Aircraft Noise over SE23 [2019]

Discussion continued from Aircraft Noise over SE23 [2017-2018]

The noise from London City Airport may be less noticeable while we spend more time indoors, but their low altitude concentrated flight path remains in place, with flights over Forest Hill already set to double the numbers of 2017, and it looks as though they want more.

Some comment quoted here from campaigning group HACAN:-

_London City Airport _
'In the autumn of last year the CAA backed the concentrated flight paths London City Airport introduced in 2016. This was a big blow to communities living under them. Now there are renewed fears that in its Master Plan, due out in March, London City will outline proposals to seek planning permission to lift the annual cap of 111,000 flights permitted to use the airport. At present there are around 83,000 flights each year but the airport is trying to attract more leisure flights in order to bring in more planes during the quieter times of the day (mid-morning to mid-afternoon). The better news is that London City, under a lot of pressure from our sister organisation HACAN East, has recognized that its planes impact areas many miles from the airport. It has installed mobile noise monitors in the Forest Hill/Dulwich area after good work by people from the Forest Hill Society. ’

Meanwhile the GLA Environment Committee is due to publish a report this Thursday which will include comment on the concentration of flightpaths over London.
Now published:
Excellent report by the London Assembly, in which many of the arguments put by SE23 residents appear.

https://www.london.gov.uk//press-releases/assembly/give-londoners-a-break-from-aircraft-noise

SE London’s campaign group Plane Hell Action had a meeting with London City Airport’s CEO last week. They clearly do not want to listen or acknowledge that low altitude concentration of planes over London is not ok. Sobering reading. The only thing they understand is complaint letters. anyone else inclined to fire one off about their dismissive attitude to residents and our environment?
use the London City Airport Website: www.londoncityairport.com . Click on ‘corporate’ and then under Environment, click on ‘Complaints and Enquiries’.

Thanks for sharing. What was Kate Hoey’s reaction to this?

don’t know yet but I know Mo and will ask her when we next meet - I think she has probably been discreet in not saying anything on that issue. Kate Hoey described it on Twitter in neutral terms.
'Useful meeting
@LondonCityAir
to discuss aircraft noise over Kennington
@MoKorda
,Liam McKay and CEO Robert Sinclair
@planehell

One other thing about complaints on this issue is that it’s not really enough to just complain once, you need to keep sending them complaints each time the LCY concentrated flightpath bothers you. This is because the basis of their justification for this is that fewer people are affected by the noise of the concentrated flightpath (but those same fewer people are affected repeatedly and without respite). Therefore they are relying on those affected people only complaining once in order to keep complaint numbers low - in fact those affected should keep complaining over and over again in order to ensure LCY can’t massage the data to their advantage.

I just filled out their web form and pressed ‘send’ - was then presented with a blank white screen, should I assume it failed and try again? Is there normally an automated email acknowledgement sent out?

That could be a more or less daily task then in some weeks! However, as it did wake me up this morning, I’ll send in another.

If you scroll back up after submitting, you should have a grey box with a ‘Thank you’ directly under the opening sentence.

just a reminder that in the present fine weather all London City Airport arrivals are overflying us once again, perhaps there is a correlation between fine weather and easterly winds (anyone know?). Planes at 2000ft every 4 minutes at some times of day. Research shows that different people are disturbed by different noise levels. If you are at all concerned, read on.

London City are on record as saying their key reported measure on the issue is numbers of complaints so it is up to us to fill their inbox. You do this by filling in their form at https://www.londoncityairport.com/corporate/Environment/Environmental-Complaints-Enquiries
or by emailing environment@londoncityairport.com

Meanwhile Forest Hill Society with Dulwich Society will be meeting London City executives in early March to raise once again what we want to change - a redesign of flightpaths over us with proper consultation, an end to the concentrated flight path, flying higher for longer, periods of relief from aircraft noise and proper joint planning with Heathrow to minimise or end double overflight.

Yes, there is. Fine settled weather is usually accompanied by a high pressure system. Winds go clockwise around high pressure which means the winds here are more likely to be easterly on those occasions.

Completely agree on the double hIt aspect, my last complaint turned out to be Heathrow but definitely back to City lately.

and its nice to see we managed to keep the numbers up last year, and were mentioned in the CEO’s report to their consultative committee. (minuted at http://lcacc.org/meeting-papers-key-documents/recent-minutes-of-meetings/ )

“During Q3 LCY received a total of 163 complaints relating to the operation, 29% of which were from three individuals. In the same period last year, 105 complaints were received. Contributing factors to this increase are likely to be warmer temperatures, and increased awareness of airport operations due to the Noise Action Plan consultation and a paper published regarding noise in SE London.”

Last chance for anyone to fill the consolation out; it closes at 11.55pm tonight.

The links that @ThorNogson posted do make it much easier to understand the consolation from our SE London viewpoint. And as I listen to a plane through a closed window echoing as it passes overhead, and realise that it could get even noisier, I’d ask you to consider making that last push if the planes remotely bother you now.

A massive result for campaigners and the overflown is emerging - London City Airport have been told to review their arrival and departure routes in line with today’s legislation with a proper consultation, as opposed to the shambles they did in 2014 resulting in a low altitude concentrated flight path over SE London. They have defended the indefensible against MPs, the GLA , residents and campaign groups for three years - but now they will have to go thru a process like the one Heathrow are doing.

This from the CEO’s quarterly report published by their Consultative Committee, LCACC at http://lcacc.org/meeting-papers-key-documents/

2.10 AIRSPACE CHANGE UPDATE
• The Government’s airspace modernisation programme: ‘Our Future skies’ is in the early stages, with the objective to deliver quicker, quieter and cleaner journeys with more capacity for the benefit of both passengers and communities. LAMP phase 1A was an early stage to this, in which London City Airport upgraded the navigation technology along all departure and arrival routes. In October 2018 the CAA published the post implementation review of this change, confirming 1.2 million people are no longer being regularly overflown below 7,000 ft, arrivals stay over the sea for longer and in a narrower area over land, and departures climb high quicker.
• As part of the next steps in this modernisation programme, NATS are currently developing an airspace change proposal to modernise the airspace structure and route network above 7,000 ft. All airports in the South East are key consultees in this process and are planning to review their arrival and departure routes to determine how best to connect with these high-altitude network changes.
• The airport will therefore be launching an airspace change proposal this year in line with the CAA’s guidance (CAP1616). Engagement and consultation with local stakeholders and communities will be integral through every step of this process, starting with engagement on design principles. The modernisation programme is due to be completed in 2025.

This is a good result, but is really the beginning not the end of the battle.

People need to:
(i) keep complaining to LCY about the low-altitude concentrated flight path over Forest Hill and don’t stop complaining, don’t just complain once, complain every time they overfly Forest Hill (about 150 days per year, on which there are approx. 150 flights at less than 2000ft above ground level along the exact same route); and
(ii) keep your eyes on this forum and local news for details of the future consultation and then engage with it to give respite to Forest Hill from constant aircraft noise.

For those who haven’t fully understood what LCY did in 2016 it’s this simple: they took the roughly 20,000 arrival flights that previously approached LCY over an area of SE London 5km wide (from roughly Peckham to Crystal Palace) and instead made EVERY SINGLE ONE of those 20,000 flights approach at low altitude over Forest Hill over an area less than 250m wide. If you want a visual representation of that effect imagine if ALL the blue dots below (which show the previous area of dispersal) were put in the red rectangle (the current situation) and then imagine living in proximity to that rectangle - which is over Forest Hill:

image906×302 35.6 KB

That’s a great graph! My house is bang in the middle of the FH bit. It really shows why some people find it a huge nuisance and others can’t see the problem.

@ThorNogson - good news that LCY being forced to look at airspace. I know it’s just a first step and long road ahead but feels like some progress.

This is definite progress. Thanks ThorNogson. Complaining is simple and quick https://www.londoncityairport.com/corporate/Environment/Environmental-Complaints-Enquiries

Hi everyone. Is it me or since last night there has been constant aircraft noise? I had to wear earplugs when I went to bed at about 11pm last night and it woke me up at 5.15 am this morning. Even now there does not seem to be any pause between flights anymore - it is just constant noise. Please let me know if you are experiencing the same. I’m in the Honor Oak Park area, just by the station at the other end of Devonshire Road. Thanks, Vanessa

Yes they are all Heathrow planes, going over at about 4500ft. several after 11pm last night, and starting over you at just after 5am, then very regular after 6am. It’s not an unusual pattern, but it does seem to be giving quite a sustained roar over the area at the moment - maybe its something to do with the high winds dispersing the sound more than usual? It doesn’t help with the noise but you can check what Heathrow planes went by at any time of any day on their Webtrak plane mapping tool, at https://webtrak.emsbk.com/lhr4.

I’ve noticed this over the last few months. Also mid afternoon. There seems to be lower air raft. I noticed the noise and assumed there must be new flight paths.

Oops! I complained to London City Airport but they were Heathrow flights!

Is there an area in London that is not on a flight path? I’m seriously considering moving but I would not want to find the same problem elsewhere! How do I check?

I did that the first time. Generally, most of the late night/early mornings are Heathrow. Daytime ones tend to be City. Next time I complained to City, I thanked them for their earlier response but pointed out that with both airport flight paths overhead on the same day, it’s not surprising that sometimes it’s hard to tell.

with the Heathrow current flight paths, maybe. If expansion goes ahead, not really.

image536×550 76.3 KB

This evening seems especially noisy. Flightradar24.com is showing incoming LCY flights at 1,475 ft over Forest Hill (e.g. the delayed 17.50 from Dublin scheduled to land at 19.30 but an hour and a half late, and the 19.55 from Milan scheduled to arrive at 20.50)

Are they flying lower because we also have LHR traffic in the area?

Update 22 Mar 2019 - I have asked LCY to conform the height of overflying aircraft last night.

And this morning’s incoming Heathrow flights are early - before 04.30 - and according to Flightradar24 are lower than usual at below 3,000!

Yes super loud this morning.

Yes also noticed noise last night. FlightRadar altitude data is usually dismissed as indicative only and unreliable by airports. Can’t see anything on London City’s own tracker Travislcy which shows anything other than 2000 ft over us yesterday evening. But they have been wrong before - there was a period last year when their own online tracking system was out by 200 feet due to a software error.

Does Heathrow’s own altitude tracking confirm this - if so I’d say that’s worth following up.

Too complex for me, but I’ve written to them.

Now available on the CAA Airspace Change website are details of the London City Redesign of Departures and Arrivals Routes.
Here is the site https://airspacechange.caa.co.uk/PublicProposalArea?pID=131 . You can sign up for news updates as the multi stage process is followed.

As you would expect from London City, there is no mention in their initial statement of prioritising noise relief for the overflown, and in a recent meeting with Forest Hill Society and Len Duvall, our GLA Member, City’s executives showed little interest in engaging in any meaningful way with our complaints or suggestions, despite a five fold annual increase in complaints and their claims to be good neighbours to local communities.

Under the relevant CAA Regulations (CAP1616) which govern this kind of change, City will eventually have to engage with community groups, it is a question of how. My sense is that they want to do as little as possible.

What to do? Now is a critical time, if they don’t prioritise what we want in their objectives, we may, at the end of this process, see no change at all. Letters to their CEO, Robert Sinclair, to our MP’s Ellie Reeves and Vicky Foxcroft, to the Minister responsible Baroness Sugg, could ask that the concentrated flight path over SE London is reconsidered and replaced by dispersed flight routes, that City fly higher for longer over SE London and that the redesign by two London Airports reduces or eliminates double overflight with Heathrow. And that these objectives are clearly documented in the London City Airport plans submitted to the CAA for the Airspace Change process.

"### Purpose of this change

As part of the wider airspace modernistation in the South East, London City Airport Ltd. is planning to make changes to integrate the airport’s arrival and departure routes, and associated airspace structures, with proposed higher level routes proposed by NATS. These changes could affect traffic at altitudes from 0 to 7000ft. London City Airport currently has a system of PBN and conventional SIDs, STARs and arrival transitions which were introduced in 2016. Passenger delays are expected to increase sharply over the next ten years if the airspace structure and route network are not upgraded to introduce additional capacity. The Future Airspace Strategy Implementation South (FASI South) programme has been established by NATS and 15 key airports operating in southern England, including London City Airport, to coordinate a series of linked ACPs that will modernise the overall airspace structure and route network."

April 9th to 18th, 10 consecutive days of every single London City aircraft flying just 2000 feet over Forest Hill. In Nov 2018, Liam McKay, a director of this airport said . 'The key metric for us is noise complaints as a reflection of distress levels’.
So complain if you are bothered by this at all otherwise they think this is ok.
Here is where you do it. https://www.londoncityairport.com/corporate/Environment/Environmental-Complaints-Enquiries

Done - took 1 minute

Done

Me three… it’s been more obvious today with the windows opening the lovely weather.

Do you think it’s better to complain to the airport - who seem totally uninterested - or elsewhere? e.g local MP?

The industry has been designed to enable it to ignore the problems it produces. City Airport is interested in growth, profit etc, and the CAA " … has few powers to control noise and considers that its main statutory duty is to facilitate aviation growth".
https://www.aef.org.uk/aef-noise-guide/

It is an unavoidable conclusion that we ordinary citizens have no legal right of quiet enjoyment of life/property, and that there is no agency, or department of local or central government that has any interest or responsibility for these issues.

Noise pollution enforcement is non-existent, and there are no standards anyway. The police make it clear with their actions that the ‘right to fly’ has a very high priority for police resources, and that seems to have Government support.

"London’s Metropolitan Police said it had “strong plans in place that would enable it to deploy a significant number of officers to Heathrow and take firm action” if needed.
Interior minister Sajid Javid said he wanted police to “take a firm stance and use the full force of the law”.

Done. Thanks again for continuing to flag this and for simplifying the process of complaining

LCY concentrated flight path over Forest Hill again today, that’s about 3 weeks solid now without respite (as the wind has been Easterly). Just a polite reminder that complaining once isn’t enough - part of LCY’s strategy in imposing the flightpath on a small number of people is the hope/expectation that they’ll only complain once despite being affected by the noise on approximately 200 days per year (and disproportionately during good weather). So we need to complain every day they over fly us. If you save the complaint page as a favourite and use Chrome you can set up the form to autocomplete your details so it only takes about 10 seconds to file a complaint.
https://www.londoncityairport.com/corporate/Environment/Environmental-Complaints-Enquiries

The reason to make multiple complaints to City is that it keeps one particular type of pressure on them because they have to publish their complaint numbers and explain them to the DfT and their controlling local authority, Newham. If the numbers drop, it lets them off that hook and simply allows them to say , as they did to the GLA last November, that they ‘only’ get on average a complaint a day.

This in itself will not make change happen- City do not propose changing anything until the airspace modernisation programme is complete, about 2024. That may or may not mean they then begin to fly higher than 2000ft, disperse more widely or provide alternative routing over SE London.

The threats to our environment are first, that City already has permission to increase aircraft movement numbers from the current level, thanks to Newham Council and Mayor of London waving it through (even though he opposes Heathrow expansion).
Second, that they are preparing a new long term 'Masterplan ’ this year, and we can safely assume they will not be proposing to downsize.

The GLA (probably not the Mayor though) will likely oppose further expansion of London City Airport. I’d expect our MP’s to take a view and oppose if enough voters show a concern. I suspect though that their mailbags are not bulging on the issue of aircraft noise? Meanwhile LB Newham will approve anything as long as it gives jobs to their residents.

Understood, I will continue to complain.

Interesting - do you know any more about how this came about?

Sadiq Khan’s position makes little sense to me. In 2016 he approved the London City increase to 111,000 movements, reversing a block on expansion by the previous Mayor. Press coverage of that is easy to find. Like this. Sadiq Khan's pollution pledges called into question with City Airport expansion approval - edie

In 2017 he appeared to join the fight against concentrated flight paths, yet that was what he had effectively ok’d in 2016 as they were the only flightpaths City were using. Airportwatch said:- ‘Campaigners have won the backing of London Mayor, Sadiq Khan, in their bid to get rid of the concentrated flight paths. In written answer to a question from Green London Assembly member Caroline Russell, he said; “It is clear that the concentrated flight paths introduced by London City Airport are not working. We will continue to raise the issue with London City Airport. We also continue to make the case to the CAA that there must be a fairer distribution of flight paths that will address the severe noise impacts.”’

But he opposes Heathrow expansion and backs the judicial reviews against the 3rd runway.

there’s a Change petition running aimed at the Mayor of London, and drawing attention to the City Airport concentrated flight path. Can’t do any harm.

Thanks. Signed.

Please please please do sign and share this petition:

And please continue to complain directly to LCY via:

The complaint numbers for the year to date are still relatively low (there are around 155 and about 25% of those are mine as I have complained each day the flightpath goes over FH) which I find surprising and disappointing since this flightpath affects thousands of people including schoolchildren in Forest Hill and Dulwich on approximately 40% of days of the year.

A number of local residents led by @ThorNogson are doing their utmost to put pressure on LCY to reconsider the concentrated flightpath but they can’t do it without the local community doing their bit and showing there is wider public opposition to the inequitable distribution of flightpaths over south east London. Signing and sharing the petition and continuing to register complaints is really important if you don’t want a future of 150 low flying aircraft over your homes and schools every day.

Done, although the petition doesn’t seem to refer to the concentrated flight path over SE London.

Indeed, fair point. I suspect it was started by someone living under the other LCY concentrated flight path (for Westerly departures by the looks of it), but it refers to concentrated flight paths generally and references Sadiq Khan’s apparent opposition to them and asks that he takes action. It’s inconceivable I think that any action he were to take (if any…) wouldn’t also apply to the concentrated flight path over South East london (which is the LCY Easterly Arrivals flightpath).

Seems exceptionally noisy this morning. And possibly earlier than usual?

LCY claims www.flightradar24.com data is inaccurate, but I do find it corresponds with my experience i.e. when the noise is loud, the site shows the aircraft flying even lower than the usual (unacceptable) 2,000 ft. This morning the height of overflying incoming London City aircraft are closer to 1600 ft.

5 posts were split to a new topic: Reporting Aircraft Noise over SE23 using the Explane App

Just to offer a different perspective here. I really don’t see much of an issue. I happily sit out in the garden with a beer watching the planes fly over and I can’t say that the noise every really bothers me. It’s more of a background noise to me and comes as part of living in a major city which relies heavily/benefits from a thriving aviation industry. I certainly never woken by the sound, nor my wife and we are pretty light sleepers. Anyway, like I say…a different perspective.

A usually solid source says London City now propose to fly all day Saturday and all day Sunday. Currently they fly all week but get Sat mornings and Sunday afternoons only. To remind you, they fly over SE23 about 40% of days already. An end to quiet Saturday evenings then - the only day you could guarantee friends an evening in the garden without their noise. Some recent readings in a local garden under the flightpath show around 80 decibels max per plane.

6 posts were split to a new topic: Trump’s Helicopters over SE23

LHR flights over Forest Hill relentless today, almost like they were using LCY’s concentrated flight path, but higher.

re Heathrow, yes on westerly winds it can be noisy. They start the next phase of their public consultation later this month which will include proposals on management of noise.

Meanwhile at the Heathrow Community Noise Forum today (btw the Forest Hill Society is one of the Community groups with a seat on this group), SE London is being represented by HACAN and Plane Hell Action who are presenting proposals to the industry represented there (Heathrow, NATS, CAA, DfT etc). They include reference to the simultaneous overflight we experience by Heathrow and London City airports in this area. Their analysis, report and recommendations are here:- https://hacan.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/NoiseRelief.pdf

Very quiet today, just birdsong this morning. unusual wind conditions i guess. London City are landing from the east. Heathrow landing from the west. Result- no arrivals over SE london, just occasional Heathrow departures over Crystal Palace. I have never witnessed this before. What a difference it makes.
edit:- Looks as if a wind directly from the north leads to no flight arrivals over us - hardly ever happens.

image960×540 216 KB

A small group from Catford and Forest Hill have arranged to meet the Head Commissioner of the Independent Commission on Civil Aviation Noise on Wednesday this week. Does anyone have any observations, comments that you’d like us to take with us? About aircraft noise, its impact on enjoyment of home or garden, flight paths, runways etc? ICCAN is a new body, currently devising their new strategy, here for interest.

I have sent a handful of emails to City Airport on this topic, is there any email address i can send a brief overview to?

Do pm me if you would like to - I am going to the meeting. Thanks.

Indeed it’s pretty rare for Heathrow to be on easterlies and City to be on westerlies at the same time.

http://www.eans.net/Mess/ShowTrack.php?R=640&S=1&D=10/06/2019&Z=09:00:00&TT=3&N=3600

shows this for a spell during Monday morning

Last week I was able to say to the new Minister for Aviation, Baroness Vere, that London City Airport continue to receive complaints at record levels despite their concentrated flight path being 3 years old, and their defence that fewer people are affected by aircraft noise since the changes. So thanks for keeping the complaint numbers up. We need ammunition like this. The third quarter starts on 1 July, one complaint per person per quarter all helps.

I was invited (for Forest Hill Society) to meet the Minister and a group of her officials along with a small number of other resident/community groups to present some of the concerns of communities about aviation issues. In a 10 min presentation I introduced the topic of concentrated flight paths and the impact on the overflown, with Lewisham/Catford/Dulwich as a case study, and using slides like the one below. So we can be in no doubt that crossing of airport flight paths over London, low altitude flying by London City, and other Heathrow/City noise issues raised by SE London are now known issues. We also discussed with the Minister the growing evidence of particulate pollution from aircraft, and the fitness for purpose of the noise metrics used by the aviation sector and Government policy makers.

The week before I met (with two residents from Hither Green) Rob Light the head Commissioner from ICCAN, the new Independent Commission on Civil Aviation Noise. Rob gave us a good hearing, and again we can say that our SE London issues have been put on the map as national aviation policy and flight path design over the whole of SE England is under review.

Finally, two weeks ago I met with the London City Airport Consultative Committee and raised again our concerns about their current flight path and their new project to look again at them. They assured me that the Forest Hill Society will be included as early as possible in the design principles stage, so we have a chance to put our views in early.

No guarantees obviously, but perhaps we can have more confidence that we won’t have a concentrated path dumped on us again without at least knowing about it and having the downsides properly considered.

I am not really bothered by it, I quite like watching them and imaging where they’ve come from, who is one them, are they happy to be coming in to land. Who are they visiting? Who have they left?

Thanks for all your work on this. We have really noticed an increase in flight noise and frequency, and moving into summer this becomes much more of an issue as more time is spent outside (or with windows open). Complaints lodged as suggested.

Agreed. Thank you. I grew up on air force bases and am probably more used to airplane noise than most. But while a Bombardier or Embraer may not be as noisy as an F-18 or a Hercules landing, the frequency of the movements makes this far worse than any base I’ve lived on.

I spent 16 years under the flight path on Waldenshaw Road and the only time I noticed a plane was when Concord used to fly over. I sat above the bandstand in Horniman Park on Sunday and only noticed the planes as someone mentioned how quiet Norfolk must be, this is a photo from Sunday. It’s not! Imagine American F15s doing pretend dogfights above your house followed by Spectre gunships and the occasional Osprey. Talking of which. The birds drive me nuts at false dawn through to twilight and you can’t ban them!

IMG_20190623_131021-011512×2688 1.4 MB

Thor, thanks very much for all your work on this.
On a different note to noise, are you aware of the impact of increased pollution impact due to current/future low flying air planes? Pollution from airplanes are meant to be the most harmful on air quality after all…

hi Tim, welcome and thanks for your interest.

Yes the emissions from planes are very much under discussion. The Teddington Action Group (TAG), made a presentation to the Minister on this issue last week. The argument is that, carbon aside, Government are overlooking important recent research on the issue, especially on particulate aircraft emissions, and that these emissions travel far further from Airport perimeters over urban London than is claimed by the aviation industry and policy documents. TAGs Neil Spurrier argued this at a judicial review concerning Heathrow earlier in the year.

'the risk is substantial that expansion will not comply with the Air Quality Regulations.

I had argued extensively that three studies, all specially referred to by the Air Quality Expert Group of DEFRA, show that harmful ultrafine particulates and NOx from aircraft can travel for more than 20 kilometres downwind from the point of emission, rather than the 2 kilometres stated by the Government. The amount of emissions could be 4 to 5 fold the norm under the flight paths up to 10 kilometres and even 20% above the norm at 40 kilometres from the airport. One of the surveys was at Los Angeles Airport, in which the report stated that

“We measured at least a 2-fold increase in PN concentrations over unimpacted baseline PN concentrations during most hours of the day in an area of about 60 km2 that extended to 16 km (10 miles) downwind and a 4- to 5-fold increase to 8−10 km (5−6 miles) downwind. Locations of maximum PN concentrations were aligned to eastern, downwind jet trajectories during prevailing westerly winds and to 8 km downwind concentrations exceeded 75 000 particles/cm3, more than the average freeway PN concentration in Los Angeles.”

*Evidence from Queen Mary’s University hospital was produced showing the damage caused by ultrafine particulates going deep into the blood stream and being passed down to the next generation by entering the placenta surrounding an unborn foetus.’

more detail here.
http://www.teddingtonactiongroup.com/2019/05/01/high-court-gives-ruling-in-heathrow-judicial-review-challenges/

Following concerns raised by constituents in the Catford area - which is under both Heathrow and London City flightpaths - Lewisham East MP Janet Daby is holding a public meeting on airline noise and flight paths for her constituents on 26 July.
https://www.janetdaby.org/news/2019/06/26/have-your-say-aircraft-noise-and-flight-paths/

Any chance Ellie Reeves could be persuaded to enquire whether we could join forces for the meeting? Both are Labour MPs so perhaps they would be happy to cooperate since both constituencies suffer the identical problem and there would be more strength in numbers to make voices heard in Westminster, Heathrow and City Airport?

Agree that’s worth asking. Anyone care to contact her with the suggestion? She probably hears enough from me.

As rumoured, London City Airport want to double their flights, start earlier in the morning, finish later in the evening and do away with the 24 hour break between midday Saturday and Sunday. Their new draft Masterplan consultation opened today, a month ahead of what was expected. There are consultation meetings planned, but not round here. Link here. https://www.londoncityairport.com/corporate/consultation

So heads up, anyone who wants or does not want this to happen has the chance to say. There is time to think about it, consultation closes in September.

London City has dropped its old USP of being an airport essential for London business, you only have to look at the list of destinations, https://www.londoncityairport.com/destinations?utm_campaign=291405_Fall%20in%20love%20with%20these%20fabulous%20five&utm_medium=email&utm_source=London%20City%20Airport&dm_i=4ZFH,68UL,2FUB7F,MFD9,1

They want a bigger, leisure travel orientated airport.

and here is HACAN East’s take on the issues of expansion:-

To respond to the London City Airport Masterplan Consultation, here is an excellent briefing from HACAN East, who recommend we do not answer the loaded questions compiled by London City Airport, but freestyle. Their briefing and your own experience and observations will be all you need.
*"What we suggest you do: *
Write down what you want to say about the consultation in your own words and email it to London City: consultation@londoncityairport.com or send it the airport at the Freepost address. "

Sadly for those impacted, Consolidated flight paths have changed the rule book!

Last week I met with Lewisham West and Penge MP Ellie Reeves to discuss Heathrow and London City flight paths, expansion plans and aircraft over Lewisham. We also talked about the London City proposed Masterplan which will increase east-west air traffic across Lewisham, start earlier and finish later, and end the 24 hour respite period at weekends. It will also use the same low altitude concentrated flight path as at present until at least 2025, when changes may be introduced, but there is no guarantee. We had a very positive discussion. Forest Hill Society will be responding to the consultation and we would encourage all residents affected by noise from the current overflight to do the same. Details of how to do this are a couple of posts above this thread.

No consultation event has been organised by London City Airport in our area, but the idea is under consideration locally. More details when known.

Meanwhile one for the diary and a chance to express support or opposition in person. Janet Daby MP has organised public meeting on 26 July with both airports in Catford. Its aimed at her constituents in Lewisham East really, but it would be good to have strong attendance and ensure a robust community discussion with the two expanding airports.

There’s a new petition aimed at Newham Council in protest against the earlier starts, later finishes and the removal of a 24 hr no flying window at weekends. All of this is proposed by London City Airport who are regulated by Newham but overfly 13 different London Boroughs. Every voice counts in letting Newham policy makers hear what Londoners think.

Public meeting about increase in aircraft noise in SE London this Friday. Hope it is well attended. We encourage our MPs by attending and participating in their events and demonstrating our concerns - hoping in turn they will support us.

https://www.janetdaby.org/news/2019/06/26/have-your-say-aircraft-noise-and-flight-paths/

And a few questions you could ask. I will be away and unable to attend.

You claim that new generation planes will be quieter on takeoff but say nothing about arrivals. You fly level under 2000 ft for 20 miles over our area. Exactly how much quieter are you claiming, and why have you published no data on this? Peak noise level for an Embraer Jet is currently 75-80 dB under the low altitude flight path round here.

We understand from noise expert sources close to the airport that round here, actually in level flight at low altitude , new generation jets will only give a 2 to 3 decibel reduction - barely noticeable to the human ear. When will you release data that is relevant to our area?

In 2017 you flew 10k aircraft at low altitude over Lewisham. With increasingly more easterly winds, you will double this by 2022 when you will increase overall aircraft movements to 111 000. How on earth do you expect support from Lewisham to treble flights over our area by 2035 when you have made absolutely no commitment to fly higher or offer alternative flight paths to the single low altitude path over our homes.

You consistently claim to have a steep 5.5 degree descent landing angle. Yet you fly in level flight at under 2000 ft for 20 miles over SE London. Your claim seems a rather dishonest representation of the truth as far as Lewisham is concerned does it not?

After three years of record complaint numbers why does your Masterplan seem to make no mention of the low altitude single arrivals flight path over SELondon that you introduced against considerable opposition in 2016? Or any objective to change it?

We understand that your low altitude flight path over SE London cannot change until 2025. You have made no commitment and set no objective to put right the damage you caused in 2016. We should not even give this Masterplan a hearing until you have introduced a proper flight path arrivals plan for SE London.

You say , without giving evidence, that new generation aircraft will be quieter. So introduce them. Let us hear for ourselves, then we might be able to talk about expansion. But the truth is, your plan says you will only have 75 per cent of the fleet as next generation by 2035. That means we will have about the same number of noisy ones that we have today plus added to that about twice as many of the so called quieter ones as well. And no guarantee or credible plan to say that they won’t be on exactly the same low altitude path as today.

Last November you assured the London Assembly Environment Committee that you would work together towards stopping your two flight paths crossing, fly higher, offer respite routes. But nothing has changed. I found no reference to the low altitude concentrated SE London flight paths in the Masterplan. Isn’t the truth that you are , without any care, abandoning SE London to an increasingly noisy future in pursuit of your own ends?

The meeting was well attended with a lively Q & A session following the usual corporate presentations by Heathrow, London City, and Head of Corporate Affairs at NATS.

Janet Daby MP did a great job chairing the meeting, and impressed me as someone who understands the situation, and the anger and dismay of suffering residents.

One Lewisham Councillor attended, but none from our ward.

Attendees had a lot to say and many questions, so were limited to one question each. I asked about the introduction of Performance Based Navigation (concentrated flight paths) which they claimed was “mandated by government”. Neither the airport reps, nor the NATS rep could point to exactly what the mandate was: i.e. was it regulation, voluntary agreement, some other instruction? They also did not know where it came from.

Angry London residents turned out in numbers at another public meeting last Friday to challenge London City Airport expansion plans. John Cryer MP summed up the truth for many:- ‘The MP stated the skies over his constituency were already overcrowded with planes and that these proposals would simply make things worse.’

As the word spreads about what London City wants to do, the fight back is being led by a new campaign from HACAN East which needs support from the overflown right now. ‘Back the Ban’, supports the retention of the existing 24 hour ban on flights between Saturday and Sunday lunchtimes. London City say they now want to fly in this period. What can you do?

1. Fill out a Back the Ban postcard and post it to London City at their Freepost address. Here it is. https://hacan.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/HACANeast-Cut-n-Post-BTB-A4-Print-Colour-2-3.pdf

2.Sign the Change petition to Newham Council, which is the body with approval over the airport’s planning applications and activities. Here it is. http://chng.it/X6gss942

Meanwhile, hard on the heels of discussions with our MP Ellie Reeves last month, the Forest Hill Society has been invited to brief a group of Lewisham Councillors at the Civic Suite on the issues arising for residents from Heathrow and London City overlapping flightpaths, lack of joint planning by the two, and their noise and emissions. In the context of the Climate Emergency, we will be suggesting that the Council use its influence through consultation responses etc to defend residents from additional environmental disturbance, and develop a clear policy position for the Borough on these matters - as many other London Councils have done.
http://www.hacaneast.org.uk/news

Ellie Reeves our local MP has written a terrific letter to London City Airport expressing her concerns about the LCY expansion masterplan. Can I encourage everyone to have a read of it but more importantly, please can you like, comment on, and/or retweet the letter - it’s important now that Ellie is engaged on this issue that she hears from local constituents that this is an issue they care about and encourage her to remain involved. LCY have demonstrated over the past few years that they don’t give a damn what the average joe (or jane!) thinks and the masterplan shows they fully intend to make air and noise pollution over our area significantly worse in the future - we really need the support of local politicians to ensure our voices are heard and LCY don’t continue to ignore us.

Published yesterday, the London Assembly submitted a response to London City Airport’s ‘Our Future Skies – Airspace Modernisation’ plans in a short but pleasing press release:

https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/assembly/how-much-noise-is-too-much

Commenting on the submission, Chair of the London Assembly Environment Committee, Caroline Russell AM, said:

“The Environment Committee has been reviewing and monitoring airspace in London for several years. The Committee has uncovered concerning evidence about how aviation noise impacts Londoners’ quality of life.
…
“The damaging effect of aircraft noise on Londoners’ lives can no longer be ignored. The London Assembly is recommending that any changes to airspace and flight paths at London City Airport prioritise the health and well-being of overflown Londoners, over and above the commercial interests of the airport.”

It is good that the London Assembly has come out in opposition to LCY’s plans but I remain slightly bemused by what powers the London Assembly actually has. Last year they wrote a damning report about the impact of aircraft noise on Londoners and singled out LCY’s concentrated flight paths for particular criticism and made a number of recommendations none of which have been followed. It seems like, other than a little bit of bad PR, LCY just ignore any criticism or recommendations and continue to impose whatever arrangements they want on our skies.

[Edit: Actually the previous report was as recent as January 2019 and can be read here: https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/aircraft_noise_report.pdf]

I wrote to the Mayor’s office when the consultation came our asking for what his response was going to be. I got this response last week

Thank you for writing to the Mayor on 1 July about City Airport. I have been asked to respond on his behalf. The Mayor has repeatedly said that where airport growth takes place it should not be at the expense of London’s environment or the health of its residents. London City Airport’s draft master plan appears to be a first step towards seeking an easing of restrictions at the airport, with potentially significant consequences for our environment, transport network and personal health and wellbeing.
Officers at the Greater London Authority and Transport for London are carefully scrutinising the detail of the proposals set out in London City Airport’s draft master plan. This work will inform the Mayor’s response to the consultation, which will be made in September.
Thank you again for writing to the Mayor, I hope this reassures you the Mayor is committed to standing up for Londoners and our environment.

Forest Hill Society met with Lewisham Council and London City Airport last week to discuss the expansive Masterplan. I presented to Councillors about the flight paths over our area, low altitude concentration, flaws in the London City plans and argued that the Borough should take a clear public position and use their influence to protect the health and wellbeing of Lewisham’s overflown against further aviation expansion over our homes, in the context of the Climate Emergency. Our presentation and briefing was very well received. We recommended that they endorse the London Assembly report from January 2019 ( which incidentally I am pleased to say referenced my own report of August 2018 on the problems over our area).

We will be sharing our responses to the London City Flight path design consultation, and the simultaneous Masterplan consultation with LB Lewisham, again to ensure our analysis can be used in influential places by our elected representatives.

This week I have been invited to meet along with two fellow campaigners with the two key aviation and transport advisers to Sadiq Khan, and hope to put our case directly to them, and to influence the Mayor’s response to the draft Masterplan.

We are discussing the possibility of arranging a public meeting with London City in our area, probably week of 2nd September, when residents from Forest Hill, Honor Oak, Dulwich etc would have the chance to hear from the Airport and ask questions.

The Back the Ban campaign is receiving massive support from London residents, and it is quite possible that the Masterplan expansion will be stopped. Please respond to the Masterplan consultation if you have an opinion. http://www.hacaneast.org.uk/news

Not satisfactory that the Mayor did not reply; this issue affects thousands of residents in his Borough.

Indeed, this is a point I made recently in a letter to Ellie Reeves MP. There are no noise standards and there is no authority (local, city-wide, or national) tasked with enforcement. New legislation is urgently required.

A good meeting today with Sadiq Khan’s team to put the case against London City expansion. We will see what his consultation response is. Meanwhile campaigning efforts are making progress with a firm steer to the airport from its planning authority, Newham. What next?

This is promising, although I would rather there was a focus on the health emergency rather than climate emergency

http://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/environment-and-health/noise/noise

The health and wellbeing argument is gaining traction and is well understood in meetings with Lewisham councillors and Sadiq Khans team in the last week. But public climate emergency recognition has struck a more urgent chord with politicians and public alike and seems to have supercharged the acceptance that we need to stop and think about aviation expansion.

The first stage of the London City airport Design Principles consultation ends on Sunday - this is the first stage of a process that will decide what the priorities are for their flight paths as they are reworked, a project that will end in 2025. It’s fairly dry stuff, but important given the massive mistakes they made last time around, ending in concentrated low altitude flights tracking across SE London.

This stage has been aimed at organisations and the Forest Hill Society’s response is linked below. But anyone can comment - feel free to use any of it, or simply copy the recommendations part and endorse it if you have time to pen a few words in an email to London City at ourfutureskies@londoncityairport.com .

https://1drv.ms/b/s!AuV6NOp8I8tAp1vfUqATNHOgL9KP

re London City Airport expansion, terrific to see this from Lewisham Council

to respond to the London City Airport flight path consultation , which ends tomorrow, you don’t need to get all technical. Here’s a clear, heartfelt letter from a local resident which makes clear points. Respond to the consultation at ourfutureskies@londoncityairport.com

'Your Response Form is too ambiguous to complete correctly.

First of all, we do not consider that sufficient publicity has been given to this matter. Advertisements in a few freebie newspapers which are not generally available across the area has NOT given the public affected sufficient notice. It also appears to us that with the ongoing Heathrow Consultations, that City Airport are endeavouring to get their Consultations through under the radar.

*London City Airport is situated in a densely populated residential area and consequently their planes flyover a large residential area including South East London at altitudes of 2000 feet or less when they are some 20 miles from touch down. The noise from these planes is such as to interrupt conversation, radio and television etc particularly in hot weather when windows etc are open. *

We do not agree that no new areas should be overflown, the noise and pollution generated by these planes must be shared out more fairly and not targeted on the same unfortunate residents. It is imperative, that as a matter of urgency that residents are NOT overflown by planes from more than one airport. This area of SE London is overflown by both City and Heathrow planes.

*City Airport was built on the understanding that it would be used by turbo prop aircraft and the BAE 146, not the jets now thundering over SE London. In addition, it would be an airport used for business people with the result that there would not be that many flights. Nowadays, planes are thundering over every few minutes. *

It is amazing how we have to respond to numerous Consultations now, but Concentrated Flight Paths were imposed upon us without any prior notice or Consultation.

We are also concerned about safety and pollution with the number of aircraft which fly almost non stop over this area.

Resident’s health should come before profit of airports, particularly when they are not even UK owned."

I clicked on the link at the bottom of your post. This is a great piece of work; thank you ThorNogson for your time and attention. It has a lot more integrity than anything I have seen produced by any of the airports, or NATS or CAA or politicians.

In contrast this is the document from the International Civil Aviation Organization which every country has apparently signed up to:

Apparently what has happened to us (people of Forest Hill and elsewhere in South East London) is in the cause of Environmental Protection:
"Improving the environmental performance of aviation is a challenge ICAO takes very seriously. In fulfilling its responsibilities, the Organization developed a range of standards, policies and guidance material for the application of integrated measures to address aircraft noise and emissions embracing technological improvements, operating procedures, proper organization of air traffic, appropriate airport and land-use planning, and the use of market-based options.

All of this has contributed to aircraft operations that today can be 70% more efficient than in the 1970s.

In 2004, ICAO adopted three major environmental goals, to:

a. limit or reduce the number of people affected by significant aircraft noise;"
https://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/Pages/default.aspx

There we have it - a United Nations Agency (ICAO) decided that we should suffer from a concentrated flight path (a.k.a. “proper organization of air traffic”), in the name of Environmental Protection. Fewer people are to be affected, but those who are affected will suffer an increased level of noise.

The London City Airport Masterplan consultation ends 20th Sept and we could do with some help. I have a stock of around 300 Defend Your Weekend postcards needing distributing for people to register their objections to the proposed expansion by ticking a few boxes and sending to a Freepost address. You can also drop into the All Inn One to pick one up and fill it in over a pint. The post box is just across the road from the pub.

Could anyone who lives under the flightpath deliver maybe 50 or 100 of these to local homes near you that you know are also affected by the aircraft noise?

We have already covered 700 homes on Horniman Hill, that is the Tewkesbury Estate. Also the homes on the hill the other side of Catford, the Corbett Estate. Climate Action Lewisham have distributed another 200. What about homes around Lordship Lane/ Dulwich Park, or Lowther Hill and Blythe Hill areas? Please PM me if you can do this. I can deliver to you. thanks.

I’d be happy to distribute some flyers around Lowther/Blythe Hill but not sure how to PM?

I’ve enabled PMing for you

HACAN East will be holding a public meeting, jointly with the No3rdRunway Campaign and Plane Hell Action, covering London City and Heathrow expansion on 4th September , 7-9pm, St Mark’s Church Kennington, 337 Kennington Park Rd, SE11 4PW

Hi - what is the latest on this? Presently we are woken at 4am by aircraft that are literally non stop and it is having a severe effect on my health and I’d like to help… they don’t stop until gone 19pm and I am literally going crazy/don’t want to live here anymore

I have much sympathy for you and for everyone whose enjoyment of their homes is blighted by aircraft noise. Early morning, before 6.30am planes and late night ones after 10.30 are from Heathrow. Heathrow want to expand massively with the 3rd runway. To learn more about both Heathrow and London City expansions and what we can do about them there are public meetings - one at Kennington on Wed 4 Sept mentioned above in this thread for example.

Heathrow has a consultation open now, and people can write to support or object. The consultation is very complex, and would need most of us to take half a day to work out what is going on and what to say. But one easy way, right now, to object to this is to follow the advice of the London Assembly, which I reproduce here together with their article that it comes from.

copy and paste the below paragraph and send to: feedback@heathrowconsultation.com ](mailto: feedback@heathrowconsultation.com)

Heathrow expansion fundamentally goes against the UK’s commitment to cut carbon emissions and improve air quality in the capital.

It’s going to make air pollution worse, increase carbon emissions and increase noise, and we don’t support.

I stand with hundreds of others calling for it to be CANCELLED. http://bit.ly/5ReasonsForNoHeathrow

Our local MP Ellie Reeves asked for an emergency parliamentary debate on LCY’s expansion plans in Parliament today. The pompous response from the Leader of the House Jacob Rees Mogg demonstrated that he is far more interested in the “convenience” of City Airport and doesn’t care two hoots for the thousands of plebs that live under its concentrated flight paths. I doubt many planes fly over his castle, maybe a few spitfires or the red arrows…

I am glad to see this raised, although the issue of concentrated flight paths was not alluded to.

Fantastic support and initiative from Ellie Reeves. After our meeting with her not long ago, she could hardly support all the effort we have made on behalf of the Forest Hill Society more than by asking in the House of Commons for a Parliamentary debate. That, plus she has endorsed the Society response to the London City Airport masterplan consultation by adding a statement of support. I am also made up with the support from our Forest Hill ward councillors and other Lewisham councillors including Cabinet member Sophie McGeevor who attended the City Airport Consultative committee meeting with me last week, putting a number of extremely critical questions to the airport. Also Len Duvall our London Assembly member who has met with us on a number of occasions. As many will have found, Airports are able to brush off individual complaints. It is harder for them to ignore consistent pressure from our elected representatives.

Still time to respond to London City Airports expansion Masterplan. The impact will be to treble their aircraft numbers flying low over SE London compared to 2017 levels. Recent noise measurements show that their ‘new generation’ aircraft are not perceptibly quieter over SE London than the current ones.

Following local interest in the expansive plans of London City and Heathrow Airports, HACAN, the campaigning group is arranging a local meeting for Forest Hill and Catford on 31 Oct.

Many will know that the Forest Hill Society has been very active on the issues, gaining support from the Council and from our MP Ellie Reeves. We have worked with other resident groups from the Corbett Estate in Catford, who have secured strong support from their MP Janet Daby. And we have also worked closely with the Dulwich Society, and the Tewkesbury Lodge Residents Association providing information and briefings for their members too.

John Stewart from HACAN says:-
a fair number of people have said that they are interested in getting more active in their local areas. I have therefore set up a series of local meetings. They are not public meetings as such (though nobody will be turned away). Their purpose is to allow our supporters to meet fellow supporters in their area and see if there is the appetite to be active locally.

The meetings I have set up are as follows:

16th October: Eltham – St Mary’s Community Centre, 180 Eltham High St, SE9 1BY, 7.30-9pm (aimed at our supporters in the boroughs of Bexley and Greenwich).

22nd October: Dulwich/Herne Hill – Herne Hill Methodist Church, 155 Half Moon Lane, SE 24 9TS, 7.30 -9pm (aimed at people in Dulwich and Herne Hill)

23rd October: Colliers Row/Romford – North Romford Community Centre, Clockhouse Lane, Colliers Row, RM5 3QJ,7.30-9pm (aimed at people in Colliers Row, Romford and Havering)

24th October: Leytonstone –St Johns Church, High Rd, Leytonstone, E11 1HH,7.30 -9pm (aimed at people in Leyton and Leytonstone)

28th October: Wanstead –Wanstead Friends Meeting House, Bush Road, Wanstead, E11 3AU, 7.30 -9pm (aimed at people in Wanstead and South Woodford)

29th October: Oval – Kennington Park Community Centre, Harleyford St, Oval, SE11 5SY, 7.30 -9pm (aimed at people in Vauxhall, Oval, Stockwell and Brixton)

30th October: Mile End – Queen Mary’s University, Mile End Rd, E1 4NS, 7.30 – 9pm (aimed at people in Tower Hamlets and Newham)

31st October : Catford –St Lawrence Church, 37 Bromley Rd, Catford, SE6 2TS, 7.30 -9pm (aimed at people in Catford and Forest Hill).

I’m glad she brought it up as its something i feel strongly about. However you’ve clearly misrepresented him as he didn’t actually say that!

Well we can agree to disagree. I think beginning an answer to a question about the expansion of City airport increasing levels of noise and air pollution at a time of climate emergency and requesting an urgent government debate on the matter with the words, “City Airport is a fantastic airport and very convenient to use…” and thereafter not committing to an urgent debate on the issue but simply listing the various ways MPs can try and get issues heard, strongly suggests that JRM’s sympathies are likely to be with the airport rather than those affected by its operations. You obviously have a different interpretation. I imagine each of our opinions are likely to be informed by our existing views on JRM’s integrity and character, but this isn’t the place for that discussion.

last chance - with just a few days to go until the expansion Masterplan consultation for London City airport closes on 18 October, here is the full response setting out reasons to oppose the expansion, made on behalf of the Forest Hill Society. Please feel free to cut, paste or endorse in a quick email to the airport at consultation@londoncityairport.com.
Or support the airport’s expansion if that’s your thing!

Very noisy this evening, even with all windows closed.

As i said, on this topic we are on the same side and happy to agree to disagree, but wiser to just avoid using emotive words such as pompous, plebs etc and sticking to the facts - he said its not urgent and to bring it up in normal channels in the next session, which however annoying is reasonable.

I think there are times the man in question shows a high level of pomposity… it is his brand… but in this circumstance you are correct sir.

Good reply Luke.

Let’s please keep this topic on the main focus of disucssion, noting that se23.life is a politically neutral forum as per the guidelines here: https://se23.life/faq#politics

just a reminder that John Stewart, Chair of HACAN East, the aircraft noise campaign group has invited interested local residents to this meeting to discuss next options in the campaign to stop London City Airport expansion.

The expansion Masterplan consultation ended with a bang last week, when the Mayor of London weighed in with multiple reasons why he could not support their plans. He joined most of the 13 overflown London Boroughs in his opposition, including Lewisham, Tower Hamlets, and Newham, the Airport’s planning authority. He included in his response several of the points about noise and flight paths that the Forest Hill Society argued for in a meeting with his senior transport advisors a couple of months ago.

A decent summary from AirportWatch reproduced below:-
Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, has warned London City Airport that “unfettered growth is not an option” as he criticised its plans for expansion. He said residents must have a break from plane noise, and the airport should take its air pollution and environmental responsibilities more seriously. The airport, in a densely populated area of east London, is increasingly used for holiday travel – not business – and it wants to increase the current cap of 111,000 flights/year to 137,000 by 2030 and to 151,000 by 2035. It hopes for 5 million passengers this year, but wants up to 6.5 million per year. The Mayor said the current plans “would not be in the interest of Londoners”. He said noise from planes was a “fundamental issue” as changes to flight paths three years ago meant some areas were being flown over too often. Also that breaks from flights – overnight, and for 24 hours from lunchtime on Saturday – “must not be eroded” and the airport should use new technology to give residents more relief, not just to maximise profits. He said the airport mus t consider CO2 emissions from flights in its carbon reduction plans, as its current target of “net zero emissions by 2050 “does not include flights – only airport terminals, vehicles, and other ground operations.
http://www.airportwatch.org.uk/

London City Airport branded a ‘noisy neighbour’ in this critical summary by Private Eye.

“Boris Johnson unveils plan to increase number of flights …”

As regards Heathrow, I predict we will see a “mid-air U-turn” as he did for London City Airport

Just flew out of City. If they’re getting more flights they need a bigger terminal. Rammed at checkin and departures, especially with delays due to weather.

I think they are busily building one, extending out over the former docks.

Last week, London City airport executives told their own consultative committee in a publicly open meeting that they had received 1800 responses to their expansion plan consultation, about 50/50 for and against. It was pointed out to them that this appeared to ignore (something we have been told by airport staff) some 4000 ‘Back the Ban’ postcards with names, signature and postcodes objecting to further flight numbers or any extension to weekend flying. The airport staff concerned became quite flustered and angry and dismissed these responses as generic campaigning material. That is the kind of organisation we are dealing with.

They are now ‘analysing’ the responses, but there is no indication that they include the postcard responses or do this in a fair or transparent way, and they look hell bent on expanding whatever this sham community consultation outcome. Next up will be a report on the consultation written by the airport, probably issued simultaneously with a planning application to Newham. Anyone with a little knowledge of research who looked at the consultation questions will have noted that they included leading, conditional and assumptive questions. They are in such a hurry to push this all through that they also failed to run the consultation questions by their own consultative committee- who might have been able to point out the failings.

I and a few others, particularly through campaign group HACAN East, are trying to encourage the consultative committee to push the airport and ensure transparency and fair play in this process - while continuing pressure on noise and climate emergency grounds.

We are also collaborating with XR, who are also encouraging the Canadian owners to have a think about what they are doing.

Continues: Aircraft Noise over SE23 (2020)