There are too many planes over East London already. Flight paths are infringing on quality of life
M
Melanie von Molendorff
11 years ago
There are too many planes over East London already. Flight paths are infringing on quality of life
G
Gary Baldwin
11 years ago
Build an airport in the Thames estuary ,it affects no one ,We need housing in the SE of England,build on Heathrow
G
Gary Baldwin
11 years ago
Build an airport in the Thames estuary ,it affects no one ,We need housing in the SE of England,build on Heathrow
A
Adrian Hoare
11 years ago
Boris Island may be a bold step and Boris may seem a bit eccentric at times but this time he has the right answer - that is, if we really do need any more south-east airport capacity, which I question.
A
Adrian Hoare
11 years ago
Boris Island may be a bold step and Boris may seem a bit eccentric at times but this time he has the right answer - that is, if we really do need any more south-east airport capacity, which I question.
J
Jacquie Lovell
11 years ago
The case for expansion is NOT proven at any airport and is a myth purported by those with an interest. Much of the air traffic is localand could be served via far more environmentally friendly railway networks. The pollution record of Heathrow is appalling and I understand promises to keep to passenger number caps have been broken. Are the politicians here to serve the interests of the people that live in this country or the profit motives of a foreign owned company. The south east is already well served. If we truely feel more capacity is needed then lets see help go to the regions.
J
Jacquie Lovell
11 years ago
The case for expansion is NOT proven at any airport and is a myth purported by those with an interest. Much of the air traffic is localand could be served via far more environmentally friendly railway networks. The pollution record of Heathrow is appalling and I understand promises to keep to passenger number caps have been broken. Are the politicians here to serve the interests of the people that live in this country or the profit motives of a foreign owned company. The south east is already well served. If we truely feel more capacity is needed then lets see help go to the regions.
H
Hilary atrapani
11 years ago
Increased traffic means increased disturbance. Having just had three months if my life seriously impaired by airt traffic noise when we were not on a flight path, I wouldn't wish this on anyone and a third runway would definitely mean new flight paths.
H
Hilary atrapani
11 years ago
Increased traffic means increased disturbance. Having just had three months if my life seriously impaired by airt traffic noise when we were not on a flight path, I wouldn't wish this on anyone and a third runway would definitely mean new flight paths.
A
Adam Siveyer
11 years ago
Expansion to Heathrow and any increase it flights it will bring is bad for the local environment and dangerous for local residents. The area in question is heavily populated and polluted by an already busy airport and traffic from major roads in the area (M40, M4, M25, etc). In addition, the densily populated area means there is a very real health and safety risk for local residents in the event of any aircraft disaster. There have been near misses in the past, e.g BA flight 38 17/01/2008. What needs to happen until people realise that increased flights in this area is dangerous. No amount of economic benefit can argue with this.
A
Adam Siveyer
11 years ago
Expansion to Heathrow and any increase it flights it will bring is bad for the local environment and dangerous for local residents. The area in question is heavily populated and polluted by an already busy airport and traffic from major roads in the area (M40, M4, M25, etc). In addition, the densily populated area means there is a very real health and safety risk for local residents in the event of any aircraft disaster. There have been near misses in the past, e.g BA flight 38 17/01/2008. What needs to happen until people realise that increased flights in this area is dangerous. No amount of economic benefit can argue with this.
B
Brigitte Jeffries
11 years ago
The noise is already unbearable. We say no to any expansion of Heathrow.
B
Brigitte Jeffries
11 years ago
The noise is already unbearable. We say no to any expansion of Heathrow.
A
Anonymous
11 years ago
already there is too much noise across the most heavily populated areas of west london - this proposal will just bring even mroe people under the flight path for even more of the time, including some of the most wealthy, highest tax-paying contributors to society. Gatwick is the cheaper, more logical solution offering greenfield sites and an opportunity for increased competition between the 2 main hubs, leading to better prices and service for all.
B
Benjamin Wellman
11 years ago
already there is too much noise across the most heavily populated areas of west london - this proposal will just bring even mroe people under the flight path for even more of the time, including some of the most wealthy, highest tax-paying contributors to society. Gatwick is the cheaper, more logical solution offering greenfield sites and an opportunity for increased competition between the 2 main hubs, leading to better prices and service for all.
L
Lori McNeill
11 years ago
There is no real evidence to show that Heathrow is the best option for expansion, if indeed airport expansion is actually needed and given that the area is not currently meeting required CO2 emission levels, Heathrow should NOT be expanded. There are already too many people living under the misery of Heathrow’s flight paths, to build another runway and thereby increase flights by another 480,000 per year is showing a gross disrespect to London’s population.
L
Lori McNeill
11 years ago
There is no real evidence to show that Heathrow is the best option for expansion, if indeed airport expansion is actually needed and given that the area is not currently meeting required CO2 emission levels, Heathrow should NOT be expanded. There are already too many people living under the misery of Heathrow’s flight paths, to build another runway and thereby increase flights by another 480,000 per year is showing a gross disrespect to London’s population.
A
Anne Ehinger
11 years ago
Absolutely against any expansion, for environmental reasons. We have a huge amount of noise as it stands now in the skies around Heathrow, in a very populated area.
A
Anne Ehinger
11 years ago
Absolutely against any expansion, for environmental reasons. We have a huge amount of noise as it stands now in the skies around Heathrow, in a very populated area.
There are too many planes over East London already. Flight paths are infringing on quality of life
There are too many planes over East London already. Flight paths are infringing on quality of life
Build an airport in the Thames estuary ,it affects no one ,We need housing in the SE of England,build on Heathrow
Build an airport in the Thames estuary ,it affects no one ,We need housing in the SE of England,build on Heathrow
Boris Island may be a bold step and Boris may seem a bit eccentric at times but this time he has the right answer - that is, if we really do need any more south-east airport capacity, which I question.
Boris Island may be a bold step and Boris may seem a bit eccentric at times but this time he has the right answer - that is, if we really do need any more south-east airport capacity, which I question.
The case for expansion is NOT proven at any airport and is a myth purported by those with an interest. Much of the air traffic is localand could be served via far more environmentally friendly railway networks. The pollution record of Heathrow is appalling and I understand promises to keep to passenger number caps have been broken. Are the politicians here to serve the interests of the people that live in this country or the profit motives of a foreign owned company. The south east is already well served. If we truely feel more capacity is needed then lets see help go to the regions.
The case for expansion is NOT proven at any airport and is a myth purported by those with an interest. Much of the air traffic is localand could be served via far more environmentally friendly railway networks. The pollution record of Heathrow is appalling and I understand promises to keep to passenger number caps have been broken. Are the politicians here to serve the interests of the people that live in this country or the profit motives of a foreign owned company. The south east is already well served. If we truely feel more capacity is needed then lets see help go to the regions.
Increased traffic means increased disturbance. Having just had three months if my life seriously impaired by airt traffic noise when we were not on a flight path, I wouldn't wish this on anyone and a third runway would definitely mean new flight paths.
Increased traffic means increased disturbance. Having just had three months if my life seriously impaired by airt traffic noise when we were not on a flight path, I wouldn't wish this on anyone and a third runway would definitely mean new flight paths.
Expansion to Heathrow and any increase it flights it will bring is bad for the local environment and dangerous for local residents. The area in question is heavily populated and polluted by an already busy airport and traffic from major roads in the area (M40, M4, M25, etc). In addition, the densily populated area means there is a very real health and safety risk for local residents in the event of any aircraft disaster. There have been near misses in the past, e.g BA flight 38 17/01/2008. What needs to happen until people realise that increased flights in this area is dangerous. No amount of economic benefit can argue with this.
Expansion to Heathrow and any increase it flights it will bring is bad for the local environment and dangerous for local residents. The area in question is heavily populated and polluted by an already busy airport and traffic from major roads in the area (M40, M4, M25, etc). In addition, the densily populated area means there is a very real health and safety risk for local residents in the event of any aircraft disaster. There have been near misses in the past, e.g BA flight 38 17/01/2008. What needs to happen until people realise that increased flights in this area is dangerous. No amount of economic benefit can argue with this.
The noise is already unbearable. We say no to any expansion of Heathrow.
The noise is already unbearable. We say no to any expansion of Heathrow.
already there is too much noise across the most heavily populated areas of west london - this proposal will just bring even mroe people under the flight path for even more of the time, including some of the most wealthy, highest tax-paying contributors to society. Gatwick is the cheaper, more logical solution offering greenfield sites and an opportunity for increased competition between the 2 main hubs, leading to better prices and service for all.
already there is too much noise across the most heavily populated areas of west london - this proposal will just bring even mroe people under the flight path for even more of the time, including some of the most wealthy, highest tax-paying contributors to society. Gatwick is the cheaper, more logical solution offering greenfield sites and an opportunity for increased competition between the 2 main hubs, leading to better prices and service for all.
There is no real evidence to show that Heathrow is the best option for expansion, if indeed airport expansion is actually needed and given that the area is not currently meeting required CO2 emission levels, Heathrow should NOT be expanded. There are already too many people living under the misery of Heathrow’s flight paths, to build another runway and thereby increase flights by another 480,000 per year is showing a gross disrespect to London’s population.
There is no real evidence to show that Heathrow is the best option for expansion, if indeed airport expansion is actually needed and given that the area is not currently meeting required CO2 emission levels, Heathrow should NOT be expanded. There are already too many people living under the misery of Heathrow’s flight paths, to build another runway and thereby increase flights by another 480,000 per year is showing a gross disrespect to London’s population.
Absolutely against any expansion, for environmental reasons. We have a huge amount of noise as it stands now in the skies around Heathrow, in a very populated area.
Absolutely against any expansion, for environmental reasons. We have a huge amount of noise as it stands now in the skies around Heathrow, in a very populated area.