee http://lcacc.org/ ), however 483 members of the public also participated in the consultation following the generation of 25 media items and 2 public meetings. The CAA guidance on consultation has however been updated since. LCY fully supports these changes and is committed to improving this process for any future airspace change.
_ _
The CAA’s Post Implementation Review of the London Airspace Management Programme (LAMP) Phase 1A has been published and can be found on the following link.
http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP1692C_ModuleC_FinalV3(P_LINKS).pdf The CAA and LCY have acknowledged that there is a proportion of the population that is being overflown more often; this was unfortunately inevitable with the changes that were mandated.
_ _
London airspace is heavily congested, and National Air Traffic Services (NATS) are running a project to review all of the London airspace to review where further efficiencies can be made and noise impacts reduced, taking into account all airports. LCY will continue to fully engage in this programme and ensure any further benefits relating to LCY operations are achieved wherever possible. Along with this, there are also joint meetings taking place between LCY and Heathrow to better understand the joint impact of our operations and explore whether any improvements can be implemented to help alleviate the noise experienced by residents in this area.
_ _
Regarding your other points, LCY follows government guidance “to limit and, where possible, reduce the number of people in the UK significantly affected by aircraft noise” set out in the The Aviation Policy Framework (2013). LCY will also continue to review emerging research regarding health impacts and how this translated into national policy and guidance. LCY has an extensive range of noise controls in place, which we believe mitigates and minimises the adverse impacts on health and quality of life within the context of Government policy on sustainable development. As well as implementing some of the most stringent noise controls of any UK airport, LCY also contributes significantly to the local economy and provides many employment and community benefits particularly in East London. In addition, LCY has recently also introduced a Penalties and Incentives Scheme to encourage airlines to use quieter operating procedures and will be financially penalising airlines that breach noise levels. All funds raised from penalties will be reinvested into local community projects.
_ _
I’d like to assure you we take the noise impact of our operations very seriously, going further than required by legislation. Whilst noise disturbance is an inevitable consequence of operating an airport in such a built-up area, we are doing everything we can to operate in an environmentally responsible manner. Apologies for any disturbance caused and I hope this information is of some use."
LCY have repeatedly told me that they only use the flight path over Forest Hill when winds are “predominantly from the east” (Easterly Operations). Well today the wind has been constantly predominantly from the S-W (as evidenced by their own tracking system which shows a wind speed of 4.1m/s from the S-W - see below) but they were using the concentrated flight path over Forest Hill. If anyone knows why I’d be interested.
yeah heard some flights quite early this morning (6.30 or so maybe). Not sure if it was a Heathrow or City Airport flight but it was loud
Yes woke me up early. I may be imagining this but aircraft noise seems worse this year than it was last year.
It is much worse - in 2017 about 30% of City arrivals overflew Forest Hill, this year it has been over 40% - they say this is based purely on wind direction, but as my post above points out, their explanation doesn’t seem to tally with the reality. I have written to them for clarification.
The standard airport line on this is that wind speed and direction can differ with altitude, so it is not always ground level wind direction that dictates flight direction. Today is one of those light wind days where Heathrow lands from the east and City from the west, giving SE23 both overflights. Heathrow started over us from about 5am, City from 6.30 am.
Following pressure from local people, Heathrow and London City have begun a monitoring project, which they recently referred to in public as the ‘Dulwich Case Study’, which includes a temporary noise monitor somewhere in our area. Recently Heathrow said that the wind direction does not always clearly drive flying direction, there are times of light winds when it is inconclusive and airports have a choice. In the case study they are looking at ideas such as whether, on days like these, the two airports could coordinate operations and choose maybe just one airport to overfly us. Sounds obvious but they’ve never done it…
Anyone writing a complaint letter to London City (and if you are at all bothered please do) - they claim that things are ok because in 2018 they are getting only about one complaint per day on average - could also ask when they will publish a plan for this Case Study and when they expect to make findings and conclusions public.
However, they seem rather relaxed about complaints from outside Newham Borough, who they are accountable to:- as their last annual report says ‘in 2017, there was a fall of 9% in complaints compared to 2016. A total of 320 complaints relating to Airport operations were received during 2017, 81 of these were received from just 2 complainants. Of the 320 complaints, only 11% were from residents within Newham with the majority coming from outside the Borough, particularly Waltham Forest.’
Thanks - the response from LCY on the wind direction issue today is below - noting the reference to NATS I wonder whether it would be more productive lobbying NATS to ensure they understand that Easterly operations at LCY cause considerably more noise disruption than Westerly operations (where aircraft are always above the Thames) and so they should implement a policy where LCY uses Westerly operations unless the wind is from the east (ie in cases where wind is north/south like today (although it was from south-WEST today) they should default to Westerly operations).
One other observation - on Westerly operations arriving aircraft (which are above the Thames) approach at 3000ft before descending into the airport, whereas Easterly operations (above Forest Hill and other built up residential areas of SE London) approach at only 2000ft from Catford and then maintain that altitude for ~15km over SE London before beginning their descent over Limehouse - in other words the planes are LOWER over residential areas where noise disturbance is an issue than they are when they approach over the Thames with minimal noise disturbance. It’s ridiculous.
"The runway is aligned between east and west. When there is an easterly wind aircraft land and depart facing east. When there is a westerly wind aircraft land and depart facing west.
When the wind is straight across the runway (northerly or southerly) then aircraft may land and depart facing either east or west. The choice of runway in these cases is largely to do with whether or not there is a slight easterly or westerly component in the wind direction and what direction the wind is forecast to move towards. The direction of operation is determined by NATS air traffic controllers who monitor wind speed and direction on the airfield and at different levels up to 3,000ft."
turning to Heathrow for a moment, I attended the Heathrow Community Noise Forum on behalf of Forest Hill Society last week. By far the most important info for SE23 is that a major consultation will launch in January about how the Airspace used by Heathrow will be redesigned. We’ll need to keep an eye out for that so SE London is properly represented. Important issues like how planes will be routed - dispersed? concentrated as with London City?, night flights, early morning flights etc. The design principles need to be developed whether or not the 3rd runway goes ahead, but they are of course planning that it will.
There is a very accessible presentation about how they are thinking here. Open the presentation for 21 November titled future runway operations.
https://www.heathrow.com/noise/heathrow-community-noise-forum/forum-meeting-notes
The new independent Heathrow Community Engagement Board has started work by talking with community and campaigning groups all over London (I met with them with the group from Plane Hell Action recently). Now they have an online survey to get an initial take on the priorities of individuals- also an opportunity to opt in to further communications from them. It’s a 5 minute job here https://www.hceb.org.uk/survey.
It seems important to let HCEB have a few responses from SE London, to let them know we are concerned with issues around aircraft noise, despite being so far away from Heathrow.
In my response I mentioned noise, ending simultaneous overflights over London from the 2 airports, and giving all areas of London not in the final descent path planned relief from aircraft. Both airports - City and Heathrow- have plans for increasing aircraft flights, 3rd runway or not.
HCEB has an independent brief to ensure that Heathrow is consulting and dealing properly with Londoners. It is neither in favour of nor against the 3rd runway - more concerned with fair processes. We must hope for something rather better than London City Airport managed in their almost invisible consultation on flight path changes in 2014. They imposed their new concentrated flight path over SE23 in 2016.
