Noise & the Environment

Press articles

The basis of the Government's 2008 consultation was to determine whether a third runway can meet air and noise pollution standards.

In March 2008, the Sunday Times reported an "environmental miracle"; the claim by the Government and BAA that a new airport the size of Gatwick could be bolted on to Heathrow without any adverse effect.

They are not alone in their incredulity.

Switch in Heathrow take-offs 'will cause more aircraft noise' PDF Print E-mail
Monday, 19 October 2009 00:00

Residents living near Heathrow face longer periods of noise disruption under plans to change landing and take-off arrangements.

Arrivals and departures are switched between the airport's two runways at 3pm daily to give respite to people living under each flight-path. But campaigners fear airport operator BAA is looking to widen special procedures that allow planes to land and take off from the same runway - so compromising the half-day "peace and quiet".

The campaigners warn that this paves the way for "mixed mode" use of runways (using the same one for take-offs and landings in the same time period) if an incoming Tory government blocks plans for a third runway. Up to 700,000 residents are affected by the 480,000 flights a year in and out of Heathrow. With the airport operating at 99 per cent capacity, loss of a third runway would add to demands for a more intensive use of existing ones.

Read the full article in
The Evening Standard.


Which is exactly why the campaign is not just against the third runway but against any further expansion of Heathrow's capacity. This is also why the campaign will continue as long as is necessary.

BAA cannot be trusted. It's the lesson of history.

 
RocketTheme Joomla Templates