Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent
Win VIP tickets

Hundreds of thousands of homes will be exposed to more aircraft noise from planned new flight paths that will allow 60,000 more aircraft a year to use Heathrow’s existing runways.
The flight paths will be phased in, the first as early as next year, and will affect people living up to 30 miles (48km) from the airport.
The Government is expected within the next two weeks to approve plans for a third runway and sixth terminal at Heathrow, to open by 2020. But ministers are also preparing to authorise more intensive use of the airport’s existing runways.
The Times has learnt that this expansion will require a complete redesign of the flight paths of approaching aircraft.
The points at which aircraft turn to enter their final approach, either from the east or west, will be moved eight miles farther from the airport. Aircraft will already be as low as 4,000ft (1,200 metres) when they reach these points.
Longer landing paths are needed to accommodate “mixed mode”, under which the two runways are used for both take-offs and landings. At the moment one runway is used for landings and the other for take-offs, with the roles switched each day at 3pm to give residents half a day’s respite from the worst noise.
Aircraft will take different routes from the holding stacks to the new turning points, meaning there will be winners and losers in terms of noise.
Residents in many parts of inner London will no longer have aircraft passing within earshot, but millions of people in outer London and the Home Counties will either be exposed to aircraft noise for the first time or find many more aircraft flying directly overhead. The main losers will be those living close to the new turning points, which will be over Reading to the west and Dartford and Woolwich to the east.
Noise levels will also increase in Watford, Amersham, Camberley, High Wycombe, Barking, Rainham, Ilford, Leytonstone, Walthamstow, Barnet, Carshalton and Beckenham. People in Hampstead, Highgate, Islington, Hackney, Mile End, Stratford, Harrow, Ruislip and Henley will no longer hear any Heathrow-bound air traffic.
The Government did not make clear in its consultation document on Heathrow expansion, published in November 2007, that so many people would experience a significant change in aircraft noise. It is possible to work out the changes only by comparing two small-scale maps on pages 53 and 78 of the document.
A report mentioned in a footnote contains more details and states that the extra flights would require “major airspace changes”. The report, by National Air Traffic Services, says that the changes to Heathrow’s flight paths would be so extensive that aircraft departing from Gatwick would have to be rerouted.
John Stewart, chairman of ClearSkies, which represents people living under Heathrow flight paths, accused the Government of expanding the airport by by stealth. “The Department for Transport [DfT] has buried the bad news about new flight paths which will disturb millions of people living in outer London and the Home Counties,” he said.
“It would be the biggest change to flight paths since Heathrow opened over 60 years ago, but it is being done by stealth. Most people who will be affected have no idea what is in store for them.
“The DfT continues to sell the introduction of mixed mode as little more than a technical change.”
Martin Salter, Labour MP for Reading West, said: “Mixed mode will have a significant impact on many people who are not exposed to much aircraft noise at present. We need a better Heathrow, not a bigger Heathrow.”
Win a luxury weekend to Newcastle and its neighbour Gateshead, find out more here
Risk, resilience and embracing new technology
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
Discover the power of collective thinking. Submit a solution and be in with a chance to win a Media Hub Home Entertainment System
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Make the most of the summer and enter our fabulous photographic competition, you could win a £5000 holiday
Corsica is an island of beauty and contrast, an ideal holiday destination
Enjoy further reading from Travel to Fashion, Business to Sport, discover more
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
The clever way to lease a new car is with Car leasing made simple™
2009
per month on 36-month
Personal Contract Hire (PCH)
2008
42850
Car Insurance
£24,250 - £30,346
MI5
London
£60,000
The Environment Agency
Bristol
Up to £90K
Boots
Midlands
OTE £85k
Credit Protection Association
Nationwide Opportunities
Completely London
Luxury Condo's in Manhattan with NYC views
The best new homes in Wimbledon?
Nationwide
Fabulous Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers Including Virgin Atlantic Flights Prices Start From Only £699pp!
Last Minute Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers. Med From £499pp, Caribbean From £699pp!
5 star quality at a 3 star price.
8 fabulous Canadian cities ...you won’t find cheaper
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths | Subscriptions | E-paper
News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
Profits before people.
What a great democratic nation we live in. No wonder alcohol consumption is on the rise.
Mr Newbury, London,
We left Windsor, which in all other respects we loved, in order to escape from living under the flight path which was getting worse. The planes have followed us! For the past couple of weeks they turn over our village. Put the airport in the sea. Hong Kong has been a great success.
Sue Goode, Winkfield, Berkshire, UK
This is now a simple battle between business and the people. I don't actually know who will win right now, but if it's business it will finally demostrate that MILLIONS of people do not matter in the face of "growth". Anyone thought about the impact of the noise and stress? Could negate any gains.
Andy, Burnham, UK
I have lost any respect for the government and it's double standards. No consideration of polution, environmental impact, increased traffic on the road, let alone in the air. Not forgetting rising NHS costs for chronic lung diseases and allergies & the huge impact on quality of life for thousands.
claire, Putney, London
You won't be able to close Heathrow. All the councils currently against the airport will then start protesting at all the jobs that would move away.
Chris, Farnham,
The introduction of mixed mode means that homes on the 2 landing paths would be exposed to noise from 6 am to 11 pm every day. The current system of runway alternation means they have respite for half the day. The proposals would lead to a significant increase in intrusive noise for over 2m people
A. Kennedy, London,
Anyone in the new areas affected by noise will be able to claim compensation as it will affect property values, compensation is likely to run into billions.
Stephen, St. Ives, England
A third runway will lead to a 4th runway. LHR has always played catchup to airports in Europe. London needs a new, advanced airport in the Thames Estuary operating 24x7. Noise and air pollution would thus be lowered for all Londoners. A good capital project that Londoners would be proud of.
B.Garvie, Reading, England
I live in Hampstead London and hear the planes, this is 'low noise' and acceptable for any city area. It would be different if I suddenly have to endure say 'Hounslow level of noise', but I think this proposal is not introducing this, this is more like 'low noise' redistribution.
Tiho Strbac, London,
The Heathrow flight paths were changed in 1972/73 causing massive noise pollution in surrounding areas. There were big protests and a government enquiry, resulting in the paths being returned to the former ones. This should be done if the new runway affects new areas.
Peter, Watford, UK
The only answer is to build a new airport in the Thames away from London with high speed rail link. Close Heathrow. I am sure if the people of Hong Kong can do it, so can the UK. It is stupid in the country which such a shortage of land for housing that airports are allows to expand.
Malcolm Freeman, Berwick - Victoria, Australia
That is the most cynical (and funniest) comment i have seen in ages Clive. I guess the people in the new filght paths won't find it so funny when their house price falls even further.
John, lancaster,
Many people who probably think that airport noise is the problem of those who live near the airport are about to get a rude awakening... Literally.
Rich, London,
A good time mow for noise abatemnet laws to be strictly applied to Heatrow so that aero-engine makers will work hard to reduce noise. It is a case of the government over-riding the wishes of the citizens who will now suffer. A new airport well away from built up areas is needed.
B J Deller, Marbella, Spain
Airlines are now in decline, so provided no public money is wasted on this expansion, all should be well. By the time an extra runway has been built ,it will already be redundant, and could perhaps be used to park new cars that cannot be sold because the Government has wrecked the economy.
Clive Burghard , Lancing, England