We suggest that you look at three out of the eight topics that are listed in the Consultation. First, go to

On the right-hand side of the front page, select ‘Start Response’. This does not commit you to an immediate response. You can just look and close, or do a partial response, save it and revert later. The topics listed below (our numbering) all have an asterisk, signifying that you will find a box ‘Have your Say’ at the end. We believe the below questions are the most important to answer.

Topic TitleSub-topic
Topic 1Our Preferred MasterplanB1 - Airport Masterplan 2022-2050
Topic 4'Future Operations'B2 - ‘Early Growth’ (IPA) (the period before Runway 3)
B3 - ‘Runway Alternation (after opening of runway three)
Topic 6'Managing the Effects of Expansion'B4 - ‘Air quality’ (including carbon/climate change)
B5 - ‘Noise’.
B6 - ‘Health’

2. Topic B1. ‘Our Preferred Masterplan, Sub topic- ‘Airport Masterplan 2022-2050’

Guidance: select the first sub-topic ‘Airport Masterplan 2022-2050*’. To make a general comment, if you wish, go to the first of the three ‘Have your Say’ boxes, that entitled ‘Please tell us what you think about any specific parts of the preferred masterplan ....’. This seems to be the best place for your response if you wish to object to the sheer scale of the development, or to ask for a rethink of the whole third runway project, should you so wish, e.g. on climate emergency grounds and/or the widespread loss of our amenity through increased aircraft noise. Please see 4.2 in section A above.

A further point that you might wish to make on the massive increase in the number of flights now proposed relates to the existing cap on the number of flights, set previously in 2001.It seems likely that this cap was set mainly on general environmental grounds. If so, why now exceed it?

Link to question: (Sample answer on page 8)

3. Topic B2, part, Topic: ‘Future operations’, sub-topic ‘Early growth’

Guidance: this is about the proposal to add, from 2022, flights carrying up to 25,000 additional passengers. It would be done by allowing aircraft to arrive on both the existing two runways at the same time for an hour or so, starting at 5.30 in the morning. One runway would operate in ‘mixed mode’ (both arrivals and departures) at that time. Runway alternation from day to day would otherwise remain unchanged. It would require permission through the planning application that will also propose a third runway (see Section A 4.1 above), as it would mean exceeding the existing cap on the number of flights, see above.

The airport now operates regularly at some 98% of the cap. Heathrow claim that the total number of people affected would rise only slightly, but this ignores two things. Firstly, those living under the final approaches, when in the usual westerly direction, would lose the ‘respite’ that they now enjoy on alternate early mornings. Secondly, further away from the point of landing, they will want to change flight paths where possible, so as to avoid damaging respite by having two parallel flight paths over all the areas now affected by the usual westerly approach. This change would affect us, see 3.2 above for an illustration of what might happen on alternate days when the northern runway is the one in ‘mixed mode’, early in the morning.

The previous consultation made it clear that, depending on the actual flight paths, a wide swathe of north west London was at risk of fights overhead at some 3,000 feet, generating noise of up to 60 decibels. Likewise, for parts of south west London, on the other alternation.

[At a first reading] the technical paper listed under this topic is remarkable in avoiding mention of these fairly obvious points.]

‘Have your say’. We suggest that you strongly oppose the addition from 2022 of flights passing over many areas previously unaffected, from around 5.15 in the morning. (Landing from 5.30 am.)

Link to question: (Sample answer on page 8)

Back to Start Page 3 Page 5