Cookham Discussion Board

General Category => General Cookham Discussions => Topic started by: Plane Complainer on September 01, 2008, 10:21:13 PM



Title: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Plane Complainer on September 01, 2008, 10:21:13 PM
Anyone noticed that the plane noise has got worse again? Way past midnight last night and are very noisy again this evening. Why do they have to be so low this far away from the airport?


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Gonzo on September 01, 2008, 10:27:44 PM
I agree, on Saturday with the rare appearance of the sun making the garden a viable proposition, they were so  low you could count the rivets. They seemed to be turning over Cookham to line up with Heathrow for their final approach as opposed to somewhere nearer Reading as per normal. An awful lot of noise........


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Plane Complainer on September 01, 2008, 10:34:22 PM
Methinks it's also the planes taking off Westerly and turning towards North East. I'm sure they are lower than last year. Am I mistaken? Mark, you're up on these things. What do you think?


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: CH on September 02, 2008, 01:31:25 PM
Like Gonzo, I also noticed on Saturday that they were flying much lower and turning over Cookham instead of further East as they normally do.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Plane Complainer on September 03, 2008, 08:27:24 AM
Please write to the local MP (Teresa May) if you have time. She is well-respected and does fight on our behalf. It's fun to complain about the noise here but, aside from raising awareness, it probably doesn't achieve too much else. Does anyone have a good explanation for why the aircraft (on takeoff) have to be so low so far away from the airport?


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Plane Complainer on September 03, 2008, 08:35:49 AM
Oops. Sorry about the spelling of the MP: should be Theresa. The other lady is in a very different line of work. ;)


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: lizzyk on September 03, 2008, 10:33:54 AM
In May I mentioned there was a consultative document that had been issued asking to reduce the minimum aircraft height to 3,000 feet (in some case this equated to a 60% reduction in height). The traffic to be redirected away from areas of high density (ie Windsor) to come over Cookham. It has been admitted that this will increase the low flying distance from Heathrow and also will increase pollution levels. The proposal is to increase the amount of traffic gradually over the next five years.

You can see the proposals at http://www.consultation.nats.co.uk/downloads/13/download_consultation_document.html/ (http://www.consultation.nats.co.uk/downloads/13/download_consultation_document.html/). If you download Part H you can see the current plan at Figure H5 and the proposed on the next page Figure H6.

The Royal Borough (see press release below-worth a read) was one of the councils that went to the High Court over it, our Cookham Parish Council said that they had had no information so had not filled in the consultative forms.

Aircraft noise policy 'meaningless' - RBWM Press Release May 2008

Cllr David Burbage, leader of the Royal Borough, has called on transport secretary Ruth Kelly to clarify the government's attitude to aircraft noise after a court ruled that she was under no obligation to improve conditions for residents woken up by early morning arrivals at Heathrow

At the High Court today (Friday May 23) Mr Justice Sullivan said that while the government had a policy of bearing down on night noise this did not necessarily mean that it had to make things better.

Windsor and Maidenhead, Wandsworth and Richmond councils claimed that the transport secretary had acted unlawfully in failing to properly address concerns over the misclassification of aircraft arriving at Heathrow before 6am.

Half the planes in this early morning period had been placed in the wrong noise category. If they had been correctly classified they would not have been able to fly.

The error affected the Boeing 747-400 RR, the main type used by airlines during the night quota period at Heathrow.

The government argued that because the night flights scheme pooled noise data over the three London airports it did not have to take specific action on what was a Heathrow problem.

The local authorities also argued that actual noise levels for all the early morning arrivals breached the limit of 87 decibels set for departures. If the government's objective was to protect residents from excessive noise, it should have acted on this discrepancy.

Cllr Burbage said: "The judge has exposed the emptiness of government policy on night noise. The objectives are so vague as to be meaningless.

“It's time for Ruth Kelly to stop hiding behind her lawyers.  Today's ruling makes it clear that the current night flight arrangements are designed for the benefit of the airlines.

“It's not clever to have drafted an important environmental policy in such a way that no one can understand it. By not being explicit in its aims the government leaves the clear impression that looking after residents' interests comes a very poor second.

“Our residents in Windsor, Old Windsor, Horton, Datchet and Wraysbury will be astonished to learn that, provided the numbers stack up at Gatwick and Stansted, ministers do not have to do anything about night noise at Heathrow.

“The government's policy on night noise is not worth the paper it is written on. It will be difficult now for residents to have any confidence that ministers will make a proper assessment of the environmental impact of Heathrow expansion.

“We will be joining with the other councils to step up our call for a complete ban on night flights, which has been the Royal Borough’s policy for many years."

On average there are around 16 early morning arrivals each day between 4.30am and 6am. Eight of these are ranked in a QC2 category when subsequent noise tests showed they should have been in a higher band (QC4) for which there is a scheduling ban at this time of day.

The application for judicial review was also supported by Kensington and Chelsea, Hammersmith and Fulham, Hounslow, Lambeth and Hillingdon councils and the GLA.

All the councils are members of the 2M Group which campaigns against Heathrow expansion. For more information visit www.2MGroup.org.uk (http://www.2MGroup.org.uk)


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Gonzo on September 03, 2008, 06:10:00 PM
Thanks Liz for the useful information, will look into it a bit more now. Sounds like the usual stitch up from our dear leaders.....  >:(.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Jane Davey on September 03, 2008, 06:13:13 PM
We did file a response to NATS from the Cookham Society on behalf of all its members objecting to the proposed changes. However with all these things it's imperative that individuals and Parish Councils respond as well. In Hertfordshire there was a substantial public response and NATS are considering moving the propsed routes in response to the outcry. The interim feedback report can be seen at the NATS website.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Plane Complainer on September 10, 2008, 08:37:49 AM
Very good. We have to keep writing to councils or we will not get noticed. It seems to be working in Hertfordshire. I want to know why they have to stay so low for so long.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Concerned on September 16, 2008, 01:03:15 PM
For the last two days (Monday and Tuesday) I have noticed an increase in plane noise in the morning. This morning I was woken up at 5am!

Anyone with concerns can report them to the council, online or by phone...

http://www.rbwm.gov.uk/forms/af3/an/default.aspx/RenderForm/?F.Name=noiseline


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: monty on September 16, 2008, 08:02:48 PM
I have been woken at 3.00 a.m with plane noise, but now its is more at 5.00 a.m one after another. I am a light sleeper and this disturbed my nights and when you do not sleep very well this is very annoying.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Paperclip1 on September 17, 2008, 07:56:38 AM
For goodness sake...You will get used to it!
I've moved from London to Cookham just over a year ago and the noise is much better here than in many other places. I don’t even notice it in Cookham.
I bet over 95% of you complainers use a plane if not at least once a year.
And why should it be ok for them to fly over other towns and villages except Cookham? What makes Cookham so special?

Anyhow, the way things are going there won’t be anymore companies left to run the planes soon.....see problem solved!


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Concerned on September 17, 2008, 08:28:33 AM
Paperclip - yes, there are far, far more important things in life than plane noise and posting on messageboards but...

...what makes Cookham special? What makes it a special place is that people here care about where we live. Without that we would be "getting used to" a gyratory road around the Pound field by now.

Power to people!



Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Tina on September 17, 2008, 10:56:50 AM
 >:( We were having tea in the garden with visitors between 4-5pm on Sunday and the plane noise was continuous throughout, worse than I can ever remember it. In fact, it was so loud and unpleasant that we were forced indoors for a bit of peace and some audible conversation.

It was nearly always possible to hear at least two, if not three, planes at the same time, often at least two were clearly visible at once and several of the planes were almost overhead and extremely noisy. 

We enjoyed a whole day in the garden on a Sunday about three months ago with hardly any disturbance, which is how it should be, so what has changed and what can we do about this? We cannot be expected to put up with this continuous noise contamination - no-one should have to live like that.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: roger on September 17, 2008, 11:54:12 AM
Tina! try living in hounslow and see what they have to put up with.
If only it was possible to run larger planes during the day and small planes which gain height quickly at night.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: megan on September 17, 2008, 03:06:36 PM
I have to say, I don't really notice plane noise at all, and I'm not hard of hearing!   Living up High Road, there's more traffic noise!


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Tina on September 17, 2008, 03:37:13 PM
The point here is that we don't live in Hounslow, where constant noise would be expected, and for that reason I would not live there.

What I would like to know is, if aircraft noise has not been a problem in Cookham until very recently, why can't it be avoided now?


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Paperclip1 on September 18, 2008, 07:46:47 AM
I don’t think Hounslow expected all the plane noise 30 odd years ago....but the point is things change!
Cookham is only a stone throw away from the airport, I think we have been very lucky to have it so peaceful for so long. And like I said after living in London for 20odd years you do get use to it.

And why you ask is it that the planes have just started going over Cookham.....well I guessing that’s because of T5....and be honest, how many of you are going to go to Heathrow and possible fly in or out of T5...or have done already! Cake and eat it comes to mind.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Biggles on September 18, 2008, 07:53:08 AM
Further to what Plane Complainer said about contacting our local MP, this can be done online here...

http://www.tmay.co.uk/contact/



Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Plane Complainer on September 18, 2008, 08:55:36 AM
Interesting ideas Paperclip1. Your argument seems to be that 95% of us use aircraft at least once a year and so therefore we should put up with the noise. I use a toilet everyday and do not expect to see or smell the results of this habit. Your idea of ‘it’s noisy there so it should be noisy everywhere’ is also odd. Are you saying that the nosiest cities in the world (Athens, San Francisco etc.) define the acceptable noise level for every community? If they get louder then can the planes start flying even lower?

Now on to business. The current situation (from midway through the weekend) is caused by the wind coming from an Easterly direction. Therefore the planes take off (and land) to the East. When this happens we are on the landing path. This is quite reasonable: the aircraft have to form an orderly line (roughly along the A4) and land at Heathrow using a ‘continuous descent’ approach. There is probably not a lot we can do about the height and the approach path.
 
My main gripe is the lowness of the aircraft on takeoff. I cannot think why they have to overfly Cookham at just over 3,000 feet. Does anyone have an idea? I know we are quite close to the airport but being at that height over Cookham does equate to an average take off angle of about 3 degrees! It is this that I think we should be complaining about. Such a low height surely interferes with bird life (does anyone have citations?), causes low-level atmospheric pollution and the noise level closer to the airport (Taplow, Dorney) must border on intolerable.

I am also aware that the current market conditions imply a drop in air travel. However I don’t think we an afford to be complacent: travel demand might recover and even if the volume of air traffic to and from Heathrow does fall, the flightpaths will remain as will the noisy traffic; albeit less of it.

Is Cookham worth protecting? If so then how? We need to be realistic about what we can expect and keep up the pressure on the elected authorities so this issue remains key.

Might I recommend a concrete apartment block in Cairo, Paperclip1?


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Paperclip1 on September 18, 2008, 09:03:01 AM
Plane complainer... you do make me laugh.

I wish you the best of luck!


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Plane Complainer on September 18, 2008, 09:21:54 AM
:-) You can help too Paperclip1; http:://www.tmay.co.uk/contact


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Rob on September 18, 2008, 11:06:03 AM

Some answers here. It's probably the noise abatement procedure that is making aircraft taking off lower here.
Bear in mind that the microwave landing system when used may share the noise problem because landing aircraft are not forced to follow a narrow beam away from the airport.

http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-9923.html (http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-9923.html)
http://www.britishairways.com/travel/csr-operating-procedures/public/en_us (http://www.britishairways.com/travel/csr-operating-procedures/public/en_us)



Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Dean resident on September 19, 2008, 10:04:22 AM
Plane complainer - you must admit that paperclip has a point? Many local residents and businesses benefit enormously from our close proximity to Heathrow. Along with the excellent train service from Cookham, it's one of the reasons I moved here. And I'm sure the same applies to many others. Fact is the prosperity of our villages is in some way connected to the success of Heathrow. And the airport's been there for decades and anyone with any nouse will take this into account when moving into the area.

The main point of my message is that only in exceptional / emergency circumstances are planes taking-off over the cookhams. Let's be very clear - the planes you see overhead on the flight path over cookham village, cookham rise and cookham dean is for planes 'landing' at Heathrow. The take-off flight path is routed over towards Taplow and Flackwell Heath, occasionally flirting with the eastern edges of Bourne End / Hedsor. Recent proposals if implemented will ensure the width of the flight path is reduced - which will in turn mean the take-off flight path is routed further from the cookhams than it is today = good news.

Please base your discussions on facts rather than emotion. Planes are easy to voice-off about. We'd all be stuck without them.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Birdman on September 19, 2008, 12:07:12 PM
Just to respond to the bit about bird strikes; there are hardly any birds around at 3000 feet so by the time planes get to us, 'our' birds are safe. Less the case around the airport itself of course, and many techniques are employed to disperse birds regularly throughout the day at most busy airports.

As to the noise itself, I think much aggrevation derives from the promises we had that T5 did not mean more traffic, as it was designed for king-sized jumbos which would carry the additional passengers travelling without increase in aircraft movements.

Shortly after these assurances, Boeing dropped the idea of building such planes and the objectives were flawed overnight, hence the decision to u-turn on the building of a third runway. The European 'double-jumbo' could get us back to fewer aircraft movements but currently, long after the opening of T5, I think there are only 4 movements of this craft per day? (mind you, it looks very striking when it goes over!)


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: James Hatch on September 19, 2008, 05:34:11 PM
Now let us take another reason for the increase in decibels. These two factors come to mind from experience. You have all had a very wet summer, agreed. Well moisture as well as extreme frost will amplify sound below 20,000 hertz. So your night time flights when the air is cool and wet, the amplification will increase. So, if you are lucky to get a dry spell, do take note of the difference. See if you can obtain a recording decibel meter and set it up. The facts will be in the print out.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Jo Jo on September 19, 2008, 08:01:51 PM
James, the reason that we now have more aircraft noise is that the flight paths and heights of the planes has been changed as someone has already mentioned. The Council even went to court over it. That is a much better reason for more noise. Also the noise is not just at nights, in fact it is worse during the day as the planes come every three to four minutes or so. I saw a TV programme that said that the statistics on the noise had been manipulated, as they in fact contravene EU directives.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: James Hatch on September 19, 2008, 09:04:47 PM
This is why I mentioned a recording decibel meter, then you have the facts to show. I to would not trust facts and figures produced by the airport authority. No government agency should be policing itself. You know that civil servants, and it does not matter which country you live in, resemble those senior bureaucrats in the TV series of "Yes Minister!. As a village you will have to do it yourselves, relying on a outside source can be manipulated.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: James Hatch on September 20, 2008, 09:38:53 PM
Let me explain to you all once again. The predominant wind direction in the London area is from the south-west. All aircraft have to take off as close as possible into wind. Each aircraft using the same runway has to wait 3 minutes before taking off behind the preceding aircraft, to let the vortex effect disappear. Prior to take off each captain is given what is known as a clearance. In this clearance he is given a specific heading and altitude for safety separation. Then to contact London Centre for radar identification and further clearances. That in a nutshell is what's happening. Why not ask any airline pilot living in or near Cookham to ratify what I have just said.

Now, all I can say is for you to pray for a good steady North East Wind. Then you will get the landing aircraft, but their engines will not be going full bore.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: simon on September 22, 2008, 03:51:18 PM
Well, there's your answer, Tina - just wait for a good north-east wind to blow up before you next invite friends to tea!


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Jo Jo on September 22, 2008, 04:36:31 PM
James, you don't think that the extra noise could also be due to the fact that the aircraft have now dropped 2,000 feet over Cookham from 5,000 to 3,000 feet?


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Showem on September 22, 2008, 04:38:35 PM
Well the plane noise could soon disappear if Boris Johnson has his way: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelnews/3041662/Boris-Johnson-wants-London-airport-on-island-in-Thames-to-replace-Heathrow.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelnews/3041662/Boris-Johnson-wants-London-airport-on-island-in-Thames-to-replace-Heathrow.html)

Quote
The scheme could be up and running within six years and is likely to be located near the Isle of Sheppey in Kent. Passengers would be transported to and from central London on high-speed trains in about 35 minutes with luggage checked in at the station rather than the airport.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: James Hatch on September 22, 2008, 07:28:48 PM
In reply to JoJo: Yes of course it would, the problem is with London Air Taffic Controll Centre. They may have a safety reason for it, only they can answer that one. You see the air traffic density in the London area has grown so big in the past few years, it has become a controllers nightmare. You may not know this, the working life span of a Instrument Flight Rule contoller is very short due to the pressure they work under. They simply just burn out.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Jo Jo on September 23, 2008, 12:41:58 AM
James, the government is arguing that because the night flights scheme pools noise data over the three London airports, it does not have to take specific action on what is a Heathrow problem. Although probably half the early morning planes coming in to Heathrow would not be allowed to fly in, if the government looked at Heathrow in isolation. Also if you look at the website given to us by Mark, you will see that the planes are landing not taking off http://lhr.webtrak-lochard.com/template/index.html (http://lhr.webtrak-lochard.com/template/index.html).



Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: James Hatch on September 23, 2008, 02:01:45 AM
I was a civil servant as well at one time! This is an old trick, where they take a group of statistics, lump them all together and divide by three or four,or what ever suits their needs. In other words try and pull the wool over your eyes, and that of anyone else.

A independant sound survey is the only way to go, and bear any weight it would have to be carried out by the local council and be certified evidence.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Jo Jo on September 23, 2008, 11:03:37 AM
James, if you had read this thread, that is exactly what has happened, several Councils are trying to take the government to court over it, you can read the Press Release on page 1 of this thread. Also it is not the flight controllers who have decided on this, it was an expensive consultation document set up by the government on changing the flight paths and heights of the planes making assumptions that will not happen, so they can get round EU rulings as they are hell bent on a third runway. In addition the government failed to inform half a million people who they said they would contact for feedback including Cookham Parish Council. Maidenhead Council along with many others plus the Mayor of London are fighting it and have applied for Judicial Review.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: James Hatch on September 23, 2008, 02:55:18 PM
Sorry JoJo: Your thread you posted would not come through my filter network. Thanks for putting me in the picture.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: simon on September 24, 2008, 01:29:57 PM
Good idea, but let's try to do this the correct way.

Members of Cookham Parish Council should also be there, so that they can tell us clearly what the options for Cookham are/have been to date and exactly what they have done about it for us so far, and will be doing.

The Parish Council will have received all the official documentation on this matter which the Cookham public needs to see and, as our elected representatives, they should now be leading the parish in whatever action is necessary.

There is strong feeling on this, so will the Crown be big enough?


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: CH on September 24, 2008, 01:39:03 PM
Sounds like a great plan.  Anyone know when the deadline is for consultation.  We don't want to get ourselves organised only to find out we've missed our chance to have a say.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: James Hatch on September 24, 2008, 02:37:52 PM
Good to see you are getting organised: Remember it all very good to fill in forms and sign them but, you must have recorded evidence to go with it. Otherwise they will find another excuse to brush you aside.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Jo Jo on September 24, 2008, 05:35:58 PM
I believe the Cookham Society are looking at the problem of flights and noise. What we can do is bombard the Heathrow Airport Noise Line which is free of charge on 0800 344 844 where specialised trained staff will do all they can to investigate whether an aircraft has broken the rules and, if possible, try to prevent it happening again.  There is a quota of night flights that is permissible.

You can see the NATS proposals for the 'both way' use of the runways by 2009 and the third runway proposals at:
http://www.consultation.nats.co.uk/downloads/13/download_consultation_document.html/ (http://www.consultation.nats.co.uk/downloads/13/download_consultation_document.html/). 

There was an article in the Times yesterday saying the government was going to ignore feedback and go ahead with their plans for a third runway anyway. It even mentions a fourth runway and a seventh Terminal!

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/transport/article4806137.ece (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/transport/article4806137.ece)



Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: James Hatch on September 30, 2008, 10:58:57 PM
Don't wait for elections to come round Jabber. The best for you to do is start campaigning now. You, will I am sure get quite a lot of supporting followers and votes.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: simon on October 01, 2008, 04:09:30 PM
Perhaps the lull has been due to the fact that everyone has to register for Discussions now and it seems from the lower volume of posts that many won't do this.

The Parish Council has more power to use on Cookham residents' behalf than anyone else, so the public strength of feeling communicated through the council should carry the most weight. The Cookham Society's input would be a strong and welcome back-up.

If CPC members are invited to the proposed meeting, residents can hopefully read the official documentation they hold, hear what CPC done so far, if anything (reports on this vary) and, once that is clarified, act accordingly. There is no point in rushing in blindly and re-doing something in a way which has not previously worked, when past experience and some official background knowledge could suggest a better way forward.

Whoever is organising this meeting will realise that there will be a lot of support. Delaying it further could be disastrous as there must be deadlines.

One gets the feeling that nothing more will be done by/for Cookham unless the public acts quickly and vociferously in protest about the planes.  :(


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Jane Davey on October 01, 2008, 11:07:43 PM
Hello there,

If you look back over the posts on this board you will see that I posted this back in May regarding the apparent increase in planes over Cookham,

Quote
'I'm looking into this issue in behalf of the Cookham Society.HACAN 'reassure' me that the current noise is down to the unusual sustained Easterlies that are prevailing at the moment - it seems to have been going on an awfully long time so if there are any weather experts out there maybe you could e-mail me to tell me whether this rings true.

More urgently the deadline is imminent for consultation on the proposal by NATS to change the routes over Maidenhead which mean aircraft will be able to fly over Cookham at a reduced height - the deadline for responses is 19th June and some of the issues are referred to earlier in these posts.

I'm trying to research exactly how significant the effect of these changes might be on Cookham (basically how much noiser would it appear from the ground) and would love to hear from any techie experts out there - Birdman? Mark? Anyone? - who can help me intrepret the data. E-mail me if you can contribute any info at all.

In the meantime if you wish to voice your opinion on the proposal you can do so via NATS at www.nats.co.uk/TCNconsultation.  Don't forget, responses have to be in by 19th June.'

Unfortunately I didn't receive any responses from anyone at all at the time showing any interest in this issue. However I went ahead and filed a response on behalf of The Cookham Society members and which I reported on on this forum in early September.

Quote
'We did file a response to NATS from the Cookham Society on behalf of all its members objecting to the proposed changes. However with all these things it's imperative that individuals and Parish Councils respond as well. In Hertfordshire there was a substantial public response and NATS are considering moving the propsed routes in response to the outcry. The interim feedback report can be seen at the NATS website.'

I have today received a letter from NATS saying they are still considering all the feedack in detail before reporting to the CAA some time next year.

On the issue of the development of Heathrow then there is a highly vociferous campaign against the third runway championed by HACAN and it is worth visitng their website at www.hacan.org.uk which gives loads of details about petitons, press campaigns and demonstrations in the offing.

 I hope you will see that on behalf of The Cookham Society I am trying hard to keep a watching brief on all these issues and to make representations on behalf of its members but I am not an aviation expert and it is a massive and highly technical area. In the meantime there is nothing to stop any group or individuals from pressing MP's, councillors and all elected representatives on what their polices are about Heathrow expansion or the NATS changes to flight paths (although the consultation deadline for the latter was in June as set out in my earlier post and I don't know whether or not the Parish Council made a formal response before the deadline). These elected bodies carry more weight than a 'voluntary organisation' like the Cookham Society ever can but they can only represent views that are canvassed with them. It's important that the Parish Council is made aware of how strongly people feel about this issue of air traffic over Cookham, if indeed people do feel strongly. Similarly it's always worth writing to the local MP and making it clear if this is an important electoral issue for her constituents.

In the meantime I'm happy to carry on posting here any info that comes my way that seems relevant to the air traffic issue if that would be useful.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: lizzyk on October 02, 2008, 12:40:00 AM
Our MP Theresa May is being very supportive over this, so the more people who contact her the better. A group could consider visiting her on one of her fortnightly surgeries as well. I did ask the Parish Council at the Parish Meeting if they had made any representation, I got the impression they had done nothing. I am not sure if they have discussed the problem even now, although I have written to them and I would have thought a lot of others have as well.

This report may be of interest:

THERESA PRESSES AIR REGULATOR ON HEATHROW EXPANSION

Theresa May met representatives of the Civil Aviation Authority last week to discuss the potential impact of the expansion of Heathrow airport on the Maidenhead constituency. Theresa has previously expressed her strong concerns about the plans in her submission to the official consultation on expansion.

Theresa said: “I was pleased to have the opportunity to discuss the detail of the plans for expansion with the Civil Aviation Authority. The data produced by the Government is extremely complex, and makes it difficult for the public to easily assess the impact on their area. Most of the comment has focused on a third runway, but I believe we have as much to fear from a change to mixed-mode operations, i.e. using both runways to land and take-off.”

“The CAA confirmed many of the fears that I and others have expressed. The building of a third runway will push many of the existing departure routes from the other two runways directly over Maidenhead, and mixed-mode operations, which could come as early as 2015, would also increase the number of flights directly over Maidenhead.”

“What they also showed is that not only will Maidenhead be affected by plans to expand Heathrow but Twyford will also suffer. Both mixed-mode operations, which could happen as early as 2015, and a third runway will have a very serious affect on Twyford. The proposed arrival routes will see more planes travelling directly over Twyford as they come in to land.”

“The Government’s case for expanding Heathrow is flawed. They are determined to press ahead without proper consideration of whether expansion is needed. I am clear that there must be no increase in the overall noise footprint of Heathrow airport. In fact, we should be working to reduce the levels of aircraft noise over the next few years.”


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: simon on October 02, 2008, 09:11:36 AM
It has been clear that the Cookham Society has been working on this and Jane's efforts are to be commended. However, if Lizzy is correct in her understanding that the Parish Council has done nothing at all, this seems beyond belief!

Would Cookham Parish Council members (our elected representatives) like to explain their reasons to us all, please?  Or, if Lizzy has been misinformed, tell us exactly what you have done for Cookham regarding this serious problem?



Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Jane Davey on October 02, 2008, 10:53:21 AM
I would also add that not only has Boris Johnson gone public with his proposal for an alternative to Heathrow/Gatwick in the Thames Estuary but the prospective Conservative MP for Thanet has also claimed that her area is keen to develop the existing airport at Kent International Airport at Manston to take the strain from Heathrow. Obviously the more public support such proposals receive, including via Theresa May, the more pressure will be put on government to seriously consider alternatives to Heathrow expansion. There does seem to be a strong sense that the government are completely blinkered at the moment about the third runway at Heathrow. I have heard spokesmen from all sides of the political specrum - from conservationists to hardcore business people - say that the third runway is both misguided and a poor solution for future aviation needs, and yet the present government remains resolute. However my sense is that the tide is beginning to turn hence the delay in finally deciding about the third runway and I think it would be very worthwhile to keep up the pressure at this stage. The argument is far from lost and Ruth Kelly's departure may provide an oppurtunity for a fresh approach.

Hope that's useful.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: lizzyk on October 02, 2008, 01:27:06 PM
I think Boris Johnson's idea is brilliant and solves a lot of problems. It did seem that Cameron had gone a bit luke warm on the idea at the Tory Conference though.  I assume the government are under enormous pressure from somewhere, in that extending Heathrow means a lot of money to someone. I assume this is what it is all about, as anyone in their right mind would realise that you don't extend the busiest airport in the world on the edge of one of the major cities in the world. Every other country builds their major airports miles away from their cities.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Plane Complainer on October 27, 2008, 10:08:19 PM
Noisy planes over the last few days. Time to complain again...


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Megan on October 27, 2008, 10:57:19 PM
I just don't notice the plane noise, maybe I'm going deaf!  :-\


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Plane Complainer on October 28, 2008, 12:47:20 PM
Megan,
You're very lucky that you're not disturbed by them!
I think they are worse in the village than anywhere else. Try the High Street.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Plane Complainer on October 28, 2008, 10:02:21 PM
Like right now... there goes another one  :-[


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Megan on October 28, 2008, 10:19:39 PM
Sorry Plane C. I haven't noticed any tonight!   I live up High Road, they must go over higher up here.   I may just go to the High Street soon and have a listen. :)


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: lizzyk on October 29, 2008, 10:07:53 AM
I hear them in New Road, in fact they often wake me up, usually before 6am.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Plane Complainer on October 31, 2008, 08:28:24 AM
Yuck. We're on the landing path as from yesterday. I'm sure even you, Megan, could here them this morning.
Lets get complaining: all the numbers / e-mails / addresses are further up this chain.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: monty on October 31, 2008, 08:53:03 AM
First one this morning was at 3.40 and continued at a rate after that. End of sleep for the night


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Plane Complainer on October 31, 2008, 08:58:25 AM
We can all phone the Heathrow Airport Noise Line: free of charge 0800 344 844.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: lizzyk on October 31, 2008, 10:24:14 AM
I was woken before 4am this morning with the noise and they were coming in regularly (probably every three to four minutes) by around 4.45am. I did phone the noise line, they would not have logged my complaint if I had not asked them to though. They say it is for safety reasons they are doing it.

It does look like there is some more positive government opposition now to the third runway at least.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Megan on October 31, 2008, 11:38:34 AM
Sorry PC, didn't hear a thing and slept like a log!   But I will make a phone call and add my voice to the cause for those who are disturbed by it.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Plane Complainer on November 07, 2008, 07:08:20 PM
The planes are especially loud this evening. Just back from work; at least 5 have gone over my house!

Megan, come down to the high street tonight!



Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Megan on November 08, 2008, 12:22:53 PM
Ah PC, I was in the pub last night at 7.08!   But I have to say that recently, I have been hearing the planes more than before.   I must be getting my hearing back!  Although luckily for me, I still sleep throgh them very early morning.


Title: Re: Plane Noise Again
Post by: Cookham Webmaster on February 10, 2009, 04:46:10 PM
This is a press release from the Royal Borough which may be if interest

Council gives cautious welcome to Cranford Agreement decision
The Royal Borough has given a cautious welcome to the government’s decision to scrap a 50-year-old agreement which has meant those Windsor residents living directly under the flightpath to Heathrow have taken the brunt of the noise all day for almost a third of every year.

The decision to scrap the controversial Cranford Agreement – which has meant that on easterly operations all planes have had to land on the northern runway directly over Windsor, resulting in up to 650 movements a day – was announced last week as part of the government’s plans to go ahead with the third runway at Heathrow.

But the council is steadfast in its opposition to the plans to build a third runway – and to press for a legal agreement to prevent the introduction of mixed mode operation which allows planes to land and take off from both runways at the same time.

Cllr Phillip Bicknell, chairman of the borough’s aviation forum, said: “We have fought long and hard for the abolition of the Cranford Agreement and easterly alternation to bring some respite to continuous aircraft noise to Windsor residents, and we are very pleased that the government has come to this decision.

“But while welcoming this announcement, we are also determined to press for a legal agreement to prevent the introduction of mixed mode which would mean planes taking off and landing from both the northern and southern runways as this would inevitably mean an overall increase in aircraft movements in and out of Heathrow. 

“While this would mean a certain amount of respite for residents in central Windsor, some people living in Old Windsor and Wraysbury would see an increase in the number of flights overhead. We want reassurance for these residents that mixed mode operations will not be introduced and will be pressing the government to give legal status to standing by its commitment.”

The Royal Borough has also pledged up to £25,000 to support the 2M group* – of which it is a founder member – in its plans to seek a legal challenge or judicial review of the government’s decision on the third runway.