Forget Expansion; Focus on Improving the Current Situation

Heathrow has become a city state whose tentacles envelop London and the Thames Valley

HACAN ClearSkies’ is calling on the authorities to focus on the situation in London and the Thames Valley as it now. Forget expansion plans! Concentrate on improving the situation for residents NOW! The campaign’s demands are radical, but realistic. Residents are fed up with nice words from the authorities. They want action NOW! HACAN ClearSkies outlines 7 key proposals that can bring relief to the hundreds of thousands of people who say that aircraft noise is a serious problem in their lives RIGHT NOW. The campaign is intended to change the focus of government thinking from future expansion to improving the current situation.

map showing heathrow flight paths

Residents want to get across to the Government and the aviation authorities that the current situation needs sorting out.

People who have lived around Heathrow airport or under its flight paths for many years never imagined things could get this bad. Based on the fact that individual aircraft have become quieter over the last 20 years, the Government argues that the noise climate has improved and the noise contours have shrunk. But that is not borne out by people's experiences. Given the choice, they all say that they would prefer a return to 20 years ago when the planes were noisier, but there were far fewer of them. It is the constant stream of planes that drives people crazy. The number of planes has doubled over the last 20 years.

But aircraft noise has become a major problem for areas many miles from Heathrow.

There are two main reasons for this:

  1. The huge increase in the number of planes has meant that planes landing at Heathrow are brought down in ever-wider arcs from their holding stacks. It means that areas many miles from Heathrow, such as Blackheath or Henley-on-Thames, now have a big noise problem. And, of course, people under the take-off flight paths have many more planes than before.
  2. The increasing reliance on computers to guide planes into land has resulted in flights being increasingly concentrated on particular flight paths, so that certain areas, often a significant distance from the airport, have become noise ghettos. For example, on a typical day. around 400 planes fly over Stockwell in South London – one every two minutes - and half of all planes landing at Heathrow when the prevailing west wind is blowing come in over the Highbury/Stoke Newington area in North London.

The test of the Government and BAA’s concern for residents is to abandon their expansion plans and sort out the current situation.

This is how bad it has become:

The authorities’ reaction:

How have BAA and the Department of Transport reacted? They have set up Project Heathrow to see how to bring more planes into the airport!

Project Heathrow is examining ways of ending runway alternation and building a third runway. A third runway would mean over 700,000 flights using Heathrow each year

The Department for Transport tries to argue that, because individual aircraft have become quieter over the past 20 years, noise is less of a problem than it was. That is to deliberately misrepresent the situation.

The Department knows that the huge increase in aircraft numbers has off-set any improvement in the noise levels of individual planes. It also knows that aircraft noise has become a serious problem for areas many miles from Heathrow.

How the Government massages the figures

It’s all down to the way the Department for Transport measures aircraft noise. It factors in the number of planes that pass over during a 16-hour day and the noise of each plane. It then averages out the noise for the day (including the quiet periods). And after that, averages the noise over the course of a year (including the days when there is no noise). From this it produces its noise contour. Because planes have become quieter over the last 20 years, the noise contours have shrunk. But the figures are pretty meaningless. They don’t properly take account of the huge increase in flight numbers (which is the real complaint of people these days). They don’t measure the low-frequency component in the noise. They never include the hour between 6am and 7am. And the figures are computer-generated. The Department hasn’t taken on-the-ground measurements across London and the Thames Valley since 1982. And, even more crucially, it hasn’t carried out a social survey to ask people their views on the noise climate. On the basis of its figures, the Department claims things have got better (though even their figures show daytime noise getting worse from 2001 and a deterioration in night noise since the mid-1990s). This is rank dishonesty intended to mislead rather than inform.

The 7 demands of The NOW! Campaign

Radical but Realistic

  1. Ban Night Flights
  2. Extend Runway and Flight Path Alternation
  3. Retain the flight number cap at 480,000
  4. Reduce the number of short-haul flights using Heathrow
  5. Adopt World Health Organisation Noise Levels
  6. Impose Air Passenger Duty (APD) on Transfer Passengers
  7. Provide Clear Information on Flight Paths

1. Ban Night Flights

Ban night flights for an 8 hour night: 11pm – 7am.
The Department for Transport has admitted that over 500,000 people live under the night time flight path. People woken up by night flights can become very stressed out. A ban is operationally possible. Research carried out by HACAN ClearSkies shows there is no good operational reason why the current night flights can’t arrive at Heathrow during the day and leave their countries of origin at a reasonable hour. It flies in the face of common sense for the Government to suggest that 16 night flights are essential to the UK economy. It has produced no research to back this up. A ban on flights between 11.30pm and 6am is entirely realistic.

HACAN ClearSkies would go further. There is strong evidence to support an 8 hour night flight ban from 11pm until 7am. This is when most people are asleep. A night ban extended from 6am to 7am would affect many more flights. But it would force the airlines and the airport to sharpen up their operations. It would result in far fewer empty seats on day-time flights and would force the authorities to consider the position of transfer passengers – who currently account for a quarter of all passengers using Heathrow and who contribute little to the overall economy.

2. Extend Runway and Flight Path Alternation

Vary existing flight paths across London and the Thames Valley.
Extend the concept across London and the Thames Valley of aircraft switching runways at 3pm. At present people in West London only get planes landing at Heathrow for half the day as the aircraft switch runways at 3pm. Elsewhere residents get no relief from the planes. The Department for Transport looking to end runway even alternation in West London! There is no fundamental operational reason why alternation can’t be retained in West London and extended much further.

It could work like this:
(these are outline ideas, not firm proposals and should be read in conjunction with our demands to reduce flight numbers and move towards the adoption of World Health Organisation noise standards. Flight path alternation should not be used as a way to increase aircraft numbers.)

For planes landing at Heathrow. The routes they take between leaving the holding stack and joining their final approach to Heathrow in the Barnes area would be varied day by day or week by week. This would give people some relief from the planes. We are not suggesting new flight paths are created, simply that the existing ones are alternated

For planes taking off. At present there are four designated take off routes, each about two miles wide. To give people some relief, the obvious answer is to alternate the routes within the two mile band on a daily or weekly basis, but this would only be acceptable with an overall reduction inflight numbers.

Verification of the flight paths used should not be left to the aviation industry. It should be done by an independent body using the track plot data available.

3. Retain the flight number cap at 480,000

Entrench the 480,000 cap on flight numbers, with a progressive reduction to 1995 levels by 2010
The Government accepted the recommendation of the Terminal 5 Inspector to cap flight numbers a 480,000 per year. This should be regarded as a maximum, with the longer-term aim being to reduce numbers to their mid-1990 levels – before the holding stacks became so full that planes started being released early to join their flight paths greater distances from Heathrow. A reduction in the number of aircraft using the airport is perfectly possible – it could be achieved by more use of larger aircraft, by airlines filling more seats on their flights and by getting rid of short-haul flights where rail is a realistic alternative.

4. Reduce the number of short-haul flights using Heathrow

Research by HACAN shows that there are 100,000 flights a year to and from destinations where there is already a viable rail alternative.

5. Adopt World Health Organisation Noise Levels

The UK Government has signed up to the noise levels recommended by the World Health Organisation. At night it suggests that sleep disturbance occurs when a plane reaches 45 decibels. That would rule out all night flights at Heathrow NOW! The WHO suggests that serious annoyance sets in when daytime levels average out at 55 decibels. Over half a million people experience these levels at present. A realistic target is to cut that by 50,000 a year.

A reduction in flights is the crucial target. That is not necessarily the same as cutting passenger numbers.

Adopt the WHO noise levels. Ban night flights next year. Halve the numbers affected by unacceptable daytime levels by 2010.

6. Impose Air Passenger Duty (APD) on Transfer Passengers

Impose APD on all transfer passengers. Target date: Spring Budget 2005
Transfer passengers now account for a quarter of all passengers using Heathrow and with T5 this will increase further. They contribute little to the UK economy. Yet they are exempt from Air Passenger Duty. The aim should be to cut their numbers by imposing the tax.

The Government would do well to take measures to curb the growth in transfer passengers. This could be done by imposing Air Passenger Duty (APD) on transfer passengers.

The aviation industry pays APD to the Government. It amounts to over a billion pounds a year. But transfer passengers are exempt from this. There is no logic in this at all. The passengers who contribute least to the national economy pay less tax on their tickets than anybody else! There is a strong, logical argument to impose a higher rate of tax on transfer passengers. It would have a number of beneficial effects:

7. Provide Clear Information on Flight Paths

Provide comprehensive, clear information to the public. Target date: Summer 2005
At present information provision is very hit or miss. Clear information on flight paths should be included in house searches, made available on the web and in public libraries.

Meeting these seven demands would result not only in a better life for the residents of London and the Thames Valley, but in an airport that was tailored to meet the needs of the economy of the South-East. The sprawling monster, designed to enrich the aviation industry, would have been tamed.

• Download and print these pages as a PDF file