Calling all non-NIMBYs
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Calling all non-NIMBYs
This item is featured on the front page of BBC News:
BBC News - Living Under a Sky of Sound
It reads to me like an unedited plug for John Stewart and his HACAN vehicle. Perhaps someone in the know can comment on whether flights over Clapham were really unknow prior to the 1990's?
At the end there's a link for comments. As I'm sure he will have a well-orchestrated campaign of supporters posting on there, I would urge all PPRuNers to make their voices heard too. I certainly intend to.
PV
PS If the above link doesn't work, there's currently a direct link from the BBC News home page BBC News .
BBC News - Living Under a Sky of Sound
It reads to me like an unedited plug for John Stewart and his HACAN vehicle. Perhaps someone in the know can comment on whether flights over Clapham were really unknow prior to the 1990's?
At the end there's a link for comments. As I'm sure he will have a well-orchestrated campaign of supporters posting on there, I would urge all PPRuNers to make their voices heard too. I certainly intend to.
PV
PS If the above link doesn't work, there's currently a direct link from the BBC News home page BBC News .
Unfortunately, they also monitor this site for our comments. He does not speak for myself, neither have I asked him to do so. I live closer than himself. I hear more noise from trains at Clapham Junction than planes.
Paid up
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm afraid it's all part of the disease of politically correct culture that is stifling the UK economically - listening to self important 'campaigners' like this bozo.
In other countries they get on with things, in the UK we prevaricate.
In other countries they get on with things, in the UK we prevaricate.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seconded, Trinity 09L
I also live in the part of sout east London allegedly "blighted" by aircraft noise according to Mr Stewart. Admittedly further along the approach path than Clapham, but right underneath one of the places where the Heathrow Directors seem to like to turn planes onto finals... 
and indeed the busses going along Brunel Road make more noticeable sound than the planes do...
So I'd like to put on record that he doesn't speak for me, either.
DHS
PS If any of the Heathrow Directors read this and can arrange for a visit to LTCC so that I can see what it all looks like on Radar rather than the ground...
and indeed the busses going along Brunel Road make more noticeable sound than the planes do...So I'd like to put on record that he doesn't speak for me, either.
DHS
PS If any of the Heathrow Directors read this and can arrange for a visit to LTCC so that I can see what it all looks like on Radar rather than the ground...
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,640
Received 300 Likes
on
168 Posts
How come if he's owned the house since 1980 (or whatever, I've closed the link) he's only woken up to the aircraft since 1996? Continental drift doesn't apply here, Clapham has ALWAYS been under the approach to 27L since EGLL opened, and the majority of airliners operating these days are definitely quieter than the older Boeings, MDDs and Tridents that were prevelant 20 years ago...
He should try living on the main road I do, apart from the buses, general traffic, emergency sirens, et al, there is a dairy opposite! Deliveries at 5am, banging, shouting, milk floats, rattling crates... and all though the double glazing! I don't complain and I don't even get my milk delivered, but I bet he flies off on holiday or business!
He should try living on the main road I do, apart from the buses, general traffic, emergency sirens, et al, there is a dairy opposite! Deliveries at 5am, banging, shouting, milk floats, rattling crates... and all though the double glazing! I don't complain and I don't even get my milk delivered, but I bet he flies off on holiday or business!
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: I wish I knew
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Notice how the photograph of the 747 misrepresents the situation. Either photograph has been doctored or it was taken many miles from Mr Stewarts home. Aircraft are no where near that low over Clapham.
I also wonder how Mr Stewart goes up to Scotland. I'll stand corrected if he drives or takes the train.
I also wonder how Mr Stewart goes up to Scotland. I'll stand corrected if he drives or takes the train.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: DXB
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I live in Pimlico (which I belive is even closer to the flight path) and it is difficult to hear the noise of the planes over that of the traffic. It is London, what does he expect.
Has Mr. Stewart had selective hearing from 1980?
As he lives close to the biggest railway junction in the Uk i reckon he may be getting his noises confused.
Go and find a quiet cave somewhere so you cannot be disturbed...please.
Has Mr. Stewart had selective hearing from 1980?
As he lives close to the biggest railway junction in the Uk i reckon he may be getting his noises confused.
Go and find a quiet cave somewhere so you cannot be disturbed...please.
The top background to the picture of Mr Stewart, is in fact Cranford. The 747 on finals picture, is again over Cranford/Hounslow. Neither anywhere near Clapham, but of course a dramatic picture of a 747, also a very old picture maybe a TWA or Air India early model? 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dspprune wrote: "I also live in the part of south east London allegedly "blighted" by aircraft noise according to Mr Stewart. Admittedly further along the approach path than Clapham, but right underneath one of the places where the Heathrow Directors seem to like to turn planes onto finals... "
There is no particular place at which we like to turn planes on to the ILS, nor do we consider the geography beneath when we issue heading instructions.. it depends on several factors - the amount of traffic, the wind and weather, the type of aircraft, what spacing is required on final approach, etc. Ideally we would be looking at a 10nm final approach and as Clapham is about 13 miles out you'll obviously see a few out there if we're busy. You might see more a/c late at night and early in the morning because we are not allowed to turn a/c on to final approach inside 10nm from touchdown during the night noise restrictions. That said, the further out they are the higher they will be, which should reduce noise.
The basic system hasn't changed much in the 30 years I've been a Heathrow Director except that we probably have more busy periods when the final approach becomes longer.
There is no particular place at which we like to turn planes on to the ILS, nor do we consider the geography beneath when we issue heading instructions.. it depends on several factors - the amount of traffic, the wind and weather, the type of aircraft, what spacing is required on final approach, etc. Ideally we would be looking at a 10nm final approach and as Clapham is about 13 miles out you'll obviously see a few out there if we're busy. You might see more a/c late at night and early in the morning because we are not allowed to turn a/c on to final approach inside 10nm from touchdown during the night noise restrictions. That said, the further out they are the higher they will be, which should reduce noise.
The basic system hasn't changed much in the 30 years I've been a Heathrow Director except that we probably have more busy periods when the final approach becomes longer.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HD, thanks for the explanation. You write: "There is no particular place at which we like to turn planes on to the ILS, nor do we consider the geography beneath when we issue heading instructions..."
Oh, I'm sure -- I did say "one of the places" since I'm well aware that stuff is heading south across my office in central London during the day. However, from early morning through the time when I walk to the tube, and again in the evening, there does seem to be a lot of aircraft from the North turning in the vicinity, though this probably corresponds to the "... late at night and early in the morning because we are not allowed to turn a/c on to final approach inside 10nm from touchdown during the night noise restrictions".
Or maybe it only looks like that from the ground
As I hope was clear from my earlier post, I'm anything but complaining. Actually, it can be quite fascinating to watch on a clear evening when you can see aircrfact coming in from all directions to apparently form an orderly queue...
Oh, I'm sure -- I did say "one of the places" since I'm well aware that stuff is heading south across my office in central London during the day. However, from early morning through the time when I walk to the tube, and again in the evening, there does seem to be a lot of aircraft from the North turning in the vicinity, though this probably corresponds to the "... late at night and early in the morning because we are not allowed to turn a/c on to final approach inside 10nm from touchdown during the night noise restrictions".
Or maybe it only looks like that from the ground
As I hope was clear from my earlier post, I'm anything but complaining. Actually, it can be quite fascinating to watch on a clear evening when you can see aircrfact coming in from all directions to apparently form an orderly queue...
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 51
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I used to live in Tooting so often visited Clapham. I never noticed aircraft even flew over, and you know pilots always look up when they here an engine. The traffic must have drowned the noise out!
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Our industry is getting well and truly stuffed by these people -and unfortunately WE are partly to blame. How many of those who have read this thread have ever written to an MP or Councillor to object to excessive noise restrictions?
The "anti's" are well organised and write letters by the score. It works. If we can't be bothered to put our case it WILL cost airline jobs -maybe yours!
The "anti's" are well organised and write letters by the score. It works. If we can't be bothered to put our case it WILL cost airline jobs -maybe yours!
Man of the Marsh
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: LGW
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
H Dir, it is some years since I last operated into LHR, but I seem to recall that radar arrivals are/were directed to intercept the slope at 3-4000ft (the seldom-used procedural alt being lower). Is this still so?
My sister used to live in St Reatham (which is just south of Clapham, and infamous for a profession in which sis was not involved, before anyone starts!). When visiting her in the summer, from the garden (sic) I could see the endless stream of aircraft heading into LHR. Compared to the noise of local ground traffic, the aircraft were virtually silent. I can't believe that one mile north makes much difference. Indoors (during the other 11 months of the year!) the only sound was the constant stream of vehicles, and trains passing through Streatham Common station.
I am not entirely sure what a land-based transport adviser does, but the biblical quote about removing the plank from your own eye comes easily to mind. Ground-vehicle noise pollution in towns and cities is quite horrendous. Examples are mentioned above, but trucks, buses, and bikes that sound like Spitfires, come to mind.
I am always sceptical about these publicity-seeking types like Stewart. Thanks to Low-Pass & Trinity, we can see that anyone flying that low over Clapham would be in serious trouble - either technically, or with his chief pilot. Normally, one would need a fairly powerful zoom lense to get a decent pic of an aeroplane over Clapham. The photo is disingenuous in the extreme.
Apart from the usual question of, "when did you decide to move next to a major airport?", we now seem to have a Clear Skies group which includes people who live 13 miles from one. A schoolboy souvenir of mine, from 1963, proudly claims that LHR sees a takeoff or landing every 90 seconds. treadigraph, above, mentions most of the noisy old types - omitting the dear-old Comet!
Modern aircraft are substantially quieter than their predecessors, yet the anti lobbies are ever noisier. We frequently receive notices promulgating changes to our procedures to further reduce the signature on Deps/Arrs. God knows we try.
My home base, LGW, has a specifically agreed number of night slots. LHR, as far as I was aware, is virtually embargoed at night (H Dir - how many night flights?) so I find this campaign hard to swallow. But still they come.
Gin Slinger makes an important point, especially about our economy. We have, over the past few decades, watched many of our productive industries decay, partially through comfortable indifference but also by political ineptitude. The majority of politicians have never had a "real" job and therefore do not fully comprehend the concept. The trend continues. Candidate selection is increasingly based upon demographic considerations rather than on merit.
Napoleon allegedly observed, "L'Angleterre est une nation de boutiquiers." If indeed said, it was not an insult but an observation of the importance of trade to our island nation, which he then attempted to strangle. Having beaten off our mortal enemies, usually by the skin of our teeth due to defence planning inadequcies, we have subsequently done a fabulous job of wrecking our productive industries all on our own. Oh, how we like to moan about it down at the local!
That historic trade (increasingly service industry on our part!) remains a vital surviving asset and whether one likes it or not, it depends ever more heavily on airports. These anti-airport groups are unwittingly striving to achieve what our historical enemies failed to do. We already have democratic procedures in place to satisfy local residents. They already compromise our operations from a safety aspect (think before you reply) and restrict our industrial capacity in the face of "local" continental competitors. What more do they want?
ShotOne is spot-on. It is time to stand up against unreasonable self-interest groups. Offence is the best form of defence. PPRuNE has fostered some impressive projects already. How about one for the preservation of Aviation?
My sister used to live in St Reatham (which is just south of Clapham, and infamous for a profession in which sis was not involved, before anyone starts!). When visiting her in the summer, from the garden (sic) I could see the endless stream of aircraft heading into LHR. Compared to the noise of local ground traffic, the aircraft were virtually silent. I can't believe that one mile north makes much difference. Indoors (during the other 11 months of the year!) the only sound was the constant stream of vehicles, and trains passing through Streatham Common station.
I am not entirely sure what a land-based transport adviser does, but the biblical quote about removing the plank from your own eye comes easily to mind. Ground-vehicle noise pollution in towns and cities is quite horrendous. Examples are mentioned above, but trucks, buses, and bikes that sound like Spitfires, come to mind.
I am always sceptical about these publicity-seeking types like Stewart. Thanks to Low-Pass & Trinity, we can see that anyone flying that low over Clapham would be in serious trouble - either technically, or with his chief pilot. Normally, one would need a fairly powerful zoom lense to get a decent pic of an aeroplane over Clapham. The photo is disingenuous in the extreme.
Apart from the usual question of, "when did you decide to move next to a major airport?", we now seem to have a Clear Skies group which includes people who live 13 miles from one. A schoolboy souvenir of mine, from 1963, proudly claims that LHR sees a takeoff or landing every 90 seconds. treadigraph, above, mentions most of the noisy old types - omitting the dear-old Comet!
Modern aircraft are substantially quieter than their predecessors, yet the anti lobbies are ever noisier. We frequently receive notices promulgating changes to our procedures to further reduce the signature on Deps/Arrs. God knows we try.
My home base, LGW, has a specifically agreed number of night slots. LHR, as far as I was aware, is virtually embargoed at night (H Dir - how many night flights?) so I find this campaign hard to swallow. But still they come.
Gin Slinger makes an important point, especially about our economy. We have, over the past few decades, watched many of our productive industries decay, partially through comfortable indifference but also by political ineptitude. The majority of politicians have never had a "real" job and therefore do not fully comprehend the concept. The trend continues. Candidate selection is increasingly based upon demographic considerations rather than on merit.
Napoleon allegedly observed, "L'Angleterre est une nation de boutiquiers." If indeed said, it was not an insult but an observation of the importance of trade to our island nation, which he then attempted to strangle. Having beaten off our mortal enemies, usually by the skin of our teeth due to defence planning inadequcies, we have subsequently done a fabulous job of wrecking our productive industries all on our own. Oh, how we like to moan about it down at the local!
That historic trade (increasingly service industry on our part!) remains a vital surviving asset and whether one likes it or not, it depends ever more heavily on airports. These anti-airport groups are unwittingly striving to achieve what our historical enemies failed to do. We already have democratic procedures in place to satisfy local residents. They already compromise our operations from a safety aspect (think before you reply) and restrict our industrial capacity in the face of "local" continental competitors. What more do they want?
ShotOne is spot-on. It is time to stand up against unreasonable self-interest groups. Offence is the best form of defence. PPRuNE has fostered some impressive projects already. How about one for the preservation of Aviation?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trinity 09L
Couldn't agree with you more. I used to live 100 meters from a railway line on one side of my house and 50 meters from a main road on the other side. Even then, I could not say that my life was "blighted by noise".
I now live under the flightpath for aircraft approaching 07L and 07R at FRA. Apart from the occasional aircraft (usually older and military types - Galaxy pilots always seem to open the throttles right overhead!) I barely hear them.
I can even put cups and glasses in cupboards touching each other now
In my humble opinion this HACAN crowd are just another group trying to return Britain to the dark ages.
Couldn't agree with you more. I used to live 100 meters from a railway line on one side of my house and 50 meters from a main road on the other side. Even then, I could not say that my life was "blighted by noise".
I now live under the flightpath for aircraft approaching 07L and 07R at FRA. Apart from the occasional aircraft (usually older and military types - Galaxy pilots always seem to open the throttles right overhead!) I barely hear them.
I can even put cups and glasses in cupboards touching each other now
In my humble opinion this HACAN crowd are just another group trying to return Britain to the dark ages.
Last edited by ramsrc; 30th Jul 2002 at 09:16.
Man of the Marsh
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: LGW
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Further to my last . . . . .
(Without intending to teach Granny to suck eggs, some folk are not aware that by holding down the <SHIFT> key and then left-clicking on a link you can bring up the item in a separate window without leaving the original site. Hope this helps someone).
When I first read the BBC item linked by Pax V's initial post, I missed the sub-link thereon, titled, John Stewart's Beat the System tips. This provides an interesting insight into the mind-set of this ClearSkies group . . . or at least its chief pilot. Well-constructed and logical points for any campaign, including tips on how to manipulate the media.
From this I spotted the ClearSkies link. It really is worth reading. I do not disagree with everything on the site, indeed some points are quite valid, but it contains several anomalies which will be obvious to most. It does not change anything I posted above. Take the time to read it carefully.
(Without intending to teach Granny to suck eggs, some folk are not aware that by holding down the <SHIFT> key and then left-clicking on a link you can bring up the item in a separate window without leaving the original site. Hope this helps someone).
When I first read the BBC item linked by Pax V's initial post, I missed the sub-link thereon, titled, John Stewart's Beat the System tips. This provides an interesting insight into the mind-set of this ClearSkies group . . . or at least its chief pilot. Well-constructed and logical points for any campaign, including tips on how to manipulate the media.
From this I spotted the ClearSkies link. It really is worth reading. I do not disagree with everything on the site, indeed some points are quite valid, but it contains several anomalies which will be obvious to most. It does not change anything I posted above. Take the time to read it carefully.
I arrived home tonight, to receive a leaflet through the post from HACAN, supplying information on their cause, and seeking contributions to the legal team costs estimated at £150,000.
In the last case, the Greater London Authority gave £20,000, & local authorities contributed over £30,000, the rest coming from local residents.
I am afraid they will not be recieving my contribution, and in turn I will be asking my local council who authorised the spend on the last occassion!!
In the last case, the Greater London Authority gave £20,000, & local authorities contributed over £30,000, the rest coming from local residents.
I am afraid they will not be recieving my contribution, and in turn I will be asking my local council who authorised the spend on the last occassion!!
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London
Age: 59
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know that this may seem terribly boreing and has been said before.....But "If you don't like aircraft noise then don't move next to an airport".
And as for those who live 5, 10 or even 20 DME from LHR you should have looked up as thats the only real way that you can tell nowadays that an A/C has flown over.
And how long does LHR have to be in existance before you realise that aeroplanes will have to fly into it....after all it's only been there for over 50 years and is one of the worlds best known airports.
If the HACAN argument can get social funding from left wing or PC councils then so should the Heathrow supporters groups in the name of providing jobs for pilots,cleaners, ATC, shop assistants, mechanics, cabin crew etc etc etc the list is endless.
And as for those who live 5, 10 or even 20 DME from LHR you should have looked up as thats the only real way that you can tell nowadays that an A/C has flown over.
And how long does LHR have to be in existance before you realise that aeroplanes will have to fly into it....after all it's only been there for over 50 years and is one of the worlds best known airports.
If the HACAN argument can get social funding from left wing or PC councils then so should the Heathrow supporters groups in the name of providing jobs for pilots,cleaners, ATC, shop assistants, mechanics, cabin crew etc etc etc the list is endless.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FWIW here are some of the questions and comments received by the BBC and John Stewart's answers.
Although I detest what he stands for and his approach, I have to admit John Stewart is a real spin-meister (learnt at the feet of Mr Mandelson, I shouldn't wonder). Shame his talents aren't more constructively employed.
Although I detest what he stands for and his approach, I have to admit John Stewart is a real spin-meister (learnt at the feet of Mr Mandelson, I shouldn't wonder). Shame his talents aren't more constructively employed.