Who we are...

But this is utterly wrong.

The reality is that school lessons are disrupted more tday than ever , musical concerts are interrupted and peaceful days shattered by overhead aeroplanes. This is due to the fact that computer generated contours can only acknowledge the noise energy that is contained within them. The contours do not necessarily translate into everyday annoyance.

Over the last 20 years the number of passenger flights arriving and departing at Heathrow has risen 63% from 283,000 to 461,000 a year. That’is an extra 488 flights a day. Night flights have increased by over 62% during the same period.

About 20,000 members of the public told the Heathrow Terminal 5 planning inquiry over 15 years ago that in their opinion the NUISANCE caused by aircraft noise had increased, not decreased. No-one came forward to say it had improved. No-one, that is, except the senior civil servants and the airport operators BAA, all of whom use the computerised noise energy tabulations on which to base their conclusions.

And the reasons for this apparent contradiction?

Second, there is increasing evidence to support reported opinion that the contours around Heathrow no longer attach the proper weight to the disturbance caused by the numbers of aircraft flying overhead. According to the current noise measuring system, people's annoyance with aircraft noise would be the same with 100,000 planes a year flying above them as it would with, say, 500,000 so long as there was no increase in total noise energy.

What's so frustrating is that there is an easy way to measure the impact of aircraft noise on people. You simply ask them.

Around Heathrow, "annoyance" surveys were undertaken on a regular basis following the introduction of jet flights. The mosy recent of those was published in 2006 (The ANANSE) study. This study was undertaken over a 6 year period and was designed to be the most comprehensive assessment of aircraft noise and annoyance ever carried out in the UK. It cost the taxpayer £1.5 million. This sudy showed that in general people have become more sensitive to aircraft noise at any given level than was the case in the 1980s and that the "leq" principal of exchanging noise energy for numbers of movements appeared to have become uncalbrated. Unfortunatley the then government decided to the findings of this report following advice from its own peer reviewers. The human experience of aircraft noise is inevitably subjective. The resukts of the ANASE study were inconvenient for policy makers who failed to understand that it cannot be measured simply by the scientific technique of calculating average energy contours.

Social surveys are a better method of measuring the nature, distribution and intensity of the subjective responses to aircraft noise within a population. It is only by asking people as well as computers that the Government can make any noise consultation worthwhile. It is unfortunate that some of the ANASE social surevy work was not carried out with sufficient rigour to enable the results of the study to stand scrutiny. LAANC is presssing civil servants to re run the parts of the study that were found to have been poorly managed.

The new Government has confirmed that it will not support the case for constructing a new 3rd runway at Heathrow. LAANC opposed the construction of a third runway believing that it would have been devastating for the local community.

• A 3rd runway would have required the construction of a new terminal Terminal 6
• A 3rd runway would have meant the unacceptable destruction of homes
• A 3rd runway would have meant yet more noise and congestion
• A 3rd runway would have increased the possibility of an air accident
• A 3rd runway would have caused a further deterioration in already poor local air quality around the airport
  
  
  

  No further terminals

  
  Terminal 5 is capable of handling more passengers than Gatwick Airport does today.
  
  LAANC believes that Terminal 5 should be the last major development at Heathrow. We believe the airport has now truly reached the limit of its expansion. The airlines and BAA argued successfully during the T5 inquiry that they did not need more runways at Heathrow in order to secure its premeninet world wide status into the 21st century. This was based upon their joint opinions that every generation of new jet would be bigger than the one it would replace. The new jets were also predicted to be significantly quieter than those flying in 1990s althoiugh they would larger. LAANC believes that both BAA and the airlines should deliver on their promises. Although the planning permission for Terminal 5 limits the numbers of Air Transport Movements (ATMS) to 480,000 a year there is no limit on the number of passengers that may pass through the airport in any 12 months. Currently Heathrow caters for about 67 million passengers a year. BAA said at the T5 inquiry that the airport was capable of handling around 80 million passengers with Terminal 5. LAANC argued that a higher figure of around 120 million would be achievable based upon BAAs future fleet mix.
  
  
  

  No night flights

  
  LAANC supports residents who continue to fight for a ban on night flights at Heathrow. Some 16 or so flights arrive every morning at Heathrow before 6am (over 60 before 7am). The last UK night noise study carreid out in the early 1990s claimed that few people living around Heathrow Airport have their sleep disturbed by these flights. The tens of thousands of people living around the airport who have their sleep disrupted on a daily basis do not agree.
  
  Everyone has a basic right to a decent night's sleep - a right denied to so many by the arrival of aircraft from four o'clock in the morning. LAANC is pressing the new government for a phased reduction in the numbers of night flights at Heathrow.
  
  
  

  Heathrow

  
  Heathrow is owned and operated by the Ferovial Group, a subsiduary of BAA plc (formerly British Airports Authority). The company was privatised in 1997. You can find out more about the airport by visiting the BAA website.
  
  The airport has two main east-west runways. At any one time one is being used for departures and the other for arrivals. Operations are reversed at around 3pm each day. The pattern is also changed weekly so that the runway used for departures in the mornings one week is used for arrivals in the following week.
  
  This alternation provides considerable relief from noise for residents who live under the approach flightpaths.
  
  The system currently works well when the wind is from the west. Westerly operations mean that landing aircraft approach Heathrow from the east passing over central London. Departing aircraft go out over Windsor.
  
  When the wind is from the east landing aircraft approach from over Windsor. Departing aircraft always use the southern runway and depart to the east. Some of these go out directly over Tooting.
  
  The northern runway cannot at present be used for departures to the east (save for exceptional circumstances). This is because of the long-standing 'Cranford Agreement' which seeks to protect houses close to the end of this runway. In January 2009 Geoff Hoon MP the then Sectretary of State announced that the Cranford Agreement was to be scrapped. A statement issued by the current Secretary of State for Transport (Theresa Villiers) on 7th September 2010 confirmed that the new governement does not intend to revsist the decision. A number of operational changes will need to be made to allow regular take offs to the east from Heathrow's northern runway. The government have said that it will be looking to ensure that BAA gives proper consideration to appropriate mitigation and compensation for those who may be adversely affected by this decision.
  http://www.baa.co.uk/
  
  
  

  The Heathrow Consultative Committee

  
  Heathrow is a 'designated airport'. This means that the Government effectively controls how the airport may operate in terms of numbers of flights, when it can open and how many flights are permitted. All designated airports have by law to establish a local consultative committee.
  
  Local authorities adjoining the airport are represented on the Heathrow Consultative Committee (HACC). It also includes airport representatives and others from the travel industry and passenger groups. LAANC is also represented on the HACC. If you would like to learn more about what the committee does visit their website at:
  http://www.lhr-acc.org/
  
  
  

  Protection not expansion

  
  Heathrow plays a vital role in the west London economy. It is the single biggest source of jobs in the area.
  
  The council wants to see Heathrow thrive and prosper.
  
  The issue for the council is how best to manage Heathrow's insatiable desire for growth - and how to ensure that residents living under the flight path are protected from the inevitable noise nuisance that goes with a busy airport.
  
  
  

  Terminal 5

  
  "The council together with many others in London and the South East opposed the plan for a fifth terminal. After a long running inquiry the current Government pronounced in favour of the expansion in November 2001, and it opened to passengers in March 2008.
  
  The inquiry which opened in May 1995 and included 525 days of hearings spread over 46 months.
  
  The additional terminal is capable of handling as many passengers as Gatwick Airport.
  
  The inquiry inspector admitted in his findings that on safety grounds expansion at Gatwick or Stansted would have been preferable.
  
  
  

  A new Thames Gateway airport?

  
  The council believes there is now growing doubt as to the reliability of DfT forecasts on future demand for air travel - particularly if UK carbon and air quality targets are to be met.
  
  If demand for air travel is to be met on the scale previously envisaged there may be are better ways of doing this than by simply adding extra runways at existing airports where the noise and other environmental problems affect so many people.
  
  The 2002 Air Transport White Paper rejected a proposal to build a new Thames Estury airport. However the Mayor for London has commissioned a new study into the viability of a new airport in this location which potentially could operate day and night with very little disruption to residents.
  
  Prior to publication of the white paper both the council and the local authorities' aviation group (SASIG) had asked the Government to include both these alternatives in a fresh round of consultation. Instead the white paper said there was no case for a new hub airport.
  
  SASIG shares the council's total objection to expansion at Heathrow and argues that the only long term answer is to build a new airport in the Thames Gateway. This could provide fast links to London and the Channel Tunnel Rail link from a location where the impact of flights overhead would affect very limited numbers of people.
  
  Visit the SASIG website at http://www.sasig.org.
  
  The council's detailed response to the SERAS consultation is available below.
  
  
  
  
  

  Council's response to consultation on Air Transport Development

  
  'The Government consulted during Summer 2005 on a new night flights regime which would run for six years from the end of October 2006.
  
  At the beginning of September 2006 Wandsworth, Richmond and Windsor councils launched judicial review proceedings in the High Court to challenge the fairness of the proposals.
  
  This followed an earlier challenge to the first stage of the consultation in December 2004.
  
  The Government then was forced to concede in court that it could take into account the real noise levels caused by flights landing at Heathrow before 6am when considering restrictions.
  
  The climbdown was prompted by the council's revelation that the true noise level of Boeing 747-400s with Rolls Royce engines was 74 per cent higher than the prescribed limit.
  
  Sadly the second stage consultation made no attempt to address these flaws in the night noise controls and a subsequent court challenge was unsucessful.
  
  
  

  A new Thames Gateway airport?

  
  The council believes there is now growing doubt as to the reliability of DfT forecasts on future demand for air travel - particularly if UK carbon and air quality targets are to be met.
  
  If demand for air travel is to be met on the scale previously envisaged there may be are better ways of doing this than by simply adding extra runways at existing airports where the noise and other environmental problems affect so many people.
  
  The 2002 Air Transport White Paper rejected a proposal to build a new Thames Estury airport. However the Mayor for London has commissioned a new study into the viability of a new airport in this location which potentially could operate day and night with very little disruption to residents.
  
  Prior to publication of the white paper both the council and the local authorities' aviation group (SASIG) had asked the Government to include both these alternatives in a fresh round of consultation. Instead the white paper said there was no case for a new hub airport.
  
  SASIG shares the council's total objection to expansion at Heathrow and argues that the only long term answer is to build a new airport in the Thames Gateway. This could provide fast links to London and the Channel Tunnel Rail link from a location where the impact of flights overhead would affect very limited numbers of people.
  
  Visit the SASIG website at http://www.sasig.org.
  
  The council's detailed response to the SERAS consultation is available below.
  
  
  
  
  

  European Court challenge

  
  'The council has campaigned for many years for a complete ban on night flights.
  
  In October 2001 the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that night flights violated human rights and that the UK Government was wrong to have put economic arguments ahead of mental concerns.
  
  Following the UK Government's appeal, this ruling was overturned. The decision was announced on July 8, 2003.
  
  The council helped to raise £3100,000 from other local authorities to help meet the legal costs of the two hearings.
  
  You can see the latest judgment of Hatton and Others v UK Government by visiting the ECHR website at:
  http://www.echr.coe.int/
  
  
  

  What to do about aircraft noise

  
  BAA plc (formerly The British Airports Authority) runs a 24 hour seven day week noise line at Heathrow. You can call this on 0800 344844 to report noisy aircraft. During office hours you can normally speak to a member of BAAs Flight Evaluation Unit who will try to help you. This unit deals with a wide range of airport related issues from noise to flight numbers and flight paths. BAA regularly publishes maps showing where complaints come from - so it is worth reporting all local problems. You may also want to contact the campaign group Heathrow Association for Control of Aircraft Noise (HACAN). You can reach them on 020 8876 0455 or visit their website.
  http://www.hacan.org.uk/