Hot topic: Heathrow

Are you for or against plans to expand Heathrow?

Controversial plans to increase the use of the two existing runways at Heathrow and to expand the airport with a third runway, are of huge interest to residents in Hammersmith & Fulham, whose sleep is already constantly disturbed by planes overhead. The government's inadequate consultation led the council to set up its own public meeting - read more.

» Send us your comments now
» Read your comments

Please read our publishing policy.

Watch the YouTube video of the Heathrow protest meeting at Hammersmith Town Hall on 12 February 2008:

» Watch the video on YouTube (opens new window)

I am for the expansion. I live right on the flight path in Fulham and I don't even notice the planes going overhead most of the time. I don't have any trouble sleeping through the noise - and generally they don't fly over between 11pm and 6am anyway. If you live in H&F and have trouble sleeping through the noise, then you should probably pay a visit to your GP as you obviously have some sort of sleeping problem. Besides, think of the extra income and tourism that would result for this city/country. As for "global warming", what a pile of rubbish!
From Ryan Sweeney on 08/03/08

I am very worried about the noise and also about the global warming. I think I'm too late for the consultation, but would like to add my opposition somehow.
From Jane Wess on 29/02/08

The noise pollution over Fulham is already excessive and seriously affects our quality of life. A further expansion would only exacerbate the problem. I am 100% against expansion.
From Richard Jung on 28/02/08

I object strongly to the expansion of Heathrow airport. The borough already suffers greatly from noise and pollution from Heathrow's existing facilities, and I do not believe that expansion is necessary to maintain our global position. This is a convenient fact for BA and other airlines to scaremonger with.
From Charles Sanderson on 28/02/08

It seems clear to me that money talks. HM Government would rather railroad the expansion through, than give serious consideration to the views of all those people affected by the proposed expansion. I'll lobby with the best of them, but, can't help feeling that we're banging our heads against a brick wall. I doubt that any Minister lives in the affected area and therefore relies on advisers for information... Enough said!
From Sue Jenner on 28/02/08

Transport and traffic can hardly handle 60m passengers and would jam up with more - yet we do not hear of plans to double the train/tube and roads.
From Richard Leworthy on 27/02/08

Expansion at Heathrow will not happen - we will win this fight, no doubt about it.
From Gaynor Rumble on 26/02/08

I am totally for expansion to Heathrow. If you don't like the noise then move house, because this is west London and you can easily sell it for a tidy sum. It’s essential to the future of London and its people to provide jobs. Compare Heathrow to other airports in other countries – in the USA and Europe, and Heathrow only has two runways! All the other airports have at least three!! Grow up and think of your country!
From Alexander Walls on 25/02/08

I wish to object to the Heathrow expansion. I object on the grounds of increased noise pollution, increased air pollution, increased traffic on trains and roads, which are already overcrowded. I believe all night flights infringe on our residents' right to a peaceful night's sleep, and no amount of financial gain can ever compensate for this. The Government is in error in wishing to place Europe's busiest airport in the heart of Britain's most populated area. Passengers in transit from other countries who change their flights at LHR bring us nothing but noise and pollution and perhaps a landing fee for BAA, but that is of no use to long-suffering residents.
From Emma Sanderson on 25/02/08

I am strongly opposed to the proposal on the grounds of increased noise, increased pollution and contribution to global warming and strain on roads and tube lines. The current level of noise in Fulham (I live close to the Charing Cross Hospital) has improved probably due to the runway alternation practice. I am opposed to the idea of continuous operation on both runways. The noise is particularly intrusive at nights - there is no such thing as a quiet aeroplane, especially at 5.30am. I also oppose proposals for a 3rd runway which we were promised was not planned. The Piccadilly Line is heavily overcrowded due to Heathrow passengers. It is time the government attended to the quality of life of ordinary people, rather than acting as paid servants of the airline industry. I strongly support the view expressed by the Town & Country Planning Association that Heathrow Airport should be closed, and replaced by a new airport close to the Channel Tunnel Rail Link, and closer to the City of London. This would eliminate the need for many feeder flights to the continent, and avoiding the dangerous madness of so many flights passing across the centre of the largest concentration of residents and businesses in the country.
From Richard Adam on 14/02/08

I believe the expansion of Heathrow is completely misguided and wrong. The current airport cannot be expanded without having a serious environmental and social impact on the area directly around it, as well as having a severe knock-on effect for residents of the many London boroughs affected by the consequent increase in overhead flights.  Heathrow has been pushed to its absolute limits already, in an area that is totally unsuitable for an airport of this size. Other European cities have responded to the increase in air travel by building airports well away from the centers of their cities, and therefore it makes considerably more sense either to expand one of the other airports like Stansted or Gatwick, or to build a new airport in the Thames Estuary, where far fewer people will be affected.
From Jon Gilbert on 12/02/08

No to Heathrow Expansion because of the increased noise, increased pollution and strain on roads and tube lines.
From Robin Ross on 12/02/08

I want to say NO to Heathrow expansion because of the increased noise.
From Thomas Walker on 10/02/08

I am totally opposed to its expansion.  It will add to noise pollution and to extra strain on the roads and tubes.  The extra flight paths over Hammersmith and Shepherds Bush will impact hugely on my quality of life.  Please do all you can to stop the expansion.
From Joanne Hilditch on 06/02/08

Since moving to Parsons Green a year ago - nearly every morning at 4.30 we're woken with the planes coming in to land. There's occasional respite when the flight path seems to be not quite overhead. I am amazed that they're allowed to come in at that time - I thought it was 5.30 which is bad enough. We're selling up and moving to somewhere out of the flight path which will probably all change again if they go ahead with the new runway and terminal.
From Joanna Gowan on 05/02/08

I entirely object to the Heathrow expansion plans.  Fulham is already on a busy flight path and the idea of more flights - especially during the night - is completely environmentally unsound, and it would offer residents little respite from an already crowded flight path area.
From Francesca Franklyn on 04/02/08

Night flights should be banned as they disrupt the sleep of people living in the flight path and this can have a detrimental affect on a person’s wellbeing.  I live in the flight path and would like to know why we are not given more help with double glazing. I am woken these days as early as 4.30 by planes flying over and very low that sometimes we can feel the vibrations, yet I am not offered any help with double glazing.  My sleep pattern has been altered because of it.
From Aretha Moore on 31/01/08

I want to say no to Heathrow Expansion because of the increased noise. We currently have difficulty sleeping. With the increased flights this problem will worsen.
From Wei Min Cheng on 30/01/08

I live on Edith Road Hammersmith and am already disturbed and woken every morning at around 5.30am when the flights start coming in. It's appalling that the government was originally not planning to consult Hammersmith residents when the existing airport already affects us so severely.
From Pam Vick on 29/01/08

There are a number of flights between 4am and 6am which are severely disruptive to our sleep, despite having double glazed our bedroom windows.  I am very worried about increased night flights, but also against the Heathrow expansion which will bring more noise during the day too and more pollution.
From Suzanne Taylor on 29/01/08

The air transport industry should be looking at how to fill planes up, rather than flying them half empty.  They have to stop the principle of landing empty aircraft at Heathrow, just to retain the slot.  This is the way forward to expand business without expanding the airport.
From Mark Middleton-Smith on 28/01/08

Please could you help us with the Heathrow night flights?  We have just moved into our new place on the border of Hammersmith and Fulham.  We knew there was a flight path near us, but we didn't know they would fly so early (4.30am!!), so low, or so constantly over our house - the flight path never seems to change and once we are awake at 4.30am, it is impossible to go back to sleep.  If the people who made the decisions to allow flights at these times knew what we had to live with, perhaps they would have more sympathy.  Please help us - even if the flights started at 6am it would be more bearable.  We are so tired and feel absolutely powerless to change this.  Thank you for your help.
From Julie Kuenzel on 21/01/08

The Heathrow expansion is a disgrace.  The consultation paper was unbelievable in that its language was convoluted and almost impossible to understand - obviously written by some civil servant who did not actually want us to understand.  Equally, it was sent with no envelope so one had to go and purchase one - the whole message being that the Government wanted to tick a box to say they had 'consulted' but didn't really want our views.  The idea that a 3rd runway will help business and not add to the pollution is laughable.  The M4/M3 are already congested.  More cars in the area will inevitably add to the pollution.  As a Fulham resident, I already have my sleep disturbed frequently from 4.30am onwards and this can only get worse.  Sending planes to take-off over London also adds to the danger and pollution over the City.  They should build a new airport further out or at sea with a purpose-built transport system.  The current proposal will not work and will reduce quality of life for a large number of people.
From Helen Whitten on 10/01/08

All of us residents of H&F must do everything in our power to stop any Heathrow expansion.  The noise/pollution etc is already unbearable. Heathrow is already too big and services too many flights. Surely Ruth Kelly and this appalling government can see this.  There must be other parts of SE England where planes can land - why not expand Gatwick/Luton/Stanstead/City etc.
From Daniel Fulton on 10/01/08

The expansion plan would add further misery to the well known problem of the heavily congested air zone over Fulham and Hammersmith. The noise pollution caused by the passing planes and helicopters is already causing some health problems to the numerous children living in the area (there are a number of studies that link the stress disorders to the noise pollution issues).  I trust that the borough will do its utmost to prevent the expansion.
From Dr Andrea Primicerio on 06/01/08

I am against it.
From John Metzler on 05/01/08

H&F Council lobby?? Pollution, noise, night flights, traffic congestion - all to be increased when already excessive now… Is the council for or against this expansion? Have they given their views and to whom????
From Mike Butcher on 21/12/07

If this were a new issue - if the airport were just being built today - there would be no question of allowing the flight path over so much of the heavily occupied south west London area - it is dangerous, and unbelievably disruptive. Woken at 4.30am, and unable to go back to sleep because the planes then come at regular intervals every few minutes, one cannot relax even when the plane is not directly overhead. What does it do to our health? And in the daytime, the pleasure of one's garden is often spoilt by the planes - you can't hear yourself speak if you have friends round for an outdoor lunch. Even if we could be sure of having Sundays free it would be something - why can they not alternate their route and give someone else a go?
From Jan Chamier on 09/11/07

Stephen - dead right, aircraft noise is a blight and a torture with a plane every 90 seconds from 4.30am until 11.00pm. Heathrow's 3rd runway should be built at Cliffe where the noise won't impact anyone.
From Tony Boys on 08/11/07

The night flights are very disruptive - not only can I not sleep with the windows open, but I have to use earplugs. Even at that, most mornings I wake at 4.10am as the planes start their approach for landing. Why can't they change the flight path regularly so we get some peace at some stage? Perhaps they would like to fund triple glazing windows for everyone affected? Please continue to fight for us on this issue.
From Anonymous on 01/11/07

It seems like the Heathrow flights have been getting earlier of late. The noise is very disruptive - there seems to be no respite. Why do flights have to come in always from the West? I do not understand why at the very least we get them half the time - they can cite winds but I am sure that in this day and age a different flight path can be worked out 3 days a week (ideally on weekends). Given this increased frequency, I look forward to the next election, as hopefully at least one party will take a strong position on this.

I hope the council will lobby hard to prevent further night flights, and any increase in air traffic over the borough. In the Brook Green area, which is by no means worst hit, the noise is intolerable already on certain days. 

I'm fed up with being kept awake at night and woken early in the morning. Sometimes there is barely a 3 hour respite. To increase night time landings at Heathrow is inexcusable. Surely NO planes should be flying over London in these very uncertain times. Of course nothing will be done until there is a catastrophic accident. 

There are already flights between 4.30am and 6.00am.  And from 6.00am there are flights every 1.5 minutes. I have lived in this area for 35 years and it has got progressively worse.  Thank you for adding your considerable voice to the citizens' campaign.

BAA and the Government wish London and Heathrow to increase as a European Hub for economic benefit. This greed is unsustainable in the face of climate change and unnecessary noise nuisance caused by ever larger numbers of Europeans transiting here. If the Government thinks that increasing UK citizens flying is sustainable, more local airport facilities should be provided. This would also provide a far greater contribution to passenger safety as the most dangerous part of the journey is the trip to and from the airport. Shortening this would increase air passenger safety far more than the current crisis the authorities have caused. 

I live in Parsons Green. The peaceful time between end of night flights and the start of the very early morning flights is just too short for me to have had any decent sleep since moving into Parsons Green 20 months ago. Because one never knows whether there will or will not actually be flights over Fulham, sleeping with a window open is NEVER an option because if the flights do start about 4.30, then I'll be awakened immediately they start.    

The constant noise of planes on some days is bad enough, but night flights really are not acceptable and there seem to be quite a few these days.  They are most disruptive.

There seems to be a direct flight path over my house and the flights start at 4.30am in the morning. This means the end of my sleep. I get up every morning very tired, lacking energy and not fit for work. I have to sleep with my windows closed at all times, which does make for a very uncomfortable night. The planes fly too low and the noise pollution is unacceptable. Please continue to fight for our nightly peace. 

The first plane flies over Fulham at 4.30am, the last one at 12.30am, that gives us 4 hours sleep!   Please do not let them make it an even shorter night! I do not understand why they cannot change the flight path so that if planes fly overhead at 4.30am they stop at 10pm, or if they stop after midnight they only start again at 6.30am over the same spot.   At least then we would have 6 hrs sleep. There are now no silent gaps between the planes during the morning and 4-5pm peak times, it is unbearable and most of us, if we could, would just leave the borough. 

The flight noise over Fulham and Hammersmith is already so bad that I sleep with earplugs in all the time. I do not understand how it can be allowed to let these planes fly over a residential area as early as 4.30 in the morning?! The noise is not soft either, it is really quite loud, and there is no escaping it. I will never get used to this I am afraid. 

Night flights at 4.30am alwayswake me up and I find it difficult, if not impossible, to go back to sleep. This has a terrible effect on me for the rest of the day. Night flights tend to go on for several days before the flight path is changed.  It really is impossible, and unfair to those of us below the flight path. 

We live in south Fulham, close to the river, and the very early morning flights are particularly disruptive to us. For older people [we're both in our late fifties] it is often harder to get back to sleep, especially when you know you soon have to get up for work. Both my husband and I feel it is having a detrimental effect on our health. God forbid it should get worse.  One expects traffic noise and one tries to be tolerant - this is the city after all - but there must be very few who are not annoyed by this level of nuisance. If it were caused by neighbours one would be able to take them to court.  

I would like to commend the council for taking action against night flights. Flight routes should be more varied altogether, with approaches which leave people with more noise-free days. Please continue to do all you can to alleviate the burden of noisy flights.

I strongly agree with the Council’s effort to avoid more night flights, it is already a nightmare as it is. Flights are starting at 5am and going on till midnight   Even if you close the windows it is very disturbing and it makes you think of buying a house elsewhere. 

The plane noise now seems to be directed over Hammersmith rather than the river. Any increase in noise is unacceptable for the area. As residents we pay our taxes and they should be used to better our lives, not worsen them.

The noise in Hammersmith and Fulham is diabolical and it would help to reduce it if night flights were banned.  It would also be safer, as night flying must be more dangerous in poor/no visibility.  Noise could also be reduced by encouraging public transport and reducing the use of cars, lorries etc.  Sunday used to be the only quiet day, but now it is noisy every day and every night.  Reducing the noise would also reduce air pollution.

No night flights between 10.00pm & 8am.  Resist further expansion and increase in flight numbers.  Keep lobbying on behalf of residents.  

I wish to express my disagreement with the night flights.  I live in Fulham & find the present night flights disturb me hugely & I do not want to be here any more.  Please let me know if there is any petition I can sign. 

Fulham is plagued not only with Heathrow flights, but also with helicopter flights from Battersea, and on occasion helicopter night-flying.  Everyone in the area knows that there is already a 'wake-up' 4.30-4.45am arrival on the Heathrow flightpath over Fulham, which seems to be ignored by BAA when it makes claims that flights do not start until 6.00am.  If the Government means to introduce night flights, whatever citizens think, then it will employ every trick in the book (like giving BAA advanced information) to justify its action.  The 2M group is an excellent idea, but it needs serious funds to match BAA and other interested parties, who will no doubt be committing £millions to their campaign.  The 2M group will need very sophisticated and original research and analysis, not only into the physical aspects of night-flights, but also the legal and commercial claims.  For instance, how and where can we challenge a 'public interest' claim which will ultimately be put by the Government?  How serious are the claims of continental cities overtaking London as dominant centres for business, if flight volumes do not increase?  How strong is the existing forensic evidence of sleep deprivation; and is it enough, ultimately, to support the claim of abuse of human rights?  Why not improve the attraction of other airports for business travel?  And so on.  These questions have probably all been answered, but is there enough sound evidence and intellectual rigour in the answers?