Have Your Say

We want to provide you with a voice to let Heathrow and the Government know that we will not tolerate the noise and how it’s ruining our lives any further. What’s more, if a 3rd Runway decision goes ahead at Heathrow, living in the area will become intolerable.


Children’s education, physical and mental health is affected by the noise, air toxicity and sleep deprivation caused by Heathrow’s planes.

Noise from Heathrow planes regularly exceeds World Health Organisation recommended limits, and planes are major contributors of noxious gases.

Heathrow expansion will increase air traffic by 250,000 extra flights per year to 740,000

Heathrow has no intention of paying for its 3rd runway infrastructure. YOU – the taxpayer – will be expected to foot their £11.5bn bill.

Each year at least 10,000 people die in London from toxic air

Please leave your comment below and we will use these to address key politicians and members of the Department of Transport and demonstrate how Heathrow is currently affecting the population in and around the London Borough of Richmond.

If you don’t wish to leave a comment please feel free to send an email or message us on Facebook or Twitter.

Please also share this with your friends, families, or download our leaflet here and email them too.

Share this post!


  1. 9th December 2018

    Sadly , having read as many of the complaints as i could before my eyes crossed , I have to say that even though I have voiced my own opinion here and have sent thousands of emails to the heathrow noise complaint dept (for which they threatened me with lega action) I am now confident thaf sadly we do not live in a truly democratic society. It is only democratic if you are extremely rich. So I have given up wasting my time with the corrupt politicians who all get nice backhanders from the industries who own them and instead will be concentrating on spreading the truth about infant mortality rates in and around the deathrow flight corridors and the industrial complex itself. The politicians blame motor vehicles for the toxic aif we breathe but never mention the *Cropdusters* that dust all of us with toxins every 90 seconds for 16 to 18 hours every day of the year. Strange that !!!

  2. Andy Harris
    2nd July 2018

    I would like to know 2 things.
    By causing or increasing the levels of mental illness through noise stress and reduced sleep, is Heathrow breaking any human rights lwas, baring in mind heathrow is just a glorified
    ( change your planr here ) stop off point ( hub ) mainly for business travellers as most holiday package flights run from Gatwick.
    Point 2. If any other business caused as much late night noise over such a vast area for such a sustained period of time they would be CLOSED DOWN. So why is heathrow given freedom to ruin so many lives ? Could it be the backhanders at the posh dinners they host ?

  3. K
    19th May 2017

    The noise pollution is already very bad and is getting worse as Heathrow has already redirected flights to support their bid. There are many schools in Teddington whose pupils will be disrupted by the noise during their lesson and during prep time. The South Asia flight plan already has plans going very low over Teddington High School.

  4. David Coles
    24th February 2017

    Unacceptably increased:
    Noise pollution
    Air pollution + CO2
    Terrorist threat + drone + laser
    Road construction + gridlocking
    Motor vehicle air pollution particulates + brake dust
    Collateral damage via no-limit economic growth
    Sewage production + treatment
    Health deterioration
    Disease import + distribution

    • John Walker
      17th July 2017

      I suggest you can add:
      Probability of major aircraft accident.

      National Air Traffic Services cannot handle the increased air traffic; struggling now even without the 3rd runway.

  5. Marie
    7th November 2016

    I’ve lived in Teddington for 16 years now and even though we’ve had some level of noise on/off, it was more reasonable/tolerable.
    Since April 2016, our lives have been turned upside down and made torture. We have low flying, heavy airbuses (which seem to take forever to take off) flying over us 18-19 hours a day weeks and months at s time, with no respite even on Sundays. They start at 6 a.m. and often go on till 12:15 a.m. with the occasional plane at 2 a.m.
    LH keep saying nothing has changed, but info shows that the flight paths have been concentrated so that we are getting all the flights over us in a line, from 2 routes (Dover and Southampton). We are sandwiched in between so it’s a double whammy. I was told by LH that there are now an extra 30 heavy planes flying over our house per day. The sound is so loud, even reaching 80 dbs indoors with double glazed windows shut.
    This is an inhuman way to treat law abiding citizens. LH needs to go back to previous flight patterns and stop flying planes so low in a concentrated line, as this unfairly hammers the same population again and again. Spread the misery and don’t bash us over the head again and again. It’s unfair

  6. Nicholas Worsley
    4th November 2016

    Living in Teddington is becoming a nightmare but it is made worse by the arrogant attitude of all associated with the Heathrow operation. Late flights (after 11pm) are regular and very disturbing. I am somewhat old to multiply the number of apps on my phone, but I can report that the noise levels are seriously high. In addition the toxic fumes that are sprayed over the area (which includes several schools) must be terrifying.
    It seems to me clear that negotiating with HCNF is a waste of time since they are committed to appeasing local groups in their objective of making the route to aircraft expansion and a further runway more acceptable to the public. Is it right that TAG is identified as a community group with whom HCNF will say they are negotiating when it seems plain that they are doing no such thing. The same applies to other creatures of the Heathrow emporium; none of them are to be trusted or even taken seriously.
    There must be a drive towards a proper assessment of noise and pollution given the lamentable attempt in the Davis report and given his close personal connection with the Heathrow project. I feel it would be preferable to present TAG’s assessment and research to this body rather than to HCNF.

  7. Christian sanders
    1st November 2016

    The last 5 weeks have been near constant Easterly, and the noise is unbearable I have a 3 month old baby and my heart drops every morning at 6am when I am greeted with jet engine noise and the depressing realisation there will be perpetual noise pollution and stress until 11pm!!!! When I called Heathrow Community Group the guy basically admitted that now the 3rd runway has the green light, the Westerly preference will soon be removed, dramatically increasing flights over Teddington…Heathrow have nothing to offer residents but empty rhetoric!! I am leaving the area having only moved in 2.5years ago! what a disgrace.

  8. Alexandrina Boariu
    25th October 2016

    Over the past couple years the aircraft noise patterns have changed a lot in Teddington and Twickenham. Planes are flying lower and they are much noisier (particularly after dusk). They also seem to fly outside the official LHR operating hours – very late in the evening or very early in the morning. Heathrow claims that Easterly departures occur for less than one third of the year, but over the past couple of years this seems to have increased considerably. Easterly departures seem to now happen even when wind blows from the West. Last but not least, I’ve read that the area around Heathrow is already breaching European regulations on nitrogen dioxide pollution. The expansion of Gatwick seems a much better choice – it’s not only cheaper and faster to build, but also the area is more rural, with considerably lower population density and fewer houses.

  9. peter clarke
    23rd October 2016

    As a resident of Twickenham I am fed up with being disturbed at 6.00 am by the first batch of planes coming over. Richmond borough was a quiet place until Heathrow decided to change the flight path. There are too many planes in the sky now, the thought of another runway at Heathrow or anywhere else is madness.I would like to see the amount of flights reduced. not increased. Everyone has the right to breath fresh air. keep making your views known.

  10. Gill M
    19th October 2016

    We recently moved to Teddington and cannot believe how noisy it is when the planes are flying from Heathrow in an easterly direction. If the proposal for the third runway is approved there will be even more air traffic overhead and living in this area will become even more intolerable. Any future expansion of the London airports should be in a location where there is a lower density of housing such as the Thames Estuary, where there would be a less adverse impact on the population. We therefore feel strongly that this proposal should be rejected.

  11. Joanna Stead
    14th October 2016

    When you have MPs, even those claiming to be against Heathrow expansion mingling with pro heathrow campaigners at events it starts to smell of corruption, when MPs who are against Heathrow are told they can’t participate in a vote that they will be unavoidably elsewhere and this is advertised in the media then democracy has gone mad that they can’t represent constituents. All the health charities eg BLF, BHF are clear that air pollution is one of the biggest, but silent killers it leads to heart disease, it leads to lung disease it leads to cancer. the impact of noise pollution on mental health and sleep disturbance is huge. The cost of this expansion on the nhs needs to assessed. an nhs that has already been crippled by this governments refusal to legislate on public health issues. The capitals air pollution levels are already critical with campaigners calling for dismal to be banned immediately, for car free days, the fines by the EU for our air toxicity levels are astronomical. And yet there are alternatives, that are not being seriously considered. That will still bring jobs to the SE. All I can see is corruption and a government that does not care, that is prepared to sacrifice the lives of our children and the elderly who are most vulnerable to air pollution related diseases and increase mental health issues for those of us of working age. The long term impact on the economy will be negative.

  12. Frances Spurrier
    9th October 2016

    Well look who was opposed to the expansion of Heathrow Airport just a few years ago?

    “I know from all the letters and emails I get that many local people will be devastated by the Government’s decision. A third runway will result in thousands of additional flights, increased noise and more pollution for thousands of people. The Government’s promises on the environmental impact of this are not worth the paper they are written on – there are no planes currently on the market that would allow them to meet their noise and carbon dioxide targets.”

    “As I suspected all along, the Government paid no attention to the opinions expressed by members of the public and have decided to push ahead with expansion despite all the environmental warnings. We need a better Heathrow, not a bigger Heathrow.”

    Theresa May, 2009 (when in opposition)

  13. Michael J. Lang
    3rd October 2016

    I have lived on the borders of Teddington and Twickenham since 1986.
    The air traffic noise has steadily increased over this period and when the take off route is directed over Teddington, the noise from the steeply banking planes (to avoid Richmond Park I assume) is very intrusive. We already have to allow an extra half and hour to cover the distance to Heathrow by taxi, compared to ten years ago, goodness knows what time it will take if the air/vehicle traffic increases even more.

  14. Richard Marum
    2nd October 2016

    We live in Strawberry Hill and do not see any necessity for another runway and more flights. The noise is intolerable and prevents us opening our patio doors during the good weather. The traffic round the Heathrow area with its noise and air pollution is already inappropriate for such a densely populated area.

  15. Stephen Clark
    20th September 2016

    Having lived in Teddington for 30 years I can say aircraft noise was never an issue until two years ago when we started having trials involving new departure routes in preparation for an expanded Heathrow and the ‘modernisation’ of airspace. The situation has never gone back to what it was before the trials. The Airports Commission has recommended putting 60% more flights over London’s airspace, causing a massive shadow over the lives of millions of innocent UK citizens. This expansion will totally destroy lives, break up communities and cause immeasurable damage to the fabric of large areas of London and the south east. It is unbelievable a British government is even contemplating such madness. This is just another facet of globalisation – large international corporations like Heathrow and the airlines walking over the interests of local people and sovereign governments. It’s time to say ‘enough is enough’ and consign this mad idea to the scrapheap where it belongs.

    • F. Smith
      9th October 2016

      The number of flights taking off over our houses has dramatically increased in the past 2 years . The noise and pollution this has created is not acceptable. No airport should be built so close to millions of dwellers, this is dangerous and breaches air pollution levels and the noise affects us all. The expansion of Heathrow, with a third runway and the inevitable change of flight paths, would be intolerable for the people living in this area.

  16. Radhia
    20th September 2016

    we moved to Twickenham 7 years ago from north London. the noise of the airplane it increased so much during this period . for the last 3 year the number of airplane increased by 50% . it’s spoil the whole area . I say definitely no, no to the third runway. I have very ill husband . he had two stroks plus now suffer from dementia which make it very hard for both of us to coup with noise .

  17. Gerrard Raven
    5th September 2016

    Your very sound arguments about health problems, toxic gases, children’s education etc apply almost equally to a second runway at Gatwick or expansion of airport capacity anywhere. The logic of them, therefore, is to oppose the expansion of the airline industry; indeed, to argue that it should shrink in size. That is what should happen. By the time any new runway can be built, it will be clear from the crisis that global warming will increasingly bring that the last thing this planet needs is more people flying around it in aeroplanes.

  18. Joan McIntyre
    25th August 2016

    I also disagree with Rodney’s comments. We know from Government data that between Dec 2015 and Mar 2016, the largest increase in workforce jobs in the UK was in London, at 55,000; it is this sort of London centric policy that has so alienated many deprived regions of the UK. We also know that Hillingdon has one of the lowest rates of Job Seeker’s Allowance claimants of all London boroughs as does Hounslow. As it is, most (75%) of the local jobs at Heathrow are relatively low skilled and low paid and it is unlikely that new employees brought in by private firms would be able to afford the average house prices in Hillingdon and Hounslow, at around £400,000. However, with the impending arrival of flight path concentration over many areas, including ours, there will certainly be a drop in values and a bargain to be had for those who are sound sleepers or hard of hearing. There’s always Social Housing of course but with over 10,000 people on Hounslow Council’s waiting list at April 2016, these workers might need to pitch a tent somewhere – any room on your lawn Rodney?

  19. Neil Spurrier
    25th August 2016

    I would respectfully disagree with Rodney Sabbagh for a number of reasons.
    1. The fact that Rodney in Teddington Park is not troubled by aircraft noise does not mean that others are not. Heathrow causes misery to a great number of people, who have no special sensitivities, which should not be ignored.
    2. While Rodney is correct that many people who live in Teddington have a generous income profile, he is not correct that gaseous emissions from their SUVs in Teddington High Street exceed the exhaust of over flying aircraft. Indeed, Rodney is very incorrect and the SUV emits a very small fraction of the emissions from an aircraft. In addition, the SUV in Teddington High Street (not that I have any great love for SUVs) will be subject to the overall cap provided by the Climate Change Act providing for a diminution of greenhouse emissions to just 20% of the 1990 level by 2050. The aircraft flying internationally will not be subject to the cap and will be contributing far more than the SUV in Teddington High Street to the destruction of the World for our children and grandchildren. Much has been written about this.
    3. While no one would begrudge people having jobs and houses, the concept of London needing this more than, or as much as, other parts of the Country is quite ridiculous. London needs fewer jobs which are dispersed over the Country. Rodney ought to travel to other areas of the Country such as parts that used to provide heavy industry in the Victorian and post Victorian eras (try some deserted woollen mills in Derbyshire – which ironically happen to be within commuting distance of Manchester Airport) to see that such places need jobs, houses and buoyant markets far more than we do here with our over-heated property market that is denying younger people the ability to buy homes of their own.
    If Rodney studies the accounts of Heathrow Airport Holdings Ltd filed at Companies House, he will see that there is a serious question mark over whether Heathrow can afford to pay for a 3rd Runway, in which case he (and us) will have to pay for this vanity project through our taxes.
    Best wishes Neil Spurrier

  20. Rodney Sabbagh
    22nd August 2016

    Living in Teddington Park the aircraft noise is tolerable. By contrast a break in the country provides the dawn chorus
    which is noisily intrusive. The gaseous emissions of large engined SUV’s in Teddington High Street exceeds the
    exhaust of overflying aircraft.The income profile of Teddington residents is generous.Perhaps we should have
    regard for those who need jobs. Why not here rather than there? Some who would work on the new runway
    will buy houses thus creating a buoyant market for those who wish to move. I am in favour of a 3rd Heathrow
    Rodders aged 72

    • B. Beausoleil
      1st September 2016

      I have to disagree with you. Since 2014 trials, the planes that overfly my house in Teddington are so loud they wake up my kids, force me to shut my windows to listen to the tv or have a conversation and make living in Teddington far less enjoyable.

      Regarding your statement that runway workers will buy houses in Teddington, is simply not an argument. Housing prices in Teddington are far too high and getting higher, even for those with reasonable incomes, never mind airport workers.
      For years I used the X26 bus to get to Heathrow to fly to Europe twice a week. The X26 stops in Teddington on the way to Heathrow, but it starts in Croydon. I’ve travelled on this bus many times at 6:30am and it is full of low paid airport workers, who do not look like they could afford a house in Hounslow, never mind Teddington/Hampton/Twickenham.

      Heathrow Runway 3 is a terrible idea for far too many reasons to list here. The data backs it up.

  21. Joan McIntyre
    21st August 2016

    Government can’t approve Heathrow expansion (potentially increasing cars by 50 per cent) along with NO2 air pollution by similar amount then claim not to realise how damaging that is for health and the environment. The wildly unrealistic assumptions on the remainder of the UK’s transport and energy operations being carbon free in order to compensate for this is risible. There is well documented evidence available – to ignore this would guarantee legal action. Heathrow already causes considerable distress to communities round the airport – nothing tangible has been done to address these concerns and low flying planes on concentrated flight paths are making people’s lives a misery.
    The economic argument is very flimsy – we know from Heathrow’s accounts that it cannot afford to fund the infrastructure costs so why should the UK Government and taxpayers be expected to do so to augment the profits for overseas shareholders?

  22. Nicola Elsden
    18th August 2016

    We moved to Ham approx. 4 years ago from North Kingston and have noticed a marked increase in the number of flights over the area in this time, particularly when the flight path changes to easterly direction which does seem to happen more regularly than it used to. The planes are also low, particularly the new double deckers, and the level of noise when they have taken off is such that we even have to stop talking when we are in the garden and sometimes struggle to hear each other talking when we are in the house. Indeed, we have a similar issue to Megan in that on some evenings, we can’t even hear the TV! Also, the ‘permissible’ hours of night time flying has also increased meaning that we are now having planes coming over later than 11.30pm and back in very early in the morning (ie before 6.00am). This always wakes me up meaning I get far less sleep than I used to and makes me incredibly tired for work.

  23. Megan Arnold
    17th August 2016

    I have always accepted that there would be some noise from living near Heathrow, but what has happened to us in terms of noise pollution in Fulwell since the so called ‘trial of 2014’ is totally unacceptable. Zero consultation with residents of new flight paths, claims from Heathrow that we are not in or under the flight noise zones, claims that the trial was stopped and has ended or indeed that any planes are flying lower over us! I was even told in one of my complaints that noise is just a perception of some of us. WRONG! I work in an industry where noise is a sensitive issue and not in a million years, would we be able to build or operate my as Heathrow do – essentially without impunity. They do not consult, they do not listen, they think they are untouchable. There is no community benefit to those who suffer from unbearable noise and there is a complete an utter disregard of the local people living around Heathrow who complain. Even as I type this, the radio inside my house is totally drained out by the low overflying aircraft.

  24. James McIntosh
    17th August 2016

    It is glaringly obvious that Heathrow is in the wrong location and while (unfortunately) not much can be done about that now, to suggest adding a 3rd runway and compounding the myriad problems it already causes is bordering on lunacy. The argument that the infrastructure is already there only serves to highlight the succession of planning and infrastructure blunders that have allowed the buildup of an airport of Heathrow’s size in the middle a densely populated area. Any sensible Government should be able to recognise this and take a bold and forward looking decision to add airport capacity away from an already cramped airport that causes noise, pollution and illness to the hundreds of thousands of people that live under its flightpaths.

  25. Claire Wilmot
    10th August 2016

    We have lived in Teddington for the last 25 years. Whilst we are constantly being told that the modern aircraft are quieter the noise has definitely increased especially in the last two years. The planes are much lower and there are hours of disruption especially late at night and through out the night. Despite hollow assurances that the night flights would be restricted Heathrow appear to be a law unto themselves. I am frequently woken throughout the night and very early in the morning and this is on two runways, the 3rd must not be allowed to happen for all our sakes.

  26. Mike Jackson
    5th August 2016

    I am surprised this group have not jumped on the fact that RiverOak are preparing a Development Consent Order (DCO) for Manston Airport to be a major international centre for air freight (Freeing up flight slots at Heathrow & Gatwick),a reliever for the major airports of London (removing the need for a third runway at both Heathrow & Gatwick airports).
    Maybe your group could have a look at http://www.savemanstonairport.org.uk/wordpress/ and support the campaign to get Manston Airport re-opened.
    Many thanks
    Mike Jackson

  27. Nazanin
    31st July 2016

    Please change the root of Heathrow airport . It’s too much noise and too much pollution. Thanks from Feltham.

  28. 31st July 2016

    It is said that it is very important to increase business via Heathrow. But business should not thrive by spoiling peoples’ lives who live near the airport. The noise and pollution are already past reasonable bearing.
    The Gatwick expansioners are at least promising financial compensation to those who will suffer so others can make money

  29. Ian Speed
    30th July 2016

    The main reasons for my objections are the increase in air and noise pollution to even more unacceptable levels, badly affecting residents’ health in ways which were not identified (heart problems etc) when the expansion was first suggested. In addition, the economic benefits are not nearly as great as are vaunted. Using Heathrow’s own figure of 125,000 jobs, that would need to be discounted by 80% to account for the fact that 80% of new jobs go to non-UK residents. So you have a figure of 25,000 new jobs for current UK residents. The cost of creating those is about £17bn for Heathrow themselves for building the runway, plus up to £15bn for the transport costs they want the taxpayer to pay. This would mean spending over £1m per job for UK resident, a wholly ludicrous figure.

  30. Sue MacEwan
    29th July 2016

    Similarly to other residents, our lives in East Molesey have become a living nightmare over the last 2 years, with constant noise now even when Easterlies are not prevalent. I cannot accept the cynical attitude of Heathrow proponents at the expense of the quality of life of local residents. Replies from the Department of Transport refer to the ‘independent review’ by Howard Davies, but as a previous resident stated his links to massive investment around Heathrow shortly before the review was published certainly don’t seem independent to me. Personally, my stress levels have gone off the scale in the past 2 years, and like others, we are considering moving from our much loved home of 26 years. But at least I don’t feel as though I am alone, as there are so many others whose lives have been blighted. I just feel sorry for those living nearer to the airport, as I watch planes barely reaching 2000ft even when they reach us here in East Molesey.

  31. Joe Bowman
    29th July 2016

    I live about 18 miles from Heathrow and seemingly under one of its laser accurate ILAS systems that directs its air traffic directly over my house. Living 18 miles from Heathrow you’d think the noise is minimal, you couldn’t be further from the truth. You can hear the planes inside my house, feel the vibrations. Want to spend an evening out in the garden? Assaulted by the noise of aircraft every 90 seconds or so flying over your garden, incessant, never ending rumble or whining of small to large aircraft going on until later than it should, 8 very large aircraft in 20 minutes between 23:00 and 23:30 last night waking my 10 yr old in the process, additional air traffic from Biggin Hill and the police helicopter, and the occasional Gatwick aircraft.

    This scenario is the case almost every evening. Heathrow do not give a monkeys and of course not being a “local” resident or community will mean we are not consulted nor do Heathrow care about us, and will therefore not be eligible for compensation yet without abandon continue to blight my neighbourhood with noise and air pollution, our views deemed irrelevant.

    This runway should be dismissed out of hand. There are better proposals and options.

    Heathrow, London does not deserve what you want to subject then to.

  32. Nick Johnsonn
    28th July 2016

    I have lived in West Molesey for 7 years now and have seen an increase in Aircraft noise year on year. I love the area but the Aircraft noise late into the night and early in the morning is unbearable. If the 3rd runway is built it will mean more noise over the area from the planes. The 3rd runway can’t go ahead, Heathrow is destroying peoples lives – too many people live under the flight path.

  33. waldopepper
    27th July 2016

    We lived in Teddington for 20 years and accepted that there was aircraft noise in return for being near a useful airport. The last few years however, planes have got louder and louder, lower and lower, more and more intrusive. We never used to have to pause the TV whilst planes flew overhead in the evening, we never used to notice planes when out walking in Bushy Park or on the high street.

    Reading the comments here, this is all sounding very familiar, too many people feel the same, yet Heathrow tell us that the noise footprint has shrunk, it will magically be quieter with expansion. It seems to be calculated on theory rather than reality, all smoke and mirrors from the Heathrow PR machine to allow expansion and more profits for shareholders.

    We have moved from the area now, far enough away to not be at risk from any changes – plane noise was a big factor in this, such a shame because it’s a lovely part of London. it simply won’t be the same if expansion is granted at Heathrow. Even if it’s denied, the concentrated flight paths that were trialed will cause major issues for many residents. How can this be allowed? Never stop fighting this and thank you TAG for your efforts.

  34. Michael Jennings
    25th July 2016

    When I moved to Teddington some 40 years ago, I accepted the level of aircraft flights given Heathrow was already there. However, Heathrow Limited has admitted that after gaining approval for each development, it has planned for further growth despite, despite claiming it would seek no further expansion. No other country would agree to expanding an airport which involves more planes and traffic over its most built up and congested area, with all the environmental problems and safety risks that involves (it is only a question of time before a plane crashes in London). In addition Heathrow would be better focused in improving the quality rather than the quantity of its operations through a better spread of destinations, better non-vehicular access (especially from outside London), and better flow through its seven existing passenger and cargo terminals. Competition would also suggest that other airports should be supported to spread the business across the south east and the rest of the UK; and Brexit may also mean less demand for capacity. I would also be interested to know whether any or all of the directors of Heathrow live with their families under the flight paths within say 3 miles of the airport to show their personal commitment.

  35. Chris Lemon
    24th July 2016

    Heathrow is in the wrong place. Probably we have to live with what is already here, but to increase its use by adding a 3rd runway is madness.
    We already breach air quality conditions, suffer constant noise and traffic problems. To worsen these nuisances and dangers by expansion would be criminal, expensive and irresponsible.

  36. owen jones
    23rd July 2016

    Gatwick is the best choice for an extra runway. The infrastructure there can be upgraded, providing employment in that area. Heathrow is too big and too busy already: the airport is making money for its owners at the expense of the health and quality of life of hundreds of thousands of local residents. Far fewer people would be affected by expansion of Gatwick. Enough is enough. Heathrow will not even increase takeoff angles to those enforced in other countries, in order to reduce the annoyance caused. Any politician who supports Heathrow expansion will be bitterly opposed by me!

  37. TW2 Resident
    22nd July 2016

    As a TW2 resident I am sick and tired traffic overhead and of low flying A380 aircraft.
    Flights at weekends flying overhead early (0630) while some of us who work hard all week seeking a well deserved lie in get woken.
    At night we cant watch tv and have windows open and hear the tv and its only 10 feet away!
    We go to bed sharp during the week due to business demands but cant get to sleep for at least 30 mins until the last flight has gone.
    As a regular business traveller I understand the demand on LHR but Gatwick is a much better solution and I would rather travel from there if there is expansion in Gatwick.
    No more flights please not in my airspace.
    The directors of LHR can give us all the BS but I bet none of them sleep in the flightpath

  38. Sue Jackson
    22nd July 2016

    The area cannot support the increase in traffic either in the skies or on the roads. Do we wait until there is a major air disaster before someone realises that Heathrow is at saturation point and the lives and views of local people do count in this decision process.

  39. Sarah Woodward
    21st July 2016

    We moved to Twickenham in 2003 and have been more and more effected by Heathrow air and noise pollution as the years have gone on. I now have a small family and we are constantly considering a move outside of the area in order to protect both our physical and mental wellbeing. My family in Scotland are immediately aware of when the planes are on Easterly operations as firstly they can’t hear me on the phone and secondly I’m in an awful mood as it effects my sleep and stress levels. I can’t think of any reason why Heathrow expansion would benefit the local community!

  40. Tracy Ferriss
    21st July 2016

    Living in South West London is difficult.
    The traffic during rush hour is at a standstill on most days whether it is Summer or Winter, whether you are on a bus or in a car. Many a time I have travelled into London off peak and still have to stand all the way.
    At night time there is no peace as we are constantly bombarded by plane noise. It has reached 60 decibels in my bedroom after 10.30pm and that was with double glazing and all the windows shut.
    an expansion of Heathrow airport or indeed any increase in air flights will add to the current misery that all the surrounding boroughs have to endure.

  41. Mo Williams
    21st July 2016

    The picture heading up these comments says it all. Since 2014 when the flightpaths were concentrated directly over our home, where we had lived for 13 perfectly lovely years, the torture of noise has literally driven us out. The planes taking off over our roof every 90 seconds for 18 hours a day have affected us body and soul so much that we are moving. I resent that more than anything … that an airport’s operations, unregulated and ungoverned by the very bodies which are supposed to ensure and protect our rights and maintain an acceptable environment in which to live, raise children, work and enjoy just being alive in the natural world, can force us out of an area in which we have lived for 30 years! On Easterly operations, the noise of an A380 18 times or more each day, at 90db (at least) 1500 feet over our roof, preventing us from hearing the TV, the radio, one another’s voices, is sheer torture. On Westerly operations, from 0430 until, again, way past midnight, the sound of incoming planes (exacerbated by the 3.2 deg steeper approach trial and doubled between 0600 & 0700) is literally CONTINUOUS! There is no break from it. The bombardment of continuous noise from 0600h until way past midnight has made our home a hell on earth. It is killing us to have to live on 5 hours’ sleep a night. The stress of the noise torture manifests itself as an inability to concentrate, at times as almost uncontrollable rage, as headaches, as chest pain, as weight gain, as anger, as the destruction of relationships, as increased blood pressure and, at times, as a desire to commit suicide in order to relieve the torture. Heathrow’s response to this? They feigned concern for our wellbeing, suggested that we “Call the Samaritans” and sent the police to our door to humiliate and attempt to silence us. Their insistence that we ‘imagine’ the noise, their consistent denials of changes to flightpaths and airline operations and their subsequent collusion with NATS and the CAA to try to refute the experiences of residents, to deny that concentration is taking place, that flightpaths, stacks, heights and speeds have changed demonstrates only their disregard for human life and health and their sole intent to profit: Bonuses for those involved if R3 goes ahead, profits from investments in properties near the airport, bias by those recommending R3, refusal to pay for noise mitigation measures for residents, refusal to accept that increased planes will bring more traffic and pollution, and a demand that the tax-payer foot the bill for the infrastructure all point to a desire for personal gain whilst minimising responsibility for the climate and the environment. If ‘nothing’s changed’, why are there SO MANY voices now screaming at Heathrow from far and wide? There is something seriously wrong with an industry which, overnight, causes ever-increasing intolerable, relentless noise for so many people with so little regulation and operating under noise laws established in the 1920s and with seeming total free rein to expand its pollution unhindered.

  42. siobhan behan
    19th July 2016

    There is an inherent dishonesty about the governance of aviation noise and believing Fair Flight Paths and noise minimisation and fair redistribution can be achieved without an impartial adjudicator (Ombudsman) is fantasy. Arguing about noise in groups will just drive noise down to the inheritors of noise ghettos – the weakest, the politically sacrificed/the unrepresented/the failed by mainstream parties.

    The idea of compressing and concentrating noise on the fewest is unethical, and uncivilised. It is all about creating an illusion that the noise problem is being sorted or won. It isn’t.

    As for compensation it is wholly inadequate and needs to re addressed.A step change is required, and something more substantial than peanuts.

    And the elephant in the room – Mental Health – it’s clearly an issue. Will the Government, it’s departments, and industry stop weasling and wriggling and do something that’s right for once? A coherent, and effective strategy should be developed before expansion/flight path change is implemented. Perhaps the Head of the Equal Opportunities who was commenting today about the parlous state of equalities (and in directly prevalence of discrimination) might want the support the plight of the overflown (discriminated against) and the overflown mentally ill?

    It is incomprehensible that people can be treated like this in a ‘so called’ civilised society.

  43. M Jones
    19th July 2016

    Although even further out (over 20 miles SW of Heathrow) we, overnight, had outlives turned upside down by NATS and Heathrow when they introduced changes that have progressively worsened week in week to the point that we have no respite on either Easterlies (landing) or Westerlies (departing) operations. Lower planes,larger planes, concentrated flight paths, engine settings to preserve engine life and increase noise, delayed departures beyond midnight – all creating an environment that tests any sanity and resilience. Every day for the past two years, planes have factored whereas before then we never noticed. New flights to South America (BA245 and BA247 especially) are horrendous.

    We can’t use the garden freely, are not eligible for noise relief funding, are told that nothing has changed by some in the industry, some say we are only infrequently overflown (but won’t come and witness what they believe to be infrequent- even after many invitations).

    The most painful part is being driven out of our home that is in an area of lower population by concentrated flight paths that result in lower numbers of (different) complainants – so is justifiable to the statistics monkeys, measuring the impact by inappropriate means.

    That the CAA is complicit in all of this (and under regulatory capture by the airlines, airports and NATS) is a disgrace. Nobody seems accountable in this sorry mess, whilst us on the ground are tortured daily.

    I feel for people closer, based on what we have to endure. The sheer volume of traffic when mixed with Luton, Stansted, Gatwick, Bristol, London City, Farnborough traffics means the sky does not stop rumbling above us all day. All this from nothing pre 2014 to suddenly being at a crossroads for air traffic. If a third runway is allowed this part of the U.K. will be a write off.

  44. Paul Mason
    19th July 2016

    I moved to Teddington around 34 years ago. Previously I lived in Kew, where there was a lot of low flying aircraft – I therefore carefully researched my move to an area with less aircraft noise.

    I accepted that Teddington had a lot of background aircraft noise. It was rare that planes flew below 8,000 feet. The main, brief annoyance, in the past, was the take off of Concorde. This annoyance was brief and only occurred a couple of times a day.

    However, in the past two or three years, my life has been greatly disturbed by aircraft noise. Flying patterns have changed, planes have been flying lower and they are much noisier. The operation time is also longer going from early morning to late at night. It is now normal for planes to fly below 3,000 – 4,000 feet and it is very common for flight to be under 2,000 feet.

    Increasingly planes are being flown outside the operating times. I have been disturbed on a number of occasions been woken by late night, eg just one in the morning I have twice been woken by BA flights to Sao Paulo just after one.

    There does seem to be a pattern of extra noise in the late evenings between 8.30 and 11.30 making the enjoyment of TV and radio unpleasant.

    Another problem which I believe is linked to early morning flights is that I often wake very early in the mornings. This seems to link with the times of early morning, scheduled flights.

    I have given up complaining to Heathrow. On a number of occasions I have not had received responses – therefore I assume my complaints are being discounted. It is also clear that Heathrow is only using the complaint statistics for their own PR purposes.

    As I’m retired I am now seriously considering moving and will almost certainly will do if the expansion is given the go ahead.

    • Paul Mason
      17th August 2016

      There now seems to be regular, delayed flights, usually BA, taking off at around 1.15 in the morning. These flights, often three times a week, fly low, around 3,000, and are therefore very noisy.

      As I am now woken around 4.30 with the early morning flights I am constantly tired.

      I note that when planes are not flying over my home, (ie when the wind is not easterly), I do not wake up in the night, but have a normal sleep.

  45. Matt Colton
    19th July 2016

    Heathrow lied about undertaking the 2014 trials.
    The accountants who prepared two figures that Heathrow used to make their case for a third runway have disowned Heathrows use of them.
    Heathrow have denied wanting a 4th runway yet leaked documents show they are already planning for that.
    Heathrow themselves ruled out ever needing a 3rd Runway when T5 was built.
    Heathrow’s offshore owners have stated that the residents living around the airport enjoy “excessive freedoms”, and that they would like the airport to operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
    Heathrow does not believe it should contribute to the cost of enlarging and detouring the road and rail networks around the airport to accommodate the extra passengers that a 3rd runway, and that the taxpayer should fit the bill.
    Heathrow is a well renowned avoider of paying tax in the UK.
    Heathrow expansion would require significant sections of the M25 to be shut for a minimum of 5 years, decimating 1000s of business in the Souh East and costing UK business £ms.
    Prudential (of which Howard Davies is a board member) bought £300m of property surrounding Heathrow that stands to be compulsory purchased if runway 3 goes ahead. Howard Davies was the chair of the Airports Commission that recommended Heathrow expansion.
    Heathrow expansion cannot go ahead and meet any existing or future air quality or noise level pledges.
    Heathrow expansion would be met with so many legal actions against it that it is an impossibility for it to happen.

    This is a selection of reasons as to why a 3rd Runway at Heathrow cannot be green lit, without even needing to mention the effect on the health of those who live in the surrounding area.

  46. Chris Loughton
    19th July 2016

    Noise, polution and traffic too much

  47. Lynn Binstock
    18th July 2016

    I moved to Teddington in 1992. Noise from aircraft at that time was reasonable, and although Concorde was incredibly loud, it went over very quickly, once or twice a day, on a timetable.

    Over the last few years the change has been significant. For weeks on end we are steadily overflown by loud, low planes, one behind the other, sometimes with almost continuous sound all day long and into the night. The noise level is MUCH louder than ever. New navigation techniques and the profit motive are destroying our quality of life. It is making it very difficult for those who work from home to concentrate, and is also damaging to mental health. I know of a number of people who want to move from the area, and meanwhile it will increasingly lower property values in the area.

    I find the noise intolerable, but much more serious is the damage we cannot see, which will impact the lives of ALL of us:


    I am adamantly against a 3rd runway at Heathrow. I am also adamant that current damaging practices at Heathrow need modification even without the runway.

    • Pauline Singleton
      20th July 2016

      The noise has become intolerable and daily life has been severely affected by the constant flights that fly over our house, not to mention the air pollution which is the cause of many health issues A definite NO to another runway

  48. Sonia Swaine
    18th July 2016

    The lower flights and changed flightpaths of the last couple of years have ruined our lives. We moved to get away from the plane noise and now it’s followed us. We don’t enjoy the garden anymore because of the noise and like others feel we have no option but to move. What a terrible situation! Another runway would be a disaster because it will just make the existing situation so much worse.

    I am so grateful to TAG for everything they are doing in the fight against the extraordinary arrogance of Heathrow. I am also heartened to read others’ stories which have made me realise I’m not alone in wanting justice and ACTION.

  49. Kay Hawkins
    18th July 2016

    I have lived in Twickenham all my life. For the last 5 years I have become more and more sleep deprived due to excessive aviation noise all the way through the night, despite the night time quota. I am also extremely concerned by the levels of local pollution caused by Heathrow. Local cancer rates are horrifying. I am currently in the process of trying to sell my house, in the hope of moving somewhere where I can breathe clean air and sleep all the way through the night. I am one of thousands of others. Tired and exhausted after years of debilitating levels of noise and pollution. Its a tragedy that we feel forced to leave our homes as pressure from Heathrow’s corporate interests continues apace. This is a global problem that needs a global solution – we are poisoning our futures. I do wish frequent flyers would reflect on this – for all of us.

  50. Neil Spurrier
    18th July 2016

    The NORAH (NOise-Related Annoyance, cognition and Health) Noise Study on how people are affected by noise around Frankfurt Airport is one of the most extensive noise surveys ever undertaken. It shows that children and adults are affected by noise from an intensity as low as 35 to 40 decibels. For every 10 decibels increase in noise, a young child’s reading age is put back one month. The NORAH study found that children’s continued learning is harmed, children’s and adults’ health is damaged and mental stress is increased by noise. The study found that aircraft noise is more damaging than road or rail noise of the same level. The Airports Commission has largely ignored this research, much of which was available shortly prior to Davies publishing his report in July 2015.
    Howard Davies estimates in the Airports Commission Final Report at paragraph 9.19 that:
    “more than 550,000 people in 2030, rising to between 570-640,000 by 2050” would be affected by an expanded Heathrow.
    However, this is based upon the drawing of Jacobs UK Ltd showing the minimum noise recording of 55 decibels. If the Commission had gone down to recording noise of 40 decibels as NORAH did, the likely number people recorded as affected would probably be (and probably is now) nearer 4,000,000 rising to at least 4,500,000 by 2050. The reason for the dramatic increase is that not only would the noise contours go right out west to places like Henley on Thames and Wokingham but right over most of central, north, south and east London. The noise contours would also take in the easterly take off operations, which happen about 30% of the time and which the Airports Commission with a master stroke has just ignored altogether. Areas like Twickenham, Teddington, East Molesey, Esher, Kingston, Brent, Harrow, which are now excluded from the noise contours, would be brought into the calculations. The estimate of the Airports Commission of the number of people affected and how they are or will be affected is, quite simply, grossly inaccurate. It is an astonishing number of people upon whom to inflict damage, injury and misery. In addition, it is an astonishingly bad investment for the next generation in schools in and around London.

  51. Darren from Teddington
    16th July 2016

    At what point in the history of Britain did it become acceptable to follow the teachings of Stalin and Hitler? Where the rights of the individual are ignored, and surpressed, not even for the “greater good” or the good of the party, but for pure monetary gains. How sad this world is, when the suffering of people is meaningless and all that matters is £££ shame on you Heathrow.

  52. Kasia from Teddington
    16th July 2016

    Me and my family live inTeddington and we feel, like a lot of other people over here, abused but Heathrow. When the easterly winds start we are under constant attack of low flying, very noisy planes. The frequency of these planes is about 2 a minute from 6:20am to 11:30 pm. They fly so low and are so loud that we can’t even have a proper conversion inside our house without shouting over the noise and this is Teddington , 8.5 miles from Heathrow, the noise, altitude and frequency should not be as bad as it is here. Engines may well be quieter than they used to be, but the planes a heavier so fly lower making them in facrt louder!The noise has an obvious detrimental impact on the quality of our lives, we can’t fall asleep, get woken up very early and get very stressed during the day as it is a constant pain to our ears without a minute break. Not to even mention the air polution that is not as noticable as the noise but will impact on our health and health of our children eventually. Please can someone start caring about the lives of about a milion of people living in this condition and stop Heathrow from expanding as Teddington will become a noise ghetto like all places in 20 miles radius from Heathorw and we will all have to move out or go mad!

  53. Worried TW1 Resident
    14th July 2016

    None of the powers that be seem to be listening to the residents and/or they are U turning. Agree with a lot of other comments that the planes very often start earlier and certainly finish later than LHR like to claim. Teddington seems to get taking off starting just as you are going to bed! When they come across our house (Strawberry Hill) they are very often so low, I feel they will take the roof off. I loath them! We lived in East Sheen and moved because of being on the landing path. Taking off is far worse on the noise ratio.
    Why on earth anyone in their right mind would advocate for a third runway at LHR compared to Gatwick. Aside from the environmental issues and disruption, am I the only one extremely concerned in the event of a tragedy the horrific consequences incurred in such a densely populated area. It is bad enough with the number of flights now – any addition only heightens the ratio of a possibility.

  54. AboutToLeave
    14th July 2016

    Lower and louder planes since August 2014. Impossible to sleep or even open a window. Planes are regularly between 1700 and 3500 feet. They could and should be:
    Minimum 4000 ft
    More dispersed over a wider area
    Reduced in number

  55. Mary G
    14th July 2016

    Surely low flying large planes, starting at 6 a.m. and often carrying on until 12 a.m. over residential areas are just wrong. Heathrow is not listening to the residents and doesn’t seem to even care. We are at the end of our theter at the unbearable noise

  56. Twick Res
    13th July 2016

    It would be an environmental disaster to go ahead with this 3rd runway. It is already almost unbearable when planes are coming over every 30 seconds as they leave the airport. This is only going to get worse.

    Increase to traffic, both road and air pollution will be intolerable, how can it not with an increase of over 7,000 flights a year?

  57. Tired Teddington resident
    12th July 2016

    Purely on environmental grounds, 3rd runway @ Heathrow should never have been put on the table in the first place. Heathrow’s greed for continuous expansion knows no boundaries. They will lie, they will twist the facts, they will campaign relentlessly, they will downplay the concerns from the overflown communities and they will play hard ball to silence anyone opposing their plans. Now the idea must be buried for once and for all! There’s simply too much at stake.

  58. Bachmann
    12th July 2016

    It is just bliss when the wind comes from the west and planes are not flying over our house. Why we need a third runway at Heathrow and concentrate and congest even more all around London beats me. I can assure you that any industry’s decision about where to place future investment does not depend on the location of an airport. It depends on the availability of workforce, road systems for access and shipping of goods and for people getting to work. Why can’t Gatwick be an alternative with only one runway available at the time. It is absolutely criminal having to destroy more than 700 dwellings (people’s life achievement) to make room for a runway. But politicians don’t think that way.
    May be after the referendum and the government’s loss to Brexit they will consider people’s wishes a little more.

    • SoniaA
      17th August 2016

      Please remember that your ‘bliss’ is others’ hell, those affected by westerlies over 70% of the time AND from woken from 4:20am landings until delayed arrivals at even 1am. At the moment, we’re just into our 3rd day of ‘bliss’ after 6 solid weeks, day in day out (apart from a less than 1 day break), all on westerlies suffer everyday until 7am and respite is a joke. LHR increasingly land on both runways even during respite and many of us, although more than 10 miles from Heathrow, are close enough to both concentrated fight paths that we’re troubled by noise from before 4:30am until 1am next day, lucky to get 3 hrs of sleep a night. We need more solidarity between those affected by easterlies and westerlies to stand up against Heathrow as one force!

  59. Laura Taylor
    12th July 2016

    The noise levels from Heathrow are currently above acceptable noise pollution limits as recommended by the World Health Organisation when measured across the eighteen hours when planes actually fly (upwards of 60dB every two minutes depending on aircraft). When on Easterly operations, we are woken at 6am by low flying planes and not given any respite until well after 23.30/midnight owing to the longstanding Cranford Agreement. There is a noticeable difference in my stress and anxiety levels when Heathrow is on easterlies and certainly my quality of life and work is affected as well as the quality of our family life. Whilst Heathrow are swift to extol the financial virtues of a third runway, what no one can quantify is the hidden cost of thousands of Londoners arriving at work on less than six hours of sleep per night nor the costs to the health service of having to deal with the effects on both physical and mental health. As a soon-to-be parent, I am also very concerned about adding to levels of pollution for young children growing up in London. The Airports Commission has already stated that 25% of the entire EU population affected by noise pollution live near Heathrow so how in any good conscience can a third runway be sanctioned when this number will invariably rise again?

  60. Sarah C
    12th July 2016

    I strongly object to a third runway at Heathrow. I have no faith in any politicians sticking to their word and I am very thankful that you are working so hard to keep this front of mind. I think us ordinary folks will have to keep fighting this. I will continue to send my emails of complaints and I hope that I don’t have to move my family to somewhere new to get away from the increased noise and pollution – we can tolerate so much, but fear the worst with a potential 3rd and then 4th runway.

  61. Mrs H
    11th July 2016

    My children’s sleep and schooling continues to be affected by the sometime constant stream of low flying aircraft, often after 11.30pm and from 6am. It has got worse over the last few years, and was so bad when Heathrow did an (unannounced ) trial of extra flight paths, I could feel my anxiety levels rise massively. I no longer trust anything the Heathrow group say with regards to their reassurances, plus do not understand how the Conservative party could do a U turn on agreeing to a third runway when they have such solid commitment to not allowing it to happen at the last general election. If it goes ahead then the MP’s will become a laughing stock and people will lose absolute faith in any reassurances or promises they may give in the future

  62. Kasolowsky
    11th July 2016

    We received a letter saying that, if the airport expansion goes through, EU-regulations will be applied as far as noise and pollution are concerned. What will happen now after Brexit? No protection and expansion until there is only airport and runways, no people to complain then…

  63. Ray Rampton
    11th July 2016

    Since we have been abandoned by our political elite, and the various Departments concerning transport, I feel the only way is by direct action to disrupt the Heathrow juggernaut. target those individuals in NATS/Heathrow who would impose this blight on us all, make there homes suffer in the same way as we do, as well as the airport itself.

  64. HL
    11th July 2016

    There is no need for further expansion of Heathrow or Gatwick. IF we “need” more flights, then these should be from less and too less built up areas of the country where expansion would create a real economic benefit and where the noise and pollution levels can be better managed. Flying over a capital City in this way is unbelievably dangerous to health. Both noise and air pollution are at unacceptable levels. The recent changes to flight paths over Teddington this summer have resulted in little relief from demonstrably lower-flying (and hence noiser) planes. These often fly outside the time limits they are supposed to. I cannot sleep when these planes fly over (they are very noisy from 10pm onwards); babies and children are awakened and cry, it is impossible to hear the tv or the radio; and the shutters in my house shake.

    Heathrow does not put forward an honest case for expansion and it does not reply to complaints in an acceptable fashion. Saying planes are quieter is pointless if they are flying lower and hence are more noisy as a result.

  65. Sim
    11th July 2016

    From April-July 2016 we had constant low flying heavy (huge airbases) taking off over TW11 (and surrounding areas) 18 hours a day. Starting at 6 a.m. and not stopping till midnight, including weekends.
    The noise was so bad that even with closed (double glazed) windows, it caused disturbance.
    This is not an acceptable state of affairs and Heathrow need to reign in the airlines and stop allowing such low flying heavy planes to fly over our homes.
    Not being able to sleep, being woken up even on Sundays and having to keep windows closed in stifling heat is not an acceptable way of life and we should not have that imposed upon us by Heathrow and the pro airlines regulatory bodies who seem to have no regards for the well being or concerns of the residents and only care about financial profiteering

  66. Mairead O'Siochru
    11th July 2016

    I strongly object to a third runway at Heathrow and have logged many complaints with the airport because of their arrogant disregard for the lives of residents living under the flight path. I am very aware that we benefit from having an airport so close to us. I have been living in Teddington for 16 years and we moved here with an awareness of the level of aircraft noise we would have to put up with – especially when there are Easterly winds. However, the levels have certainly increased in our time here with lower-flying aircraft and disruption before 6.00am and after mid night becoming a regular occurrence. When Heathrow changed the flight paths for the trial period (unannounced) we were very severely impacted upon and it was made worse by Heathrow’s initial insistence that nothing had changed and that we were mistaken. I do not trust Heathrow management and I am strongly against giving them ANY opportunity to add to the increased noise burden we already face from their operations. Thanks so much for keeping this issue at the forefront of people’s minds and challenging to pro-Heathrow lobby and its Heathrow-funded activity.

  67. Briand Beausoleil
    11th July 2016

    Absolutely no to Heathrow’s Third Runway for all the reasons already cited and reinforced by the overwhelming evidence that has been put forth but which Heathrow doesn’t wish to acknowledge.

    As a resident in Teddington, our family has felt first hand the noise and pollution of heavier and lower flying aircraft over our home and it completely negatively affects our quality of life.

    Kind regards,
    B Beausoleil

  68. Clare Hall
    11th July 2016

    The noise of planes over Teddington is unbearable now, let alone if there is a third runway. Heathrow say they are committed to a ban on night flights after 11.00pm however now they frequently fly well past this time. The planes fly low waking up residents and adding to air pollution.

    Heathrow do not abide by the existing rules why would they abide by rules if there was a third runway? Please do not let this happen. There are other more suitable sites, big business always rides rough shod over residents.

  69. Chandra Garuda
    10th July 2016

    I oppose the 3rd runway for Heathrow Airport.
    Previously I supported it but I have certainly change my mind and now completely oppose the 3rd runway.

    Will greatly help If you can let me know how to un-register myself from the previous support I given for 3rd runway.

  70. Pierre Naggar
    10th July 2016

    I fully support this initiative. I have lived in Teddington since 2003 and I have noticed a marked increase in the number of flights taking off over our neighbourhood. I have sent several emails to Heathrow Noise Complains and I have always received the same answers blaming a change in wind direction which i don’t believe are true.

    • SoniaA
      17th August 2016

      But, when there is a change in wind direction to westerlies, you may not get the noise but someone like you does … and it’s for at least 70% of the time! We should be working together for a quieter, less polluted London for all, whether on easterlies or westerlies.

  71. Alicia Loughton
    9th July 2016

    Another runway at Heathrow will make the roads even busier, the noise problem worse and the air more toxic. How can these factors not be important?

  72. Eleanor McLellan
    9th July 2016

    Whenever I fly into Gatwick I see acres of green countryside. Heathrow,on the other hand, is so congested with housing it is madness to consider inflicting even more noise and pollution to those living near or under the flight path there.

  73. Sandrine Desbarbieux
    9th July 2016

    I completely disagree with a 3rd runway at Heathrow. We do not need it. I moved from Richmond to Teddington to get away from having planes landing on my roof late at night and early mornings, from having my car covered in dust every morning (wondering what it did to my lungs!!) so I don’t want it happening over Teddington!! Thank you for helping out.

  74. Jane Ward
    9th July 2016

    1. As I understand, it there is absolutely no way Heathrow can satisfy the pollution levels required by going ahead with the third runway, however they dispute this.
    2. Despite their published assurances, there promise not to push for a 4th runway must be regarded as spurious given that they promised there would be no third runway when granted planning for Terminal 5.
    3. And what happened to the Conservative Party’s manifesto at the last election which categorically said ‘no’ to a third runway?

  75. Katie Williams
    7th July 2016

    We moved to Teddington five years ago, to what was a lovely place to bring up a young family. In the last two years, the noise from Heathrow has become intolerable making it impossible to enjoy our lovely town when the airport is on easterly operations, when the noise also means that I get less than six hours sleep.

    To preserve my sanity, I now feel that I have no option but to move but this means wrenching my children away from friends, family and a school they love to a place where they know no one. There is also the problem that nowhere within at least 30 miles from Heathrow is safe from its clutches. I cannot fathom how any responsible Government could even contemplate a third runway inflicting more suffering on London, particularly when it knows about the very serious health and pollution impacts of expansion.

Leave a Reply

Your e-mail address will not be published. Required fields are marked *