Claims of noisy jets at Southend Airport are rejected by council (From Southend Standard)

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:
Ah, so those big planes with EASYJET in big orange lettering coming in low over Shoebury are headed for Heathrow? How? By driving along the A127?

Rayleigh Reader wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote: Ah, so those big planes with EASYJET in big orange lettering coming in low over Shoebury are headed for Heathrow? How? By driving along the A127?

It's a shame the planes are not Air Force Blue and fully laden with bombs, Bye Bye Shoebury! :-)

pendulum wrote:
I'm all for the Southend Airport expansion, I've flown from there myself, BUT, how can the council say people are mistaking the planes as coming from other airports, it's blatantly obvious the only low flying big planes are to/from Southend. The council should not be lying.

j-w wrote:
When people complained about the airport noise on a weekend when it was completely closed for resurfacing last year then I think the council have a point. also going to planefinder.net you can replay all the aircraft movements over the last few months, I bet you will be hard pressed to find some "over Shoebury" but if you tell me what days Lefty, I will be willing to look as I wouldn't want people to think you are making it up.

Mr. Pedantic wrote:
Russ13 - I think you've clearly missed the point. I believe Rayleigh Reader was promoting the idea of ridding the world of a horrid place and the muppets/chavs that live there. The planes would need to pass over Canvey, Basildon, Grays & Dale Farm, amongst others, long before Rayleigh.

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:
Ah, so those big planes with EASYJET in big orange lettering coming in low over Shoebury are headed for Heathrow? How? By driving along the A127?

Mr. Pedantic wrote:
Russ13 - Glad to hear that someone from Shoebury has a job! Hopefully it doesn't involve too much writing though. If it does I'd suggest investing in a spell checker.

bigmak wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:
Ah, so those big planes with EASYJET in big orange lettering coming in low over Shoebury are headed for Heathrow? How? By driving along the A127?

so now we know that Lefty lives on the off-shore mud flats and not in Shoebury!
I live under the Shoebury flight path, that is the three daily take offs that go to Spain, total time over my house 20 secs, noise? far less than the USA-bound European flights at 39,000 ft. As I said before, download FlightRadar or Plane Finder HD onto your computer and you can trace the actual flight path of every aircraft in the sky, what height, what direction, what speed and exact flight path.
All the incoming flights that approach Shoebury for the last month have used a flight path that takes them about 200 yards off shore, not over the houses. Hence my comments about Lefty living on the mud flats!

pendulum wrote:
I'm all for the Southend Airport expansion, I've flown from there myself, BUT, how can the council say people are mistaking the planes as coming from other airports, it's blatantly obvious the only low flying big planes are to/from Southend. The council should not be lying.

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

bigmak wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote: Ah, so those big planes with EASYJET in big orange lettering coming in low over Shoebury are headed for Heathrow? How? By driving along the A127?

so now we know that Lefty lives on the off-shore mud flats and not in Shoebury! I live under the Shoebury flight path, that is the three daily take offs that go to Spain, total time over my house 20 secs, noise? far less than the USA-bound European flights at 39,000 ft. As I said before, download FlightRadar or Plane Finder HD onto your computer and you can trace the actual flight path of every aircraft in the sky, what height, what direction, what speed and exact flight path. All the incoming flights that approach Shoebury for the last month have used a flight path that takes them about 200 yards off shore, not over the houses. Hence my comments about Lefty living on the mud flats!

Gosh yes, because 200 yards makes so much difference when a bloody great jet is throttling back to land a couple of miles up the road. Where previously there was none, there has been a 100% increase in aircraft noise over Shoebury since our d@mnable council bent over and submitted to Stobart. Were the people of Shoebury consulted over the increase in flights over their town? NO. Now the people of Leigh, Southend, and Shoebury are waking up to what it means to have large aircraft taking off and landing all the time. Good luck being a tory in this town in the coming months.

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

bigmak wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:
Ah, so those big planes with EASYJET in big orange lettering coming in low over Shoebury are headed for Heathrow? How? By driving along the A127?

so now we know that Lefty lives on the off-shore mud flats and not in Shoebury!
I live under the Shoebury flight path, that is the three daily take offs that go to Spain, total time over my house 20 secs, noise? far less than the USA-bound European flights at 39,000 ft. As I said before, download FlightRadar or Plane Finder HD onto your computer and you can trace the actual flight path of every aircraft in the sky, what height, what direction, what speed and exact flight path.
All the incoming flights that approach Shoebury for the last month have used a flight path that takes them about 200 yards off shore, not over the houses. Hence my comments about Lefty living on the mud flats!

Gosh yes, because 200 yards makes so much difference when a bloody great jet is throttling back to land a couple of miles up the road.
Where previously there was none, there has been a 100% increase in aircraft noise over Shoebury since our d@mnable council bent over and submitted to Stobart. Were the people of Shoebury consulted over the increase in flights over their town? NO.

Now the people of Leigh, Southend, and Shoebury are waking up to what it means to have large aircraft taking off and landing all the time. Good luck being a tory in this town in the coming months.

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

bigmak wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote: Ah, so those big planes with EASYJET in big orange lettering coming in low over Shoebury are headed for Heathrow? How? By driving along the A127?

so now we know that Lefty lives on the off-shore mud flats and not in Shoebury! I live under the Shoebury flight path, that is the three daily take offs that go to Spain, total time over my house 20 secs, noise? far less than the USA-bound European flights at 39,000 ft. As I said before, download FlightRadar or Plane Finder HD onto your computer and you can trace the actual flight path of every aircraft in the sky, what height, what direction, what speed and exact flight path. All the incoming flights that approach Shoebury for the last month have used a flight path that takes them about 200 yards off shore, not over the houses. Hence my comments about Lefty living on the mud flats!

Gosh yes, because 200 yards makes so much difference when a bloody great jet is throttling back to land a couple of miles up the road. Where previously there was none, there has been a 100% increase in aircraft noise over Shoebury since our d@mnable council bent over and submitted to Stobart. Were the people of Shoebury consulted over the increase in flights over their town? NO. Now the people of Leigh, Southend, and Shoebury are waking up to what it means to have large aircraft taking off and landing all the time. Good luck being a tory in this town in the coming months.

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:
Ah, so those big planes with EASYJET in big orange lettering coming in low over Shoebury are headed for Heathrow? How? By driving along the A127?

Blind Haze wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

bigmak wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote: Ah, so those big planes with EASYJET in big orange lettering coming in low over Shoebury are headed for Heathrow? How? By driving along the A127?

so now we know that Lefty lives on the off-shore mud flats and not in Shoebury! I live under the Shoebury flight path, that is the three daily take offs that go to Spain, total time over my house 20 secs, noise? far less than the USA-bound European flights at 39,000 ft. As I said before, download FlightRadar or Plane Finder HD onto your computer and you can trace the actual flight path of every aircraft in the sky, what height, what direction, what speed and exact flight path. All the incoming flights that approach Shoebury for the last month have used a flight path that takes them about 200 yards off shore, not over the houses. Hence my comments about Lefty living on the mud flats!

Gosh yes, because 200 yards makes so much difference when a bloody great jet is throttling back to land a couple of miles up the road. Where previously there was none, there has been a 100% increase in aircraft noise over Shoebury since our d@mnable council bent over and submitted to Stobart. Were the people of Shoebury consulted over the increase in flights over their town? NO. Now the people of Leigh, Southend, and Shoebury are waking up to what it means to have large aircraft taking off and landing all the time. Good luck being a tory in this town in the coming months.

If there were no aircraft noise and now a 100% increase, that makes the noise level.... silent?

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

Blind Haze wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

bigmak wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote: Ah, so those big planes with EASYJET in big orange lettering coming in low over Shoebury are headed for Heathrow? How? By driving along the A127?

so now we know that Lefty lives on the off-shore mud flats and not in Shoebury! I live under the Shoebury flight path, that is the three daily take offs that go to Spain, total time over my house 20 secs, noise? far less than the USA-bound European flights at 39,000 ft. As I said before, download FlightRadar or Plane Finder HD onto your computer and you can trace the actual flight path of every aircraft in the sky, what height, what direction, what speed and exact flight path. All the incoming flights that approach Shoebury for the last month have used a flight path that takes them about 200 yards off shore, not over the houses. Hence my comments about Lefty living on the mud flats!

Gosh yes, because 200 yards makes so much difference when a bloody great jet is throttling back to land a couple of miles up the road. Where previously there was none, there has been a 100% increase in aircraft noise over Shoebury since our d@mnable council bent over and submitted to Stobart. Were the people of Shoebury consulted over the increase in flights over their town? NO. Now the people of Leigh, Southend, and Shoebury are waking up to what it means to have large aircraft taking off and landing all the time. Good luck being a tory in this town in the coming months.

If there were no aircraft noise and now a 100% increase, that makes the noise level.... silent?

Mathematics is not your strong point is it.

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

Blind Haze wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

bigmak wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote: Ah, so those big planes with EASYJET in big orange lettering coming in low over Shoebury are headed for Heathrow? How? By driving along the A127?

so now we know that Lefty lives on the off-shore mud flats and not in Shoebury! I live under the Shoebury flight path, that is the three daily take offs that go to Spain, total time over my house 20 secs, noise? far less than the USA-bound European flights at 39,000 ft. As I said before, download FlightRadar or Plane Finder HD onto your computer and you can trace the actual flight path of every aircraft in the sky, what height, what direction, what speed and exact flight path. All the incoming flights that approach Shoebury for the last month have used a flight path that takes them about 200 yards off shore, not over the houses. Hence my comments about Lefty living on the mud flats!

Gosh yes, because 200 yards makes so much difference when a bloody great jet is throttling back to land a couple of miles up the road. Where previously there was none, there has been a 100% increase in aircraft noise over Shoebury since our d@mnable council bent over and submitted to Stobart. Were the people of Shoebury consulted over the increase in flights over their town? NO. Now the people of Leigh, Southend, and Shoebury are waking up to what it means to have large aircraft taking off and landing all the time. Good luck being a tory in this town in the coming months.

If there were no aircraft noise and now a 100% increase, that makes the noise level.... silent?

Mathematics is not your strong point is it.

HK9597 wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

Blind Haze wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

bigmak wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote: Ah, so those big planes with EASYJET in big orange lettering coming in low over Shoebury are headed for Heathrow? How? By driving along the A127?

so now we know that Lefty lives on the off-shore mud flats and not in Shoebury! I live under the Shoebury flight path, that is the three daily take offs that go to Spain, total time over my house 20 secs, noise? far less than the USA-bound European flights at 39,000 ft. As I said before, download FlightRadar or Plane Finder HD onto your computer and you can trace the actual flight path of every aircraft in the sky, what height, what direction, what speed and exact flight path. All the incoming flights that approach Shoebury for the last month have used a flight path that takes them about 200 yards off shore, not over the houses. Hence my comments about Lefty living on the mud flats!

Gosh yes, because 200 yards makes so much difference when a bloody great jet is throttling back to land a couple of miles up the road. Where previously there was none, there has been a 100% increase in aircraft noise over Shoebury since our d@mnable council bent over and submitted to Stobart. Were the people of Shoebury consulted over the increase in flights over their town? NO. Now the people of Leigh, Southend, and Shoebury are waking up to what it means to have large aircraft taking off and landing all the time. Good luck being a tory in this town in the coming months.

If there were no aircraft noise and now a 100% increase, that makes the noise level.... silent?

Mathematics is not your strong point is it.

Here's another calculation for you all:

5 x 0 = ..........anybody? (i'LL GIVE YOU A CLUE, Lefty thinks it's 5).

DOH!

mys842 wrote:
I find it quite amusing reading user's comments about Shoebury. I live on the Garrison and have experienced no such additional noise; levels are almost identical to before easyJet started flying from SEN - which for the record is virtual silence. Most of Shoebury is very nice, for example the Garrison, Bishopsteignton and the areas around the seafront. It has a village feel and isn't a heavily congested town with extreme traffic problems off a major artery road (like Rayleigh). Many houses around here are now commanding very high prices and the town is changing for the better. Oh and before people decide to comment, I can spell and have a good job in London. I chose to move here and haven't regretted it once.

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

HK9597 wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

Blind Haze wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

bigmak wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote: Ah, so those big planes with EASYJET in big orange lettering coming in low over Shoebury are headed for Heathrow? How? By driving along the A127?

so now we know that Lefty lives on the off-shore mud flats and not in Shoebury! I live under the Shoebury flight path, that is the three daily take offs that go to Spain, total time over my house 20 secs, noise? far less than the USA-bound European flights at 39,000 ft. As I said before, download FlightRadar or Plane Finder HD onto your computer and you can trace the actual flight path of every aircraft in the sky, what height, what direction, what speed and exact flight path. All the incoming flights that approach Shoebury for the last month have used a flight path that takes them about 200 yards off shore, not over the houses. Hence my comments about Lefty living on the mud flats!

Gosh yes, because 200 yards makes so much difference when a bloody great jet is throttling back to land a couple of miles up the road. Where previously there was none, there has been a 100% increase in aircraft noise over Shoebury since our d@mnable council bent over and submitted to Stobart. Were the people of Shoebury consulted over the increase in flights over their town? NO. Now the people of Leigh, Southend, and Shoebury are waking up to what it means to have large aircraft taking off and landing all the time. Good luck being a tory in this town in the coming months.

If there were no aircraft noise and now a 100% increase, that makes the noise level.... silent?

Mathematics is not your strong point is it.

Here's another calculation for you all: 5 x 0 = ..........anybody? (i'LL GIVE YOU A CLUE, Lefty thinks it's 5). DOH!

An increase is not a multiplication, it's an addition.

frank & monty wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

HK9597 wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

Blind Haze wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

bigmak wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote: Ah, so those big planes with EASYJET in big orange lettering coming in low over Shoebury are headed for Heathrow? How? By driving along the A127?

so now we know that Lefty lives on the off-shore mud flats and not in Shoebury! I live under the Shoebury flight path, that is the three daily take offs that go to Spain, total time over my house 20 secs, noise? far less than the USA-bound European flights at 39,000 ft. As I said before, download FlightRadar or Plane Finder HD onto your computer and you can trace the actual flight path of every aircraft in the sky, what height, what direction, what speed and exact flight path. All the incoming flights that approach Shoebury for the last month have used a flight path that takes them about 200 yards off shore, not over the houses. Hence my comments about Lefty living on the mud flats!

Gosh yes, because 200 yards makes so much difference when a bloody great jet is throttling back to land a couple of miles up the road. Where previously there was none, there has been a 100% increase in aircraft noise over Shoebury since our d@mnable council bent over and submitted to Stobart. Were the people of Shoebury consulted over the increase in flights over their town? NO. Now the people of Leigh, Southend, and Shoebury are waking up to what it means to have large aircraft taking off and landing all the time. Good luck being a tory in this town in the coming months.

If there were no aircraft noise and now a 100% increase, that makes the noise level.... silent?

Mathematics is not your strong point is it.

Here's another calculation for you all: 5 x 0 = ..........anybody? (i'LL GIVE YOU A CLUE, Lefty thinks it's 5). DOH!

An increase is not a multiplication, it's an addition.

An increase can be both an addition or a multiplication.
Take the aircraft noise issue as you raised in your post: 0 noise plus 0 noise (100% of 0 is 0) is still zero noise (addition).
0 noise x 100% is still 0 noise (multiplication).
Whichever way you want to look at it, with no noise (0) and then a 100% increase, you still end up with 0, i.e. no noise.
Sounds like Shoebury is blissfully quiet, then.
I'd stick to cycling, Lefty (and keep off the bl00dy pavement!)!

frank & monty wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

HK9597 wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

Blind Haze wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

bigmak wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote: Ah, so those big planes with EASYJET in big orange lettering coming in low over Shoebury are headed for Heathrow? How? By driving along the A127?

so now we know that Lefty lives on the off-shore mud flats and not in Shoebury! I live under the Shoebury flight path, that is the three daily take offs that go to Spain, total time over my house 20 secs, noise? far less than the USA-bound European flights at 39,000 ft. As I said before, download FlightRadar or Plane Finder HD onto your computer and you can trace the actual flight path of every aircraft in the sky, what height, what direction, what speed and exact flight path. All the incoming flights that approach Shoebury for the last month have used a flight path that takes them about 200 yards off shore, not over the houses. Hence my comments about Lefty living on the mud flats!

Gosh yes, because 200 yards makes so much difference when a bloody great jet is throttling back to land a couple of miles up the road. Where previously there was none, there has been a 100% increase in aircraft noise over Shoebury since our d@mnable council bent over and submitted to Stobart. Were the people of Shoebury consulted over the increase in flights over their town? NO. Now the people of Leigh, Southend, and Shoebury are waking up to what it means to have large aircraft taking off and landing all the time. Good luck being a tory in this town in the coming months.

If there were no aircraft noise and now a 100% increase, that makes the noise level.... silent?

Mathematics is not your strong point is it.

Here's another calculation for you all: 5 x 0 = ..........anybody? (i'LL GIVE YOU A CLUE, Lefty thinks it's 5). DOH!

An increase is not a multiplication, it's an addition.

An increase can be both an addition or a multiplication.
Take the aircraft noise issue as you raised in your post: 0 noise plus 0 noise (100% of 0 is 0) is still zero noise (addition).
0 noise x 100% is still 0 noise (multiplication).
Whichever way you want to look at it, with no noise (0) and then a 100% increase, you still end up with 0, i.e. no noise.
Sounds like Shoebury is blissfully quiet, then.
I'd stick to cycling, Lefty (and keep off the bl00dy pavement!)!

meldrew84 wrote:
Can't help but wonder how many of the people leaving these well informed comments actually live under the flight paths?? Also can't help wondering how many people are just on here to argue an irrelevant point with Lefty?? Certainly seems to be a pattern developing in these threads.... Apparently the phrase "agree to disagree" is just wasted on some people.

meldrew84 wrote:
Can't help but wonder how many of the people leaving these well informed comments actually live under the flight paths??
Also can't help wondering how many people are just on here to argue an irrelevant point with Lefty?? Certainly seems to be a pattern developing in these threads....
Apparently the phrase "agree to disagree" is just wasted on some people.

HK9597 wrote:

frank & monty wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

HK9597 wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

Blind Haze wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

bigmak wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote: Ah, so those big planes with EASYJET in big orange lettering coming in low over Shoebury are headed for Heathrow? How? By driving along the A127?

so now we know that Lefty lives on the off-shore mud flats and not in Shoebury! I live under the Shoebury flight path, that is the three daily take offs that go to Spain, total time over my house 20 secs, noise? far less than the USA-bound European flights at 39,000 ft. As I said before, download FlightRadar or Plane Finder HD onto your computer and you can trace the actual flight path of every aircraft in the sky, what height, what direction, what speed and exact flight path. All the incoming flights that approach Shoebury for the last month have used a flight path that takes them about 200 yards off shore, not over the houses. Hence my comments about Lefty living on the mud flats!

Gosh yes, because 200 yards makes so much difference when a bloody great jet is throttling back to land a couple of miles up the road. Where previously there was none, there has been a 100% increase in aircraft noise over Shoebury since our d@mnable council bent over and submitted to Stobart. Were the people of Shoebury consulted over the increase in flights over their town? NO. Now the people of Leigh, Southend, and Shoebury are waking up to what it means to have large aircraft taking off and landing all the time. Good luck being a tory in this town in the coming months.

If there were no aircraft noise and now a 100% increase, that makes the noise level.... silent?

Mathematics is not your strong point is it.

Here's another calculation for you all: 5 x 0 = ..........anybody? (i'LL GIVE YOU A CLUE, Lefty thinks it's 5). DOH!

An increase is not a multiplication, it's an addition.

An increase can be both an addition or a multiplication. Take the aircraft noise issue as you raised in your post: 0 noise plus 0 noise (100% of 0 is 0) is still zero noise (addition). 0 noise x 100% is still 0 noise (multiplication). Whichever way you want to look at it, with no noise (0) and then a 100% increase, you still end up with 0, i.e. no noise. Sounds like Shoebury is blissfully quiet, then. I'd stick to cycling, Lefty (and keep off the bl00dy pavement!)!

Looks like someone's put their (lefty) foot in it again! You made an incorrect statement, and then had the cheek to say 'Mathematics is not your strong point is it'..... I find the best thing to do when you get something wrong is to say 'sorry I got it wrong', not to keep digging. (Even if you live on the mud flats)

Blind Haze wrote:

meldrew84 wrote:
Can't help but wonder how many of the people leaving these well informed comments actually live under the flight paths?? Also can't help wondering how many people are just on here to argue an irrelevant point with Lefty?? Certainly seems to be a pattern developing in these threads.... Apparently the phrase "agree to disagree" is just wasted on some people.

I disagree.

Mr. Pedantic wrote:

HK9597 wrote:

frank & monty wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

HK9597 wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

Blind Haze wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

bigmak wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote: Ah, so those big planes with EASYJET in big orange lettering coming in low over Shoebury are headed for Heathrow? How? By driving along the A127?

so now we know that Lefty lives on the off-shore mud flats and not in Shoebury! I live under the Shoebury flight path, that is the three daily take offs that go to Spain, total time over my house 20 secs, noise? far less than the USA-bound European flights at 39,000 ft. As I said before, download FlightRadar or Plane Finder HD onto your computer and you can trace the actual flight path of every aircraft in the sky, what height, what direction, what speed and exact flight path. All the incoming flights that approach Shoebury for the last month have used a flight path that takes them about 200 yards off shore, not over the houses. Hence my comments about Lefty living on the mud flats!

Gosh yes, because 200 yards makes so much difference when a bloody great jet is throttling back to land a couple of miles up the road. Where previously there was none, there has been a 100% increase in aircraft noise over Shoebury since our d@mnable council bent over and submitted to Stobart. Were the people of Shoebury consulted over the increase in flights over their town? NO. Now the people of Leigh, Southend, and Shoebury are waking up to what it means to have large aircraft taking off and landing all the time. Good luck being a tory in this town in the coming months.

If there were no aircraft noise and now a 100% increase, that makes the noise level.... silent?

Mathematics is not your strong point is it.

Here's another calculation for you all: 5 x 0 = ..........anybody? (i'LL GIVE YOU A CLUE, Lefty thinks it's 5). DOH!

An increase is not a multiplication, it's an addition.

An increase can be both an addition or a multiplication. Take the aircraft noise issue as you raised in your post: 0 noise plus 0 noise (100% of 0 is 0) is still zero noise (addition). 0 noise x 100% is still 0 noise (multiplication). Whichever way you want to look at it, with no noise (0) and then a 100% increase, you still end up with 0, i.e. no noise. Sounds like Shoebury is blissfully quiet, then. I'd stick to cycling, Lefty (and keep off the bl00dy pavement!)!

Looks like someone's put their (lefty) foot in it again! You made an incorrect statement, and then had the cheek to say 'Mathematics is not your strong point is it'..... I find the best thing to do when you get something wrong is to say 'sorry I got it wrong', not to keep digging. (Even if you live on the mud flats)

A good idea! I must apologise to Russ13 and mys874 for slurring the name of their lovely sounding village. I wonder why no-one has jumped to the defence of the other places I mentioned? On a slightly different tone Russ13 - an "m" can make a big difference in English and why are you talking about airports in Papua New Guinea? Do you have a holiday home out there too? And finally I wander around south east Essex a fair bit (will try to visit Shoebury soon too) and have noticed the extra air traffic - there are more planes around but the noise increase seems to me to be only very close to the airport (SEN) - for take-offs and landings. Once in the air the Easyjet planes do seem to be extremely quiet.

tws123 wrote:
This article is totally right. Basically since the expansion, people have become more aircraft aware and are constantly looking for planes to moan about. Here's an idea. Use www.planefinder.net and that way you can see if its an Easyjet into Southend or another plane going to heathrow etc. and it is 100% accurate as to the aircraft location so there can be no mistakes and that will prove to a lot of people that most planes in the sky are not all going to Southend!

Max Impact wrote:
Make it even more simple you have no money somebody gives you 100% of that money you have as you have nothing you get nothing. Simple for a simple person. As has been pointed out LCA traffic comes low over Southend I know of people who have complained about them, as has been pointed out people moaned about airport noise when it was closed at the weekends, people like Lefty moan for the sake of moaning.

r6keith wrote:

Max Impact wrote: Make it even more simple you have no money somebody gives you 100% of that money you have as you have nothing you get nothing. Simple for a simple person. As has been pointed out LCA traffic comes low over Southend I know of people who have complained about them, as has been pointed out people moaned about airport noise when it was closed at the weekends, people like Lefty moan for the sake of moaning.

Max, surely if someone gives you something it can not be nothing it has to be something ?

Blind Haze wrote:

meldrew84 wrote:
Can't help but wonder how many of the people leaving these well informed comments actually live under the flight paths?? Also can't help wondering how many people are just on here to argue an irrelevant point with Lefty?? Certainly seems to be a pattern developing in these threads.... Apparently the phrase "agree to disagree" is just wasted on some people.

I disagree.

Max Impact wrote:
Make it even more simple you have no money somebody gives you 100% of that money you have as you have nothing you get nothing.

Simple for a simple person.

As has been pointed out LCA traffic comes low over Southend I know of people who have complained about them, as has been pointed out people moaned about airport noise when it was closed at the weekends, people like Lefty moan for the sake of moaning.

HK9597 wrote:

meldrew84 wrote:
Can't help but wonder how many of the people leaving these well informed comments actually live under the flight paths??
Also can't help wondering how many people are just on here to argue an irrelevant point with Lefty?? Certainly seems to be a pattern developing in these threads....
Apparently the phrase "agree to disagree" is just wasted on some people.

I live under the flight path and I am also just on here to argue an irrelevant point with Lefty.

Also the phrase 'agree to disagree' is wasted on me. I just like arguing.

Does that make me a bad person?

meldrew84 wrote:

HK9597 wrote:

meldrew84 wrote:
Can't help but wonder how many of the people leaving these well informed comments actually live under the flight paths??
Also can't help wondering how many people are just on here to argue an irrelevant point with Lefty?? Certainly seems to be a pattern developing in these threads....
Apparently the phrase "agree to disagree" is just wasted on some people.

I live under the flight path and I am also just on here to argue an irrelevant point with Lefty.

Also the phrase 'agree to disagree' is wasted on me. I just like arguing.

Does that make me a bad person?

LOL,i guess not... but i do find it a bit tiring to read a barrage of comments on every thread aimed at Lefty. It takes over and then the thread distances itself from the article and becomes a looooooooooooooong and inane series of childish point scoring and endless comment quoting... Like in this case, i can't work out who actually cares about the noise and who is just here for a pop at Lefty?!
Each to their own and everything but i'm sure i speak for a lot of people when i say the "lets argue with Lefty group" just make the thread on the boring side. Not to mention making this guy near on famous in the Echo world!
I still can't quite work out why everyone seems to hate him so much either? Perhaps you could enlighten me??

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

meldrew84 wrote:

HK9597 wrote:

meldrew84 wrote: Can't help but wonder how many of the people leaving these well informed comments actually live under the flight paths?? Also can't help wondering how many people are just on here to argue an irrelevant point with Lefty?? Certainly seems to be a pattern developing in these threads.... Apparently the phrase "agree to disagree" is just wasted on some people.

I live under the flight path and I am also just on here to argue an irrelevant point with Lefty. Also the phrase 'agree to disagree' is wasted on me. I just like arguing. Does that make me a bad person?

LOL,i guess not... but i do find it a bit tiring to read a barrage of comments on every thread aimed at Lefty. It takes over and then the thread distances itself from the article and becomes a looooooooooooooong and inane series of childish point scoring and endless comment quoting... Like in this case, i can't work out who actually cares about the noise and who is just here for a pop at Lefty?! Each to their own and everything but i'm sure i speak for a lot of people when i say the "lets argue with Lefty group" just make the thread on the boring side. Not to mention making this guy near on famous in the Echo world! I still can't quite work out why everyone seems to hate him so much either? Perhaps you could enlighten me??

Because they know I'm right. ;)

whataday wrote:
More concerned about low flying EasyJets coming in to land. Thought one was going to take the roof off a block of flats in Hadleigh

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

meldrew84 wrote:

HK9597 wrote:

meldrew84 wrote:
Can't help but wonder how many of the people leaving these well informed comments actually live under the flight paths??
Also can't help wondering how many people are just on here to argue an irrelevant point with Lefty?? Certainly seems to be a pattern developing in these threads....
Apparently the phrase "agree to disagree" is just wasted on some people.

I live under the flight path and I am also just on here to argue an irrelevant point with Lefty.

Also the phrase 'agree to disagree' is wasted on me. I just like arguing.

Does that make me a bad person?

LOL,i guess not... but i do find it a bit tiring to read a barrage of comments on every thread aimed at Lefty. It takes over and then the thread distances itself from the article and becomes a looooooooooooooong and inane series of childish point scoring and endless comment quoting... Like in this case, i can't work out who actually cares about the noise and who is just here for a pop at Lefty?!
Each to their own and everything but i'm sure i speak for a lot of people when i say the "lets argue with Lefty group" just make the thread on the boring side. Not to mention making this guy near on famous in the Echo world!
I still can't quite work out why everyone seems to hate him so much either? Perhaps you could enlighten me??

Because they know I'm right. ;)

whataday wrote:
More concerned about low flying EasyJets coming in to land. Thought one was going to take the roof off a block of flats in Hadleigh

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

Max Impact wrote:
Make it even more simple you have no money somebody gives you 100% of that money you have as you have nothing you get nothing.

Simple for a simple person.

As has been pointed out LCA traffic comes low over Southend I know of people who have complained about them, as has been pointed out people moaned about airport noise when it was closed at the weekends, people like Lefty moan for the sake of moaning.

And planespotters will defend and lie about which aircraft are making the noise. Because heavens forbid any of us mere mortals should stop them going out with their anoraks and egg sandwiches to watch the big exciting aeroplanes every weekend.

When a bloody great big jets, with EASYJET in big orange lettering on their sides, fly in low making a godawful racket over Shoebury, and Leigh, planespotters saying 'That didn't happen' are just making themselves look stupid.

But then 'Max Impact' will always, but always, agree with Southend council and the airport. The council and the airport will say 'Jump' and 'Max Impact' will say: http://bit.ly/2AcVTt

Max Impact wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

Max Impact wrote:
Make it even more simple you have no money somebody gives you 100% of that money you have as you have nothing you get nothing.

Simple for a simple person.

As has been pointed out LCA traffic comes low over Southend I know of people who have complained about them, as has been pointed out people moaned about airport noise when it was closed at the weekends, people like Lefty moan for the sake of moaning.

And planespotters will defend and lie about which aircraft are making the noise. Because heavens forbid any of us mere mortals should stop them going out with their anoraks and egg sandwiches to watch the big exciting aeroplanes every weekend.

When a bloody great big jets, with EASYJET in big orange lettering on their sides, fly in low making a godawful racket over Shoebury, and Leigh, planespotters saying 'That didn't happen' are just making themselves look stupid.

But then 'Max Impact' will always, but always, agree with Southend council and the airport. The council and the airport will say 'Jump' and 'Max Impact' will say: http://bit.ly/2AcVTt

What are your views on the people that made complaints about flights from the airport when the runway was CLOSED hence no flights.


Also what are your views on the misrepresentation of facts that flights would be taking off and landing every five minutes and that British Airways Boeing 747’s operate from Southend (See saen’s latest leafleting campaign)


Also the people who stated to the Echo that the increase in flights had not bothered them and they had not noticed but they would still claim compensation.


Bike spotters have saddle sores in all the wrong places…

whataday wrote:
More concerned about low flying EasyJets coming in to land. Thought one was going to take the roof off a block of flats in Hadleigh

Nebs wrote:

Blind Haze wrote:

meldrew84 wrote: Can't help but wonder how many of the people leaving these well informed comments actually live under the flight paths?? Also can't help wondering how many people are just on here to argue an irrelevant point with Lefty?? Certainly seems to be a pattern developing in these threads.... Apparently the phrase "agree to disagree" is just wasted on some people.

I disagree.

I disagree with both of you.

Max Impact wrote:
No have a full PPL, can fly (after check out) anything up to King Air (non-commercial) I work had so why not spend after all we can not take it with us, I do not own my own aircraft but have a 1/4 share in a cessna 206, which is actually based in Germany. As the other three owners are German but I don't hold that against them! So can you respond to my questions?

j-w wrote:

whataday wrote: More concerned about low flying EasyJets coming in to land. Thought one was going to take the roof off a block of flats in Hadleigh

You are dead right, I can't understand why they have to fly so low when they land!

Max Impact wrote:
Did any hear the two jet fighters this morning? or were they drowned out by the easyjets?

APR wrote:

Max Impact wrote: Did any hear the two jet fighters this morning? or were they drowned out by the easyjets?

Didn't hear or see them. Maybe Typhoons doing exercises for Olympic coverage ?

Max Impact wrote:

APR wrote:

Max Impact wrote: Did any hear the two jet fighters this morning? or were they drowned out by the easyjets?

Didn't hear or see them. Maybe Typhoons doing exercises for Olympic coverage ?

Apparently they were F15's! Wait for saen, jayman, lefty and the countless other to state that they were in fact easyjets!

Max Impact wrote:

APR wrote:

Max Impact wrote: Did any hear the two jet fighters this morning? or were they drowned out by the easyjets?

Didn't hear or see them. Maybe Typhoons doing exercises for Olympic coverage ?

Apparently they were F15's!

Wait for saen, jayman, lefty and the countless other to state that they were in fact easyjets!

jayman wrote:

Max Impact wrote:

APR wrote:

Max Impact wrote: Did any hear the two jet fighters this morning? or were they drowned out by the easyjets?

Didn't hear or see them. Maybe Typhoons doing exercises for Olympic coverage ?

Apparently they were F15's!

Wait for saen, jayman, lefty and the countless other to state that they were in fact easyjets!

hi max.

the only thing i have to say on the matter (regarding the article) is this.

from my above comment.

"Despite this, they’ve agreed to set up a committee to monitor complaints and ensure the airport doesn’t breach strict limits on flight paths and night operations."

it would have been prudent and responsible for the council to have had the committee to begin with!!!

Council leader, Nigel Holdcroft, added: “I think residents are generally supportive of the airport, but it is important we’re seen to monitor the situation and ensure it is following the rules.”

so the council have, 'up until now' not been monitoring the situation. and to assume public support prior to an objective statement on regulatory responsibility implies that the assumed 'first' out weighs the absolute 'second' within the paragraph....

to summarise then..

the council 'to date' have in no way been interested in investigating, pursuing, monitoring or controlling any breaches of the Section 106 Agreement...

SaneSteve54 wrote:
TO THE EVENING ECHO NEWSPAPER:

I was absolutely astonished at your story in the Echo this evening. This clearly demonstrates that Bosses at Southend Council have absolutely no integrity whatsoever.

It would also suggest that they credit Leigh residence as stupid. The claim that noise is coming from aircraft from other airports is absolutely absurd and insults the intelligence of local people.

As I see it, the council will say anything to justify a ludicrous decision to allow expansion of a site too small and in the wrong location for an airport.

Nigel Holdcroft needs to stand under the flight path in Leigh for a short while and watch Easy Jet aircraft taking off and landing. Surely the reverse thrust of the engine on landing would be all the evidence he needs that the aircraft are from Southend.

Also, the claim with regard to not receiving any more complaints about noise since Easy Jet operations started is equally as absurd as the other claims in your report. To the best of my knowledge the council have not set up a specific complaints contact with regard to airport noise. The only avenue open to local residence is to complaint to Stobart Air. Clearly a conflict of interest!

I feel reading the Echo recently is like reading advertising literature for the airport. Not bringing us local independent unbiased news. You should consider conducting your own opinion poll of local residence and print the results. This will confirm that Leigh residence lives are now blighted by low flying planes.

Also in closing, I must add that whilst the Echo and Council continue with the positives of the expansion very little is published on the negatives. Apart from the obvious noise, traffic congestion and damage to the environment you might want to consider a disaster may not be far away.

Recent events in Lagos show what happens when a plane falls short of the runway.

I can remember two incidents in the local area of light aircraft from Southend falling out of the sky. What happens if the next one is a passenger jet? It has happened at Stansted, Heathrow and Gatwick!!! Southend next? Perhaps you will not be so positive if it falls on a local school or heaven forbid the hospital.

anon anon wrote:

Max Impact wrote:
No have a full PPL, can fly (after check out) anything up to King Air (non-commercial) I work had so why not spend after all we can not take it with us, I do not own my own aircraft but have a 1/4 share in a cessna 206, which is actually based in Germany. As the other three owners are German but I don't hold that against them! So can you respond to my questions?

i like your style..
agree you cant take it with you, i also have my ppl....

SaneSteve54 wrote:
TO THE EVENING ECHO NEWSPAPER: I was absolutely astonished at your story in the Echo this evening. This clearly demonstrates that Bosses at Southend Council have absolutely no integrity whatsoever. It would also suggest that they credit Leigh residence as stupid. The claim that noise is coming from aircraft from other airports is absolutely absurd and insults the intelligence of local people. As I see it, the council will say anything to justify a ludicrous decision to allow expansion of a site too small and in the wrong location for an airport. Nigel Holdcroft needs to stand under the flight path in Leigh for a short while and watch Easy Jet aircraft taking off and landing. Surely the reverse thrust of the engine on landing would be all the evidence he needs that the aircraft are from Southend. Also, the claim with regard to not receiving any more complaints about noise since Easy Jet operations started is equally as absurd as the other claims in your report. To the best of my knowledge the council have not set up a specific complaints contact with regard to airport noise. The only avenue open to local residence is to complaint to Stobart Air. Clearly a conflict of interest! I feel reading the Echo recently is like reading advertising literature for the airport. Not bringing us local independent unbiased news. You should consider conducting your own opinion poll of local residence and print the results. This will confirm that Leigh residence lives are now blighted by low flying planes. Also in closing, I must add that whilst the Echo and Council continue with the positives of the expansion very little is published on the negatives. Apart from the obvious noise, traffic congestion and damage to the environment you might want to consider a disaster may not be far away. Recent events in Lagos show what happens when a plane falls short of the runway. I can remember two incidents in the local area of light aircraft from Southend falling out of the sky. What happens if the next one is a passenger jet? It has happened at Stansted, Heathrow and Gatwick!!! Southend next? Perhaps you will not be so positive if it falls on a local school or heaven forbid the hospital.

notinwestcliffanymor
e wrote:

SaneSteve54 wrote:
TO THE EVENING ECHO NEWSPAPER: I was absolutely astonished at your story in the Echo this evening. This clearly demonstrates that Bosses at Southend Council have absolutely no integrity whatsoever. It would also suggest that they credit Leigh residence as stupid. The claim that noise is coming from aircraft from other airports is absolutely absurd and insults the intelligence of local people. As I see it, the council will say anything to justify a ludicrous decision to allow expansion of a site too small and in the wrong location for an airport. Nigel Holdcroft needs to stand under the flight path in Leigh for a short while and watch Easy Jet aircraft taking off and landing. Surely the reverse thrust of the engine on landing would be all the evidence he needs that the aircraft are from Southend. Also, the claim with regard to not receiving any more complaints about noise since Easy Jet operations started is equally as absurd as the other claims in your report. To the best of my knowledge the council have not set up a specific complaints contact with regard to airport noise. The only avenue open to local residence is to complaint to Stobart Air. Clearly a conflict of interest! I feel reading the Echo recently is like reading advertising literature for the airport. Not bringing us local independent unbiased news. You should consider conducting your own opinion poll of local residence and print the results. This will confirm that Leigh residence lives are now blighted by low flying planes. Also in closing, I must add that whilst the Echo and Council continue with the positives of the expansion very little is published on the negatives. Apart from the obvious noise, traffic congestion and damage to the environment you might want to consider a disaster may not be far away. Recent events in Lagos show what happens when a plane falls short of the runway. I can remember two incidents in the local area of light aircraft from Southend falling out of the sky. What happens if the next one is a passenger jet? It has happened at Stansted, Heathrow and Gatwick!!! Southend next? Perhaps you will not be so positive if it falls on a local school or heaven forbid the hospital.

Nigel holdcroft live s in leigh so must have some experience of the "noise"

Max Impact wrote:
Wonder what all the nimby moaning mingers woukld have done when there were Spitfires operating out of the airport protecting from the Nazis...

That Spitfore is too loud, those Anti-aircraft guns make me jump, the air raid siren should not be used at night...

You knew the airport was there before you moved in stop moaning and get a life.

Oh and before you say We did not know the airport was going to expand its been on the cards for decades proposals have been poping up since the 1960's.

Wonder how many of the anti-job bregade have flown off on holiday?

jayman wrote:

Max Impact wrote:
Wonder what all the nimby moaning mingers woukld have done when there were Spitfires operating out of the airport protecting from the Nazis...

That Spitfore is too loud, those Anti-aircraft guns make me jump, the air raid siren should not be used at night...

You knew the airport was there before you moved in stop moaning and get a life.

Oh and before you say We did not know the airport was going to expand its been on the cards for decades proposals have been poping up since the 1960's.

Wonder how many of the anti-job bregade have flown off on holiday?

i think there are two key factors that sort of destroy your argument..

1) world war two was a long.. long time ago.

2) spitfires where used when the airport was operated by the RAF. at a time when the UK was under the threat of absolute oblivion by Nazi Germany..

how does this in any way relate to a tacky, budget air operation from a microscopic airport surrounded by densely populated area?

Max Impact wrote:
Wonder what all the nimby moaning mingers woukld have done when there were Spitfires operating out of the airport protecting from the Nazis...

That Spitfore is too loud, those Anti-aircraft guns make me jump, the air raid siren should not be used at night...

You knew the airport was there before you moved in stop moaning and get a life.

Oh and before you say We did not know the airport was going to expand its been on the cards for decades proposals have been poping up since the 1960's.

Wonder how many of the anti-job bregade have flown off on holiday?

jayman wrote:

Max Impact wrote: Wonder what all the nimby moaning mingers woukld have done when there were Spitfires operating out of the airport protecting from the Nazis... That Spitfore is too loud, those Anti-aircraft guns make me jump, the air raid siren should not be used at night... You knew the airport was there before you moved in stop moaning and get a life. Oh and before you say We did not know the airport was going to expand its been on the cards for decades proposals have been poping up since the 1960's. Wonder how many of the anti-job bregade have flown off on holiday?

i think there are two key factors that sort of destroy your argument.. 1) world war two was a long.. long time ago. 2) spitfires where used when the airport was operated by the RAF. at a time when the UK was under the threat of absolute oblivion by Nazi Germany.. how does this in any way relate to a tacky, budget air operation from a microscopic airport surrounded by densely populated area?

Max Impact wrote:

jayman wrote:

Max Impact wrote: Wonder what all the nimby moaning mingers woukld have done when there were Spitfires operating out of the airport protecting from the Nazis... That Spitfore is too loud, those Anti-aircraft guns make me jump, the air raid siren should not be used at night... You knew the airport was there before you moved in stop moaning and get a life. Oh and before you say We did not know the airport was going to expand its been on the cards for decades proposals have been poping up since the 1960's. Wonder how many of the anti-job bregade have flown off on holiday?

i think there are two key factors that sort of destroy your argument.. 1) world war two was a long.. long time ago. 2) spitfires where used when the airport was operated by the RAF. at a time when the UK was under the threat of absolute oblivion by Nazi Germany.. how does this in any way relate to a tacky, budget air operation from a microscopic airport surrounded by densely populated area?

You really are a pleb

Would you rather:
A. Have the airport as it is with restrictions on night flights and a cap on movements.

B: As it was NO restrictions on night flights no upper cap no restrictions on types.

C: RAF Typhoons unrestricted operations 24 hours a day.


Like saen you clearly do not have a clue about the rich history of the airport they said it "apparently played a minor role in the war" which could not be further from the truth, you also hate to see job creation so as lets hope you never need to look for work.

Major Incident wrote:
SaneSteve54 you stated, "I can remember two incidents in the local area of light aircraft from Southend falling out of the sky. What happens if the next one is a passenger jet? It has happened at Stansted, Heathrow and Gatwick!!! Southend next?"

The last passenger aircraft accident outside the airport perimeter at Heathrow was in 1972 (UK's worst), Gatwick 1969 and Stansted never but a Korean 747 cargo plane crashed in 1999. So before trying to scaremonger in order to strengthen a very weak arguement...get the facts and timelines straight.

mjl1969 wrote:
Let's get back to the point here.

I live in Leigh under the flight path and have noticed an increase in the noise levels. To suggest that I'm getting this noise mixed up with planes flying to other airports is absurd.

That said, the noise hasn't been as bad as I expected but this will get far worse for everyone in the area as the airport expands. This will need to be looked at/managed carefully but I fear too much money will be involved to stop it.

I must say though, to suggest that you should move if you don't like the noise is a little immature !

RoystonVasey@SS9 wrote:

mjl1969 wrote:
Let's get back to the point here.

I live in Leigh under the flight path and have noticed an increase in the noise levels. To suggest that I'm getting this noise mixed up with planes flying to other airports is absurd.

That said, the noise hasn't been as bad as I expected but this will get far worse for everyone in the area as the airport expands. This will need to be looked at/managed carefully but I fear too much money will be involved to stop it.

I must say though, to suggest that you should move if you don't like the noise is a little immature !

Totally agree with every word of this quote. I live in Mountdale Gdns and I started, in late April/early May, to notice low flying civil aircraft with orange tails and the word 'Easyjet' written on them. They seemed to be ascending from and descending towards the Warners Bridge area. I can't be sure if they were bound for City, Stanstead, Charles de Gaulle or JFK!! Neither can I 100% confirm they were 'planes at all and could have been invaders from space!!

The sound is not that bad and doesn't last very long. On one occasion so far I was awoken by the last flight of the day but quickly fell back to sleep. I am not complaining and can see positives and negatives regarding the expansion but really!!!...please please please do not insult our intelligence!!!!!

Lastly,if you are suffering noise nuisance and were seriously considering following the sage advice of the 'if you don't like it, just sell up, leave your friends, families and roots and simply move house' brigade I have an alternative that will save you a pretty penny...simply perforate both ear-drums with a knitting needle and you can remain in your ancestral home in silent bliss..problem solved!
(Hmm seems ridiculous, absurd and a tad childish doesn't it...)

Max Impact wrote:
Actually you can have RAF aircraft based at civilian airfields and vice versa

Just look at Gibraltar, RAF Northolt has reguar civilian traffic.

And to point something out did I actually say Southend would stay as a civilian airport no I did not (admit I did not actually say rever to RAF only either)

What would get more moans from the like of you and the other nay sayers the airport as it is or a 24 hour Typhoon QRA base, Tiffys taking off full afterburners at 2:00am would wake up more people that an A319 taking off at the same time.

It seems that you hate the very aspect of a sucsess in Southend, as of being a pillock at least my lover is not my right hand (or left or both if you are ambidextrous)

Broadwaywatch wrote:

Max Impact wrote:
Actually you can have RAF aircraft based at civilian airfields and vice versa

Just look at Gibraltar, RAF Northolt has reguar civilian traffic.

And to point something out did I actually say Southend would stay as a civilian airport no I did not (admit I did not actually say rever to RAF only either)

What would get more moans from the like of you and the other nay sayers the airport as it is or a 24 hour Typhoon QRA base, Tiffys taking off full afterburners at 2:00am would wake up more people that an A319 taking off at the same time.

It seems that you hate the very aspect of a sucsess in Southend, as of being a pillock at least my lover is not my right hand (or left or both if you are ambidextrous)

Max Impact….On here you tell us of things you do and the activities you pursue and by so doing make suggestion that you are bright, intelligent person.
On past posts you have hinted that you hold a private flying licence and that you are a deep sea diver. You appear to have time to attend all local civil events and be on speaking terms and have the ear of many of our town councillors. Recently you posted that you were going abroad to gain some qualification or other and that you were applying to do something else. Good luck to you but what I can’t understand is why someone who gives the impression as too having so much intelligence resorts to making such derogatory comments as you posted above.

mrttev63 wrote:

RoystonVasey@SS9 wrote:

mjl1969 wrote:
Let's get back to the point here.

I live in Leigh under the flight path and have noticed an increase in the noise levels. To suggest that I'm getting this noise mixed up with planes flying to other airports is absurd.

That said, the noise hasn't been as bad as I expected but this will get far worse for everyone in the area as the airport expands. This will need to be looked at/managed carefully but I fear too much money will be involved to stop it.

I must say though, to suggest that you should move if you don't like the noise is a little immature !

Totally agree with every word of this quote. I live in Mountdale Gdns and I started, in late April/early May, to notice low flying civil aircraft with orange tails and the word 'Easyjet' written on them. They seemed to be ascending from and descending towards the Warners Bridge area. I can't be sure if they were bound for City, Stanstead, Charles de Gaulle or JFK!! Neither can I 100% confirm they were 'planes at all and could have been invaders from space!!

The sound is not that bad and doesn't last very long. On one occasion so far I was awoken by the last flight of the day but quickly fell back to sleep. I am not complaining and can see positives and negatives regarding the expansion but really!!!...please please please do not insult our intelligence!!!!!

Lastly,if you are suffering noise nuisance and were seriously considering following the sage advice of the 'if you don't like it, just sell up, leave your friends, families and roots and simply move house' brigade I have an alternative that will save you a pretty penny...simply perforate both ear-drums with a knitting needle and you can remain in your ancestral home in silent bliss..problem solved!
(Hmm seems ridiculous, absurd and a tad childish doesn't it...)

FUNNY THAT WHERE MY MUM LIVE IN SAME ROAD AT YOU .SHE IS SAME SITUATION AS YOU NOT BOTHER ABOUT THE PLANE FLYING OVER HER ROOF . I DO HAVE FLIGHTRADAR 24 ON MY IPHONE OR PAD TO TEASE HER THAT EASYJET IS ON WAY OVER HER ROOF AND PUT EARS PLUG IN NOW.BUT SHE SAY SHE NEVER NOTICE OR HEAR IT COS SHE WAS LISTEN THE TV OR DOING SOMETHING .......

Broadwaywatch wrote:

Max Impact wrote:
Actually you can have RAF aircraft based at civilian airfields and vice versa

Just look at Gibraltar, RAF Northolt has reguar civilian traffic.

And to point something out did I actually say Southend would stay as a civilian airport no I did not (admit I did not actually say rever to RAF only either)

What would get more moans from the like of you and the other nay sayers the airport as it is or a 24 hour Typhoon QRA base, Tiffys taking off full afterburners at 2:00am would wake up more people that an A319 taking off at the same time.

It seems that you hate the very aspect of a sucsess in Southend, as of being a pillock at least my lover is not my right hand (or left or both if you are ambidextrous)

Max Impact….On here you tell us of things you do and the activities you pursue and by so doing make suggestion that you are bright, intelligent person.
On past posts you have hinted that you hold a private flying licence and that you are a deep sea diver. You appear to have time to attend all local civil events and be on speaking terms and have the ear of many of our town councillors. Recently you posted that you were going abroad to gain some qualification or other and that you were applying to do something else. Good luck to you but what I can’t understand is why someone who gives the impression as too having so much intelligence resorts to making such derogatory comments as you posted above.

Ivanna Goodhump wrote:
I think they should route the flightpaths over the Council estates. At least then the chavs and the feckless would get two early morning calls and might then get up and do some work, pay tax etc to contibute to their benefit handouts.
~
It will make the descents a bit convoluted but the pilots would enjoy the low passes over Cluny Square .... :), "I say Ginger, chav with brahn baby at 10 o clock dive dive.."
~

Ivanna Goodhump wrote:
I think they should route the flightpaths over the Council estates. At least then the chavs and the feckless would get two early morning calls and might then get up and do some work, pay tax etc to contibute to their benefit handouts.
~
It will make the descents a bit convoluted but the pilots would enjoy the low passes over Cluny Square .... :), "I say Ginger, chav with brahn baby at 10 o clock dive dive.."
~

Major Incident wrote:
mrttev63 and wine2468.... PLEASE TAKE THE CAPS LOCK OFF. There's no need to shout, the Boeing A319 is a whisper jet.

Mr. Pedantic wrote:
Russ13 - Glad to hear that someone from Shoebury has a job! Hopefully it doesn't involve too much writing though. If it does I'd suggest investing in a spell checker.

Broadwaywatch wrote:

Max Impact wrote: Actually you can have RAF aircraft based at civilian airfields and vice versa Just look at Gibraltar, RAF Northolt has reguar civilian traffic. And to point something out did I actually say Southend would stay as a civilian airport no I did not (admit I did not actually say rever to RAF only either) What would get more moans from the like of you and the other nay sayers the airport as it is or a 24 hour Typhoon QRA base, Tiffys taking off full afterburners at 2:00am would wake up more people that an A319 taking off at the same time. It seems that you hate the very aspect of a sucsess in Southend, as of being a pillock at least my lover is not my right hand (or left or both if you are ambidextrous)

Max Impact….On here you tell us of things you do and the activities you pursue and by so doing make suggestion that you are bright, intelligent person. On past posts you have hinted that you hold a private flying licence and that you are a deep sea diver. You appear to have time to attend all local civil events and be on speaking terms and have the ear of many of our town councillors. Recently you posted that you were going abroad to gain some qualification or other and that you were applying to do something else. Good luck to you but what I can’t understand is why someone who gives the impression as too having so much intelligence resorts to making such derogatory comments as you posted above.

Max Impact wrote:

Broadwaywatch wrote:

Max Impact wrote: Actually you can have RAF aircraft based at civilian airfields and vice versa Just look at Gibraltar, RAF Northolt has reguar civilian traffic. And to point something out did I actually say Southend would stay as a civilian airport no I did not (admit I did not actually say rever to RAF only either) What would get more moans from the like of you and the other nay sayers the airport as it is or a 24 hour Typhoon QRA base, Tiffys taking off full afterburners at 2:00am would wake up more people that an A319 taking off at the same time. It seems that you hate the very aspect of a sucsess in Southend, as of being a pillock at least my lover is not my right hand (or left or both if you are ambidextrous)

Max Impact….On here you tell us of things you do and the activities you pursue and by so doing make suggestion that you are bright, intelligent person. On past posts you have hinted that you hold a private flying licence and that you are a deep sea diver. You appear to have time to attend all local civil events and be on speaking terms and have the ear of many of our town councillors. Recently you posted that you were going abroad to gain some qualification or other and that you were applying to do something else. Good luck to you but what I can’t understand is why someone who gives the impression as too having so much intelligence resorts to making such derogatory comments as you posted above.

ipad 3G and a Samsung Galaxy S3 lets me post on the go whenever I want and wherever I am.

Currently on stand down for a while before a big job in a few weeks, a shipping compnay want their entire fleet inspecting before they sell off a number to release funds to buy some new mega tankers.

Max Impact wrote:
Because some people on here state "facts" that are far from fact.

They spout the same comments over and over again even if they have been told over and over again that they are wrong.

People moan about the airport ignoring the fact its been there long before they moved in to their houses.

I would not move near a school and moan about the racket the kids make I have more intelligence than that it takes just a few moments to check what is in the local area if you don't bother than They that sow the wind, shall reap the whirlwind.

Max Impact wrote:
Because some people on here state "facts" that are far from fact.

They spout the same comments over and over again even if they have been told over and over again that they are wrong.

People moan about the airport ignoring the fact its been there long before they moved in to their houses.

I would not move near a school and moan about the racket the kids make I have more intelligence than that it takes just a few moments to check what is in the local area if you don't bother than They that sow the wind, shall reap the whirlwind.

Max Impact wrote:
After reading recent postings from other submitting individuals whose own views are not the same as one’s own I have taken a step back from one’s brash and some would say overly hostile form of posting messages and thought I would fall back on the formal and more articulate way of conversation that one has to use when in meetings at ones place of employment when one is addressing ones superiors.

One would like to ask peoples view son this:

http://www.echo-news

.co.uk/news/local_ne

ws/southend/9807106.

Tuesday_s_Echo__Win_

easyJet_flights_from

_Southend_Airport/

Max Impact wrote:
One would like to extend ones thanks for your speedy reply, it is really most appreciated.

I would like to hear other posters views on the subject and would further like to ask if anyone who has a view that it is wrong for the airport to have aircraft flying out of it if they intend to participate in the contest to win a free fight on an Easyjet service out of Southend Airport.

jayman wrote:

Max Impact wrote: One would like to extend ones thanks for your speedy reply, it is really most appreciated. I would like to hear other posters views on the subject and would further like to ask if anyone who has a view that it is wrong for the airport to have aircraft flying out of it if they intend to participate in the contest to win a free fight on an Easyjet service out of Southend Airport.

alas.. they are now having to give plane tickets away? I fear the Greeks, even those bearing gifts. they may as well have parked up a giant wooden horse on the high street with a load of PR men hidden inside!

Max Impact wrote:

jayman wrote:

Max Impact wrote: One would like to extend ones thanks for your speedy reply, it is really most appreciated. I would like to hear other posters views on the subject and would further like to ask if anyone who has a view that it is wrong for the airport to have aircraft flying out of it if they intend to participate in the contest to win a free fight on an Easyjet service out of Southend Airport.

alas.. they are now having to give plane tickets away? I fear the Greeks, even those bearing gifts. they may as well have parked up a giant wooden horse on the high street with a load of PR men hidden inside!

Who said the airport/easyjet are giving tickets away it is the Echo that is offering them. Easyjet might have donated them but its good PR or don't you know how it works.

Keeping it simple just for you: By giving the Echo free tickets they get their name in the paper without having to pay for advertising, people spot competition and go in for it, if they win and have a good time they will probably book again in future, or they missout but book a trip anyway.

But lets just stick with your way of looking at it, so in your mind free tickets means whoever is giving them away is in the brown smelly stuff and failing well in that case I have been given VIP tickets the Japanese Grand Prix 5th-7th October wonder of it will still be on...

jayman wrote:

Max Impact wrote:

jayman wrote:

Max Impact wrote: One would like to extend ones thanks for your speedy reply, it is really most appreciated. I would like to hear other posters views on the subject and would further like to ask if anyone who has a view that it is wrong for the airport to have aircraft flying out of it if they intend to participate in the contest to win a free fight on an Easyjet service out of Southend Airport.

alas.. they are now having to give plane tickets away? I fear the Greeks, even those bearing gifts. they may as well have parked up a giant wooden horse on the high street with a load of PR men hidden inside!

Who said the airport/easyjet are giving tickets away it is the Echo that is offering them. Easyjet might have donated them but its good PR or don't you know how it works. Keeping it simple just for you: By giving the Echo free tickets they get their name in the paper without having to pay for advertising, people spot competition and go in for it, if they win and have a good time they will probably book again in future, or they missout but book a trip anyway. But lets just stick with your way of looking at it, so in your mind free tickets means whoever is giving them away is in the brown smelly stuff and failing well in that case I have been given VIP tickets the Japanese Grand Prix 5th-7th October wonder of it will still be on...

yes max.. I'm well aware of how PR works, that was the point i was making, but I seems totally lost on you. good luck, and enjoy watching cars going round and round.

Max Impact wrote:

jayman wrote:

Max Impact wrote:

jayman wrote:

Max Impact wrote: One would like to extend ones thanks for your speedy reply, it is really most appreciated. I would like to hear other posters views on the subject and would further like to ask if anyone who has a view that it is wrong for the airport to have aircraft flying out of it if they intend to participate in the contest to win a free fight on an Easyjet service out of Southend Airport.

alas.. they are now having to give plane tickets away? I fear the Greeks, even those bearing gifts. they may as well have parked up a giant wooden horse on the high street with a load of PR men hidden inside!

Who said the airport/easyjet are giving tickets away it is the Echo that is offering them. Easyjet might have donated them but its good PR or don't you know how it works. Keeping it simple just for you: By giving the Echo free tickets they get their name in the paper without having to pay for advertising, people spot competition and go in for it, if they win and have a good time they will probably book again in future, or they missout but book a trip anyway. But lets just stick with your way of looking at it, so in your mind free tickets means whoever is giving them away is in the brown smelly stuff and failing well in that case I have been given VIP tickets the Japanese Grand Prix 5th-7th October wonder of it will still be on...

yes max.. I'm well aware of how PR works, that was the point i was making, but I seems totally lost on you. good luck, and enjoy watching cars going round and round.

I will in the most part be at the free bar, there is a spare ticket as the misses hates F1 in truth so do I its so boring but who would turn down a free holiday!

Knowing my luck it will pee down non stop!

Still looking forward to it, Japan is an amazing place.

Max Impact wrote:
Yes as long as you are not a heffalump!

sensiblelos wrote:
"The situation is complicated" no its not.

Before the expansion, there were no easyjet flights flying out of southend and now if you live in leigh these flights are the lowest noisiest flights that can be heard early in the morning and late at night.

Ok so these type of aircraft are quieter but they are not quiet and they fly a lot lower than other aircraft from other airports, this can clearly be seen they are easyjet and they are orange how condescending to suggest otherwise .

Complaints. Perhaps the Council and the members that have supported the expansion can explain if a resident complains will this be recorded and if the same person wishes to sell their home due to the expansion, will this compliant need to be disclosed to any potential purchaser? i guess people who know the answer to this will wish to keep quiet to avoid any complications and residents will keep quiet and put up with it until their house is sold. Obviously this scenario suits the Council and they can make condescending statements in respect of the lack of complaints.

The general support of the airport is nothing to do with the Council owning the airport is it? If the Council is benefiting from the expansion then they should also compensate those who have been disadvantaged and there are many who have, perhaps the council are unaware of the true figures of those who have been disadvantaged for the reasons noted above.