London Hub proposal published by Halcrow/Foster+Partners
 

In message , at 20:13:52 on Fri, 4
Nov 2011, Graeme Wall remarked:
The claim for Borisport is that it will operate 24/7.

With no-one living really close, and the flight paths not crossing
London either. Simples.

You are the one that is simple. There are quite a few built up areas
in the South East even if you want to ignore London.

But none sufficiently close to the airport to be bothered by the noise
on takeoff.

Then there is the question of what happens when the winds are easterly.

The sound doesn't blow that far (and the takeoffs will be across the
north sea).
--
Roland Perry

London Hub proposal published by Halcrow/Foster+Partners
 

Neil Williams wrote:
On Fri, 04 Nov 2011 17:45:33 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:
Which is why, currently there is a curfew at LHR. The claim for
Borisport is that it will operate 24/7.

That sort of depends on destination - I can't see a lot of demand for
0300 departures to many places, nor really arrivals at that sort of
time.


There is huge demand for cheap charter flights to/from Gatwick, and
they take off and land throughout the day and night. In summer, the
airport is almost at busy at night as in the day.

London Hub proposal published by Halcrow/Foster+Partners
 

On Fri, 04 Nov 2011 20:13:52 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 04/11/2011 19:21, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 17:45:33 on Fri, 4 Nov
2011, Graeme Wall remarked:
There's no reason to suppose that flightpaths from an estuary airport
would be routed over central London at all.

There's also no reason to suppose they won't be.

To reduce the noise.

Which is why, currently there is a curfew at LHR.

That'll be for people living really close.

The claim for Borisport is that it will operate 24/7.

With no-one living really close, and the flight paths not crossing
London either. Simples.

You are the one that is simple. There are quite a few built up areas in
the South East even if you want to ignore London. Then there is the
question of what happens when the winds are easterly.

Increased wind strength also seems to have a distinct effect WRT to
flattening and straightening out the incoming flight path and thus
shaking a few more roofs.

London Hub proposal published by Halcrow/Foster+Partners
 

On 04/11/2011 20:26, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 20:13:52 on Fri, 4
Nov 2011, Graeme Wall remarked:
The claim for Borisport is that it will operate 24/7.

With no-one living really close, and the flight paths not crossing
London either. Simples.

You are the one that is simple. There are quite a few built up areas
in the South East even if you want to ignore London.

But none sufficiently close to the airport to be bothered by the noise
on takeoff.

Then there is the question of what happens when the winds are easterly.

The sound doesn't blow that far (and the takeoffs will be across the
north sea).

But the approaches won't be.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

London Hub proposal published by Halcrow/Foster+Partners
 

In message , at 21:18:10 on Fri, 4
Nov 2011, Graeme Wall remarked:

Then there is the question of what happens when the winds are easterly.

The sound doesn't blow that far (and the takeoffs will be across the
north sea).

But the approaches won't be.

Indeed. They'll be turning onto the runway from east of London.
--
Roland Perry

London Hub proposal published by Halcrow/Foster+Partners
 

On 04/11/2011 21:34, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 21:18:10 on Fri, 4
Nov 2011, Graeme Wall remarked:

Then there is the question of what happens when the winds are easterly.

The sound doesn't blow that far (and the takeoffs will be across the
north sea).

But the approaches won't be.

Indeed. They'll be turning onto the runway from east of London.

Maybe. Approach tracks are generally longer than take-off tracks the
glide slope being much flatter.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

London Hub proposal published by Halcrow/Foster+Partners
 

On Fri, 04 Nov 2011 17:45:33 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 04/11/2011 17:12, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:59:33 on Fri, 4
Nov 2011, Graeme Wall remarked:
There's no reason to suppose that flightpaths from an estuary airport
would be routed over central London at all.

There's also no reason to suppose they won't be.

To reduce the noise.

Which is why, currently there is a curfew at LHR. The claim for
Borisport is that it will operate 24/7.

Why should that be a worry? If you compare the noise created by an
airport now to that say 20-25 years ago then they are almost silent
and getting even more quiet year on year.


--

London Hub proposal published by Halcrow/Foster+Partners
 

On Fri, 04 Nov 2011 21:47:30 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 04/11/2011 21:34, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 21:18:10 on Fri, 4
Nov 2011, Graeme Wall remarked:

Then there is the question of what happens when the winds are easterly.

The sound doesn't blow that far (and the takeoffs will be across the
north sea).

But the approaches won't be.

Indeed. They'll be turning onto the runway from east of London.

Maybe. Approach tracks are generally longer than take-off tracks the
glide slope being much flatter.

But for the vast majority of the approach the engines are on idle and
thus significantly less noisy than on departure.

--

London Hub proposal published by Halcrow/Foster+Partners
 

On Nov 6, 9:37*pm, The Other Mike
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Nov 2011 17:45:33 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 04/11/2011 17:12, Roland Perry wrote:

Which is why, currently there is a curfew at LHR. *The claim for
Borisport is that it will operate 24/7.

Why should that be a worry? *If you compare the noise created by an
airport now to that say 20-25 years ago then they are almost silent
and getting even more quiet year on year.

Are they ********.

London Hub proposal published by Halcrow/Foster+Partners
 

On 06/11/2011 21:37, The Other Mike wrote:
On Fri, 04 Nov 2011 17:45:33 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 04/11/2011 17:12, Roland Perry wrote:
In , at 16:59:33 on Fri, 4
Nov 2011, Graeme remarked:
There's no reason to suppose that flightpaths from an estuary airport
would be routed over central London at all.

There's also no reason to suppose they won't be.

To reduce the noise.

Which is why, currently there is a curfew at LHR. The claim for
Borisport is that it will operate 24/7.

Why should that be a worry? If you compare the noise created by an
airport now to that say 20-25 years ago then they are almost silent
and getting even more quiet year on year.



Total nonsense.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail