|
noise campaigners-the right to moan?
:* :mad: :* :mad:
i'm posting this because i'd like to get your views as fellow pilots on the trend towards increasing pressure by communities living near airports to reduce acft noise by restricting operating hours,imposing noise-reducing departure procedures etc. My arguement,and I'm using Heathrow as my example,is that firstly,the airport was there long before any of the residents,so they knew what they were getting into before moving there,and therefore are actually being very unreasonable by expecting the airport to curb its operations to suit them. Secondly,you'd have to be deficient upstairs not to realise that if you move nearby to the world's busiest airport,you'd be in a noisy environment that,like with most things,is bound to expand and develop,so why didn't they think about this before moving there? i understand that BAA has even installed double glazing for people free of charge near lhr in an effort to satisfy them,and they apparently are involved in many community endeavours like schooling,public projects etc,and yet these :mad: people still have the cheek to complain constantly about the noise! Its unbelievable.In short,if you dont like the noise,why did you move there in the first place? |
People like to take advantage of the cheaper housing prices and then want the noise taken away.
Doesn't work like that though. At one airfield I've been involved with, we have huge problems with residents complaining about noise. It isn't the folks who've lived there a long time, but people who moved there recently. The field has been there since WW2 so it's not as if it isn't known about. |
RUDAS & Say again s l ow l y
Guys... its quiet obvious you've never lived underneath the flight path of an aircraft. Fair enough house are cheaper. Thats all many people can afford. And there not THE cheapest. The houses are still bloody expensive. who here says they don't deserve a descent night sleep. Its their right to fight their cause... if they can win concessions, and maybe be get a goodnights sleep. Good on them. Maybe its all they can afford, but when their kids cant sleep at night, who can blame them for fighting. Look, the pressure (for the most part) is not being put on pilots, its aimed at national/multi-national airlines/corporations. To say that the airport has been there long then the people, is pure bollix. Are you tell me the frequency is the same as in the '50's. Are you tellin me what was acceptable in th '50's should be acceptable in the 21st centuary. Get a grip. I hope ye were born rich... i hope your parents dont live beside heathrow. |
O\ZON
<<Are you tellin me what was acceptable in th '50's should be acceptable in the 21st centuary>>
Compare the noise footprint of modern airliners to those designed in the 50's and 60's. i.e. compare the noise generated with types such as the VC10, BAC 1-11 etc with types such as the B.777 and A319/320. A lot has been achieved by both the airframe designers and engine designers in terms of reducing noise. The frequency of departure/arrivals has I agree increased enormously, but that is in response to public requirements. Campaigns to reduce movements at individual airfields will just shift those movements, and the noise, elsewhere. (Possibly to other countries) <when their kids cant sleep at night, who can blame them for fighting>> If I were in a simiar position to those residents then perhaps I would also campaign in the same way. It is their right to fight I agree, but if I was desperate then I would move. (I did years ago) Regards Exeng |
I've had numerous email altercations with that guy who fronts HACAN, the bunch that campaign against LHR night flights. I can understand to a degree their problem but when an awful lot of their members live near/on the A30 or within earshot of the M25 you dont hear any real debate about road noise or the 44-tonners that rumble through there towards Western International Market. Research also shows that a passing high speed train (like those that run just to the North of LHR) has a more substantial "footprint" than that of a modern jet.
I really dont think theres that much cause for argument around Heathrow. Triple glazing, cutting back on night flights and general decrease in aircraft noise just goes unnoticed. Gatwick already implements a voluntary QC4 ban and so its only DAS Air that are allowed to use DC-10s at night. Never hear much thanks from the community about that one... A lot of complaints actually occur when theres a go around with the subsequent non-standard departure. Mind boggles as to whether people would prefer airprox's to a brief noise as someone passes over their house. Cant speak for any other airports but I'm sure they do their bit. But I know that Jo'burg has quite a strict rule on night departures too. On a 'lighter' note, you would think that residents around the old Croydon airport would have 100% less cause to complain since the closure back in the 1950s... Wrong, the local model aircraft club has had to cut back its activities and now can only fly at certain arranged times due to noise. Do they know that all model aircraft owners up there had to pass a noise test? Do they notice that the little ****s on scooters and motorbikes on Roundshaw common are louder than a model aircraft? Besides the point I guess but still bugs me! |
Buy a house near an airport, you have absolutely NO right to complain about the noise.
Tough s**t. |
No I don't live near an airport, I'm not that stupid. Everybody has choices in life, one of mine is not to live near an airport and especially not to live under the flightpath.
The noise is a pain in the a*se, but when I have stayed in Hounslow and other places affected by noise, I found I got used to it quickly. I was brought up in central London, so I am fairly used to quite a high constant noise level. At the time it didn't bother me, now I don't like it. So I live out in the country. Cheaper house prices, less noise and MUCH better air quality. If you knew of the noise problem before you moved there, then as 18 wheeler put it, tough s**t. If you moved there before the airport was built, then bad luck, but you will have been recompensed by the Airport at sometime for the inconveinence. |
I'm going to jump on this one, as I have just recently moved to not very far from LHR (all be it temporarily). Living almost exactly between the airport and a major train line between Reading (and places west) and London...............guess where most of the noise comes from, and until much later than the airport curfew.
As a controller, I can tell you our noise abatement procedures for inbounds and outbounds are VERY strict. And we as controllers adhere to them to the utmost of our abilities. Now this is where my rant is really going to start........... O\ZON states: its quiet obvious you've never lived underneath the flight path of an aircraft Look, the pressure (for the most part) is not being put on pilots, its aimed at national/multi-national airlines/corporations Said it before, and I'll say it again......if you have used air transport for your little "Winter Sun break" or whatever, you have just lost your right to complain! And if you have moved to the area in the past 30 years, join the club. |
Just to bring a bit of balance to the thread, there was a report about a year ago where they interviewed some residents who had been there before Heathrow was turned into what we all know and love today.
I earn my living there, but it was hard not to feel some sympathy for some of those rather elderly people. |
four_two,
That argument doesnt hold any weight, those nice elderly people would have had to deal with the original B707/Comet/Trident et al......... Technology has advanced since those nice old days....... Mutt. |
I live near an airport, close enough so that things sometimes vibrate when a heavy passes over during the night.
I've never once considered complaining about it - in fact I don't even notice it anymore after living here so long. The airport was here long before me, so why should I have any right to tell them what to do? If you buy a house near an airport then you get aircraft noise, simple as that. People should only complain if they have actually changed something like noise abatement procedures making it worse for residents. Besides, why would you want to get rid of it anyway... I'd rather hear planes flying overhead then no sound at all :ok: ps. This location isn't cheap either, it's more expensive then areas which are away from the airport :) |
aircraft noise
I write in response to the pilot who has been critical of the residents who complain about noise under the Heathrow flight path. I write as the Chairman of HACAN ClearSkies, the body which represents these residents.
Of course some people who have moved into their homes in recent years complain about the noise, but they form a very small minority of our members. Most of our members fall into three categories: 1. A small number of older people who have lived in their homes since before the airport was built. 2. A much larger group who moved into their homes 15-25 years ago. They new about the airport. They made the concsious decision that they could put up with the noise as it was then. What has changed over the last 25 years is that individual planes have become quieter, but the number of planes has increased greatly. It is the number of aircraft passing over their heads that really disrturbs them. The other factor to consider here is the fact that government promised that each new development - Terminal3, Terminal 4 and Terminal 5 - would be the last. A good number of our members believed those and decised not to move. Now they feel badly let down by successive governments. 3. A group of people who have joined us over the last 6 or 7 years. These are people who live much further from the airport. We now have members from Greenwich in the east to Henely in the west and Finsbury Park and Mile End in the north. The vast majority of these people moved into their homes before aircraft noise became a problem in their area. What has happened, as many of you will know, over the last few years is that much greater use has been made of flight paths further away from Heathrow: the number of planes using the airport has meant that aircraft tend to be brough in in wider arcs. Acording to the 2002 GLA London Household Survey 6% of Londoners raircraft noise as a "serious" problem in their lives. That is around 400,000 people. |
Apart from the group of elderly people mentioned in the post above ,if the others dont like it they can MOVE.The airport keeps thousands in work,and as Jerricho and others rightly said -----if the moaners use the airport for business or leisure they have very little to grumble about----they'd grumble a damn side more if they had to go 100 miles for their flight to the sun!
I understand that LHR changes runways to stop the same groups of residents getting the noise all the time --just what are these people like? THEY SHOULD ACCEPT THE AIRPORT IS THERE ---IF THEY DONT LIKE IT THEY KNOW WHAT TO DO!!!!! PS We live on a road where in the last 10 yrs the traffic has doubled,it is a fact of life now whether in the air ,the roads or the railways--even more so now some flightsare cheaper than the train! |
JDM, you would understand how cynical most pilots are about noise problems if you had been on the recieving end of some of the complaints.
I have had the misfortune to be threatened and verbally abused over noise complaints. People tend to put all of their feelings about noise problems onto aircraft, when often the real source of the problem is something else. For example, we have one individual who rings up and can be very abusive whenever an a/c is percieved to have strayed from the prescribed route. Often this isn't even the case. What makes this amusing is that this person owns a wood mill that is located 50yds from their house. Chain saws etc. going all day, but WE are a noise problem! I don't really see what HACAN is trying to achieve, the noise abatement procedures are already amongst the strictest in the world and whilst I agree that successive Governments have lied to us all, have you ever proposed a sensible solution? A noise abatement procedure by it's very nature reduces safety margins, are you happy with that? How many members of HACAN use Heathrow? If they do, then they should be immediately banned from the organisation as they are helping to perpetuate the problem. You will find that most flight crew hate Heathrow as much if not more than anybody else, it is a dreadful airport to both operate from and to use as a passenger so I avoid it as much as possible. The simple truth is that if noise is such an issue, then you move. This would be the same if a sewage plant was plonked next to you. Over 100,000 people rely on Heathrow for work, do HACAN suggest that they should all be moved or made redundant? |
Mr John Stewart, thank you for joining us.
Perhaps you would like to answer this question either for yourself, or your members. As Say Again has pointed out, have you or any of your members used and airport in the South East (and I'm including Stanstead, Luton, Gatwick, I think you get the idea). As a further to this, at what time did your flight depart the UK and arrive elsewhere? In the wider sphere, we are not opposed to civil aviation, and recognise its contribution the national economy, but we argue that aircraft operators should be fully accountable for the pollution they cause Having heard all your arguments before, and the stats and numbers you quote, I am yet to see in any of your reports the percentage of residents in you "target" areas that are quite happy with the airport where it is, and the numbers of people who are happy to see it expand (and improve) the services, employment and economic advantages it provides. In closing, I would also like to as, what proposals do you put forward (aside from those already in place such as Continuous Descent Approachs, Day/Night alternation, Curfew, Departure Noise Abatement procedures, not to mention Noise restriction on aircraft that actually use the airport) that will revolutionise or make you and your organisation happy? Thank you for your time. |
I live under a departure route for FRA... and there are in about 200 m away traintracks with high-speed and other trains, and these tracks split my village in two! Guess what wakes me up at night? Nope, not the planes (except occasional military transports on their way to Iraq or Afganistan), but freight trains!! We have a group "Cititzens against airplane noise" but I have never seen a group form against train noise!
About 4 years ago I visited a village just west of FRA... the planes are so low there, that you could almost pet their bellies... and what did I see? Brand new town houses being built! Who gives permission for that??? About 3 years later there was a report in television about the airplane noise and a gal was interviewed.. saying how she moved into her town house so her kids could be brought up in a quiet atmosphere. You guessed it! I recognised her town house as being one of those that I had seen being built! What kind of promises did her realtor make? Probably argueing that special "noise-free" windows are installed... great if you never open the windows or go outside in the garden! And I wouldn't doubt it, if she also regualarly goes to Mallorca or such for vacation :mad: Westy |
Jerricho
Very nicely put old chap! And the solution is simple I tell you. If JDM has over 400,000 noise pollution victims on his register, then let us charge them each an extra hundred quid every time they fly. That money can be re-invested in the industry and go towards research into quieter aircraft. Those of us that don't give a hoot about noise (I've lived near an airport for over 12 years now) needn't bother paying the extra, provided we don't complain.
We can even take it one step further and suggest that aviation noise pollution victims should undertake not to benefit from the industry until it is completely silent! :ok: |
I'm glad you posted on here Mr Stewart as it means you can answer my question that you avoided in my email to you a couple of years back.
I know its a certainty that some of your members are hyprocrites who, if they decide they want to go to the far east, aren't going to do a Michael Palin style land and sea journey. Anyhow, the question. I asked what would happen if any of your members had booked a flight to say Singapore or another late departing flight and this flight for whatever became delayed either for technical or weather reasons and ended up in the night period. Would your members sit back and enjoy the free drinks or would they employ their stance and demand to be let of the aircraft? I'm sure they wouldn't want to be one of the culprits... Please answer this time John. (If you could let me know your thoughts on the A30/M25 also I would be grateful) |
Noise is all around us, even if you live in the country. It just depends on what irritates you as an individual, and also I suspect what is most easily identified as a source of noise. Aircraft are particularly identifiable. I have had some ludicrous complaints about helicopter charter drop offs, a once-off noise that lasts for maybe two minutes at most, from people who think nothing of running a virtually unsilenced lawnmower for hours on end, and never consider that noisy. There is often little or no logic involved in this - just bug-up-the-ass griping from the I want, I want, I want, me! me! me! generation.
They should try living next to a road with diesel engines revving until the valves bounce to see what real unnecessary noise is. And thats most urban, suburban and rural roads in the entire country that are within 200m of a bend, junction or hill. And as for excessively loud and frequent ambulance sirens (but that's just my bug...) As Al Sleet, your hippy-dippy weatherman said, "If you don't like the weather, mooove!" |
I'm sorry, I've only just picked myself up off the floor after hearing that HACAN has members in Henley!
|
Would you believe, that I've heard of noise complaints over GLIDER planes!!!
the parachut on the winch whistles too loud when it's falling the whining of the speed brakes disturb once there was a complaint about a glider circling in one spot... the complainer said the glider pilot was probably only trying to see this guys wife, who was sunning in the garden! those are real complaints! not made up! the local authorities once get written complaints against all aircraft that took off a particular airfield between 8 a.m. and 5. p.m. :\ luckily the authority just chucked those.... And, even though one particular noise group has lost at court a number of times, they continue to complain... don't they have anything better to do??? they should get a life....... Westy |
It's a shame that debates like this always degenerate into slanging matches. Both sides have valid points to make, and would benefit from listening to each other.
I'm a pilot, a helicopter instructor and a former resident of Richmond, 6nm short of 27L at EGLL. I bought my home there at a time when it was firmly promised that T4 would be the last development at Heathrow, and that movements would be capped at 260,000. I've never objected to aircraft noise (I do make rather a lot of it myself) but my former neighbours often did, because they felt they'd been deceived over the expansion of Heathrow. There were a few questions I found difficult to answer. It was galling for them to be told that aircraft had to land at Heathrow at 4:30am because of night curfews in places like Narita or Mascot. Why, in a country the size of the UK, were the three major airports virtually co-located in one corner, remote from the 'C of G' of the population? Why did a Scotsman, or a northerner, have to travel all day to reach Heathrow, then fly back over his own home to get to North America? Is it the case that the population is there to serve the airports, or the airports to serve the population? When my neighbours say aviation policy in the UK is largely made by BAA and BA for their own benefit, it's hard to argue. Most of my neighbours objected most strongly to the 20 or so landings between 4:30am and 6am (out of what, 1,200 movements daily?). If they were removed, I suspect HACAN would just melt away. On the other side of the coin, it is important to stress that aircraft have become significantly quieter over the years, and the demise of Concorde has made a huge difference. But I think the simple if-you-don't-like-it-move argument is wooden-headed, and sets us up for confrontation when dialogue would be constructive. Of course, I live in Cornwall now, so I don't give a stuff. |
remote from the 'C of G' of the population
Proximate to the 'C of G' of the GDP Cheers WWW |
Pat, let's see if we can keep it constructive. It is an emotive issue, and it's easier (I should know ;) ) to attack the player rather than the ball.
I am interested in hearing Mr Stewarts response to the few questions put to him here. If he would be so kind. |
Nicely put Pat, :ok:
I've a lot of sympathy for the people that have been lied to by numerous governemets over the years. Unfortunately it's all too easy to promise everyone that "This'll be the last terminal, honest" when you know full well you won't be in office to handle the ramifications in 20yrs time. I remember spending a lot of time studying airport expansion as part of an Economics A-Level - it came under the heading of 'Market Failure'. If politicans were open about the required long term rate of expansion for given airports, people would be in the position to decide for themselves. As it is plenty of people (i guess they're not in the airline business :hmm: ) believe that there's only one round of expansion to go all the time. That makes house prices artificially high, and of course with the inevitable long term increase in flights they fall behind unaffected areas. Why's it fair for someone to get pushed down the house ladder because they were lied to/not given the full picture? The only solution I can see is for the government to draw up long term expansion plans and make them public. That way the free market will sort out the true value of the affected areas and people shouldn't loose out in the future. Although they could just avoid all the hassle that would bring them of course.... Stu p.s. as for the wingers that start complaining as soon as they move into the area :yuk: |
Hmm...
6% or 400,000 consider it a serious problem... By my maths that makes: 94% or about 6,266,667 (six MILLION, two hundred and sixty six thousand, six hundred and sixty-seven) who DON'T consider it a serious problem. Sort of puts it into perspective eh? :ok: |
Like Westwind, I live under both a departure and arrival route for FRA - although under prevailing wind conditions it is departures. However, I am sufficiently far away from the airport to rarely even notice passing aircraft. Having said that, our village has a very active anti-noise campaign. Even to the point of sending a questionnaire to each and every resident asking if they or their children had any medical complaints (high blood pressure, headaches, migraine, heart conditions, kidney complaints and so on and so forth) which could be "related to aircraft noise".
With the planned airport expansion at Frankfurt, these campaigns are intensifying but many of the complaints are groundless. Having said that if you live in places like Kelsterbach - which really is right on top of the airport (and maybe the village Westwind mentioned) - then you probably do have a case. Many of the houses there were built before the airport was anything like the size it is today. Personally, there is no way in the world I would live in Kelsterbach, but many people do and the close proximity of the aircraft doesn't seem to have a vast impact on house prices. |
I live in Chiswick just off the A4. HACAN annoys the hell out of me, they are simply a job creation scheme for professional nimbys who have discovered a soft target in Heathrow(the big..the multinational...the profitmaking evil empire etc etc).
Now try banning boy racers on motorbikes, trucks, and close the M4 after 11pm. After all, sometimes it keeps me awake...... Cities make noise, its a trade off for vitality, economic power and the ability to get a loaf of bread at 4 in the morning if you need to. As the previous respondent suggested- if you dont like it-move to Cornwall. Here's my vote for an extra runway and a circular high speed rail link between Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted. I havent noticed the value of houses in Hounslow being diminished in the slightest by the prospect of a 3rd runway, but then again I'm not planning to move. |
There's a concrete motorway near my home that generates higher perceived dB's than the airport does. But I've never heard anyone complaining about it? :}
|
well put,aztruck.i live near to a major airport,and the plane noise is not a problem at all...but what really is a nuisance is the people who ignore all the other forms of noise like motorbikes etc because airports are a soft target (as you say,the multinational entity etc...) to these people who,i suspect,are driven by a fair measure of spite and who overlook the totally unproductive sources of noise pollution because they'd rather have a dig at a big airport operator.
As for what O/ZON has to say... if people move to an airport,they know what to expect,so it really is quite a poor show if they then are opportunistic enough to try to 'get something out of' the airport companies by way of concessions/payouts etc.that sort of thing is in very poor taste and should be condemned as it really borders on extortion. secondly,these people and their children must have been born with extremely sensitive ears because if they can hear acft noise through double glazing (provided free by BAA) to the extent that it causes ailments then they are all sensorially superior to me! i've stayed across the road from 27R and with double glazing,i barely heard a sound as even 742's rumbled past on takeoff. |
As another point, while I respect every individuals "right" to stand up for what they believe, what about when the expression of this standing up impinges on the rights and saftey of others?
I seem to remember a demonstration at Heathrow involving some protesters and a crane. The HACAN website claims Local campaigners against airport expansion tuned up at the court to support the protesters. John, I'm not deliberately trying to belittle your organisation, just attempting to obtain some input on your thoughts on some of these matters. Your initial post seems to highlight you readiness to enter into this discussion, so please continue to do so. |
Lets be honest here...... Anybody that believes their governments, like any business owner, will not try to increase their "business" in the future and generate increased cash flow is an idiot that lives in a fantasy world. What business is any government in??? COLLECTING TAXES. :hmm: Any airport the size of Heathrow is a huge cash cow for their local and country leaders. Not just from taxes on operations, but from income taxes on the jobs created by the airport itself.
The officials are not fools. They realize that people will always find something to complain about, it is in their nature. Imagine the demonstrations if their were rampant unemployement and the government, because they do not make much money after somebody shut down every facility they had to generate cash flow, had no funds to feed and house the unfortunate. They would be hanging from the walls at the palace. When people feel left out by the government and deceived they must realize.......time changes things. Decisions made in the past were made using the best information in hand at the time. When that changes the path must change. Faced with putting up with a few complainers of something like aircraft or train noise, they choose the tough answer and meet the needs of the majority. :ouch: Hate the game, don't hate the player. :E |
For us out-of-country people... who/what is HACAN? :confused: ;)
Times change, situations change. There are many different reasons for expantion. I remember when the first B747's came out... they didn't fit on the terminals! So obviously new terminals had to be built. And of course, with the world getting smaller through television, etc. people want to travel to see it.... and it's not the "luxury" it once was! So, more people WANT to fly, airlines WANT to provide it, so the aerodromes must be expanded to meet the capacity... very simple fact! It's not always possible to move a whole aerodrome, like Munich did (causing people to suffer noise that never dreamed they'd one day be near an airport!) A German flying magazine brought the following notice one year: all persons that complain about noise at a neighboring would be put on a "black list" and as soon as they booked a vacation flight, they would not be allowed to fly. Unfortunately it was an April fool's joke :{ Westy |
Screw 'em - the one's that complain the most, are ALSO the most vociferous when they have to travel all the way to Luton because they can't get a flight to xyz from their local airport:mad: :mad:
Sad t0ssers.......modern aeroplanes are so quiet...... Oh yes. I did live under left base to 26L @ LGW, never heard them unless a whingy neighbour pointed them out........ Bring back RR speys, tays, conways etc:E :E :E |
WestWind1950,
That is the best thing I have heard in a long time..... Anybody that complains gets put on a black list and is banned from flying. Better yet, charge 3 times the amount for the ticket and pass the costs of noise reduction on to the people that want it the most. :E :E :E |
Westwind - HACAN is the "Heathrow Action for the Control of Aircraft Noise". They are apparantly a member of FANG - The Federation of Aircraft Noise Groups :hmm:
White knight Bring back RR speys, tays, conways |
In short - yes - noise complainers do have a right to moan.We all have a right to complain about perceived injustices or nuisances. If we are really serious we will then make the effort to substantiate our moans with well reasoned, difficult to challenge and logical arguments and, most importantly, come forward with practical solutions. Unfortunately the Chairman of HACAN appears unwilling to engage in discussion through this forum.Could it be that the professional status of most forum members is worrying him? Perhaps the public visibility of these forums is insufficient? Maybe he is unable to substantiate the "moans" in an acceptable manner as prescribed above.
I, together with (probably) the overwhelming majority of this nation find that noise pollution is one of the major nuisances of life in the 21st century. However, I do not have an answer nor a sustainable solution to the problem and choose, where possible, to take and make my own decisions to lessen the impact of noise pollution on my life. The crusading, belicose attitude of so many "action" groups leave me cold and totally unimpressed. |
Would this work?
1) Heathrow has all noise and curfew limitations lifted - use the airport 24/7 as hard as possible. 2) But no VC10s et al - just modern high bypass quiet aircraft. 3) The increase in producivity generates £x Million pounds of profit. 4) £x Million pounds of extra profits are spent on paying 90% of the council tax of all houses within 2 miles of Heathrow. Everyones happy, everythings productive as possible. Just trying to think laterally. Cheers WWW |
So can all the residents that live next to a rail way line get it closed down from 11pm until 5.00 am? No, thought not.
Some things are for the greater good. Probably find they“ll all complain when their council tax goes up because they have to pay for the housing benefit of all the workers that lost their jobs at LHR. |
Quote:
"secondly,these people and their children must have been born with extremely sensitive ears because if they can hear acft noise through double glazing (provided free by BAA) to the extent that it causes ailments then they are all sensorially superior to me!" RUDAS, Acting in my capacity as Devil's Advocate, do you think that it might be possible for those you mentioned with sensitive ears to occasionally leave their house with it's double glazing and perhaps sit in the garden? Or should they stay huddled up inside their house. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 19:54. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.