< Back


February 2019

PLANE UNACCEPTABLE – we think so too!
With thanks to PRACT, joint community body that focuses on Transport matters in our area and also to SEBRA, our neighbouring Amenity Society… Heathrow are consulting on new flight paths for Heathrow’s existing 2 runways – Independent Parallel Approaches.  In a nutshell, this could result in significant extra aircraft noise for the W9W2 area well in advance of the building of the third runway.  The letter from John Walton on PRACT and sent to our MPs, lays out more detail Below;


I am writing on behalf of P – R – A- C – T (PRACT), a consortium of four recognised wide-area amenity societies in the Borough of Westminster, whose combined areas cover most of London W2 and W9.

   Consultation misleading on ‘IPA’ 

We regard the form of this consultation as [highly] misleading in regard to ‘IPA’., in several respects.  It is presented as if one particular form of increasing the two-runway airport’s capacity has official approval, so that only details are at issue.  We do not believe this to be the case.
 It is also presented as probably introducing, prematurely, changes in flight paths between holding areas and the final approach, depriving huge areas of both north and south London of sleep. We do not understand the need for [ or practicality of] such changes from the existing flight paths, if ‘IPA’ were to be introduced (with only the existing two runways).
Other communities – relief from daily alternation disappears. It appears incontrovertible that the communities living under the final approaches to both runways would have the relative calm of daily alternation shattered every single morning that the wind is coming from the west, as is usual.

  Lack of publicity: consultation period is too short

We object strongly to the limited publicity given to the consultation.  We think that all households affected should have received a leaflet about it.  Further, in regard to ‘IPA’ we regard the form of the questions as misleading in asking, in considerable detail, about particular flight paths within a ‘design envelope’, whose approval with the existing two runways is not yet assured. We think that there should be a longer period than eight weeks for responses. We note that twelve weeks is the period usually set for central Government consultations.

Failure to clearly identify the comparison between the ‘before’ and ‘after’ situations.

There is no specific information for particular postcodes about the existing situation (decibels, etc).  People need to be able to compare now with then. The present situation might seem obvious for some – no overflights – but not for all. There should be specific worked examples of the likely impact of the proposals in particular postcodes.

Possible third runway
As regards the impact of a possible third runway, we regard the consultation as premature. [ It serves to disguise the impact of ‘IPA’.]

We ask that the consultation be redesigned to make it clear that ‘IPA’ in the early morning is not yet decided, and be launched again with extensive publicity and  worked before and after examples. I am copying this to the MPs for the Cities of London and Westminster and for Westminster North, to the Mayor of London, to the Civil Aviation Authority, to the London Assembly Member for West Central and to the Councillors of the five Wards covering our area.

W9W2 want to thank John Walton for his detailed view and action letter above. So, to summarise, Heathrow are consulting on new flight paths for Heathrow’s existing 2 runways – Independent Parallel Approaches. Noise pollution will affect us all. Please Click on the link below, to take action.

What can you do? 

If you haven’t already done so, then respond to the Heathrow Consultation via their website:https://afo.heathrowconsultation.com/