Heathrow Expansion was temporarily derailed by the Judicial Review (JR) in February, ruling the Airports National Policy (ANPS) illegal through its non-compliance with the existing UK Climate Change Act, and by extension, the Heathrow expansion plans that relied on it. By law, the Climate Change Act commits the UK government to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 100% of 1990 levels (net zero) by 2050.

Heathrow expansion 2019

There have been many setbacks to the Airport’s expansion plans over the years from Terminal 5 onwards: claims that several top politicians would stop expansion, elongated planning enquiries, and many anti-expansion campaigns, but like the addict it appears to be, suffering Compulsive Shopping Disorder, Heathrow Airport Limited (HAL) keeps coming back for just one more hit, claiming that it will then be satisfied.  Like it’s maniacal namesake in Stanley Kubrick’s epic 2001 – a Space Odyssey, to accept this would be to seriously misjudge the machine.

HAL’s public response to the JR is “10,000 quality apprenticeships by 2030, New Routes and 180,000 new Jobs”, plus the inevitable appeal against the judgement.  While new routes could be created easily with a new runway, they could also be created by displacing cargo and short-haul flights onto greener options, such as rail or electric vehicles (remembering that Heathrow is actually the UK’s largest cargo destination, with 1.8 million tons in 2018: up 20%, matching passenger volume increases since T5 opened).  The other two claims stretch credibility beyond reason, given that Heathrow currently employs 76,000, the expansion would represent a more than doubling in size.  Or perhaps that gives a clue as to the full plan ? 

Heathrow doesn’t appear to be addressing the issues that most of us care about – the effect on the environment, surface transport, and the lives of residents in large parts of the South-East – all the more so having recently become used to not being woken at or before 6AM with fewer flights during the Coronavirus pandemic; Heathrow has temporarily reduced to single runway operation.   In the new Greta-inspired world, HAL makes additional claims regarding sustainability, but it again stretches reason that the discredited greenwash baked into last year’s consultation could have been warmed over sufficiently to pass muster this time round.

Click on the newsletter image to open the pdf 

The Special 20-page Anniversary Newsletter has been published, celebrating 30 years of Hammersmith Society Awards. Printed copies are being distributed to subscribing members.

Several committee members attended the latest Heathrow Consultation held on 24th Jan.  A more detailed article will appear in the next Newsletter, but in the meantime the essential take-aways are summarised in the graphic shown, short-cutting the 26 consultation documents. 

“Arrivals-1 for the northern runway”

This shows one of the most problematic proposed new arrivals flight paths “Arrivals-1 for the Northern runway” (used 75% of the time for early mornings), overlaid with a “heat map” of the Society’s membership. Make no mistake, the majority of members would be directly overflown at 2000-3000ft.  The “Arrivals-2” option is worse for some members, with overflights between 2000-2500ft in the southern part of Hammersmith.

We urge you to respond to the online questionnaire answering “neither – prefer no expansion” to most questions, or use appropriate detailed responses largely the same as Chiswick’s, see: http://chatr.org.uk. You must do this by 4th March.

Currently, no Hammersmith residents are directly overflown, and those living North of King Street (the majority of our members) hear rather less of the early morning arrivals along the river that plague those living further South, particularly in TEAM mode between 6-7am as described here.

Heathrow impact (image: H&F council)

On Thursday 4th Oct all the organisations presenting a legal challenge to Heathrow expansion will be in court seeking permission to go ahead.

H&F Council have now joined 4 other Councils to challenge the Heathrow decision. Friends of the Earth are challenging it on climate change grounds, and Greenpeace on grounds of air pollution.

The judge will decide which, if any of challenges, can proceed to a full hearing. The campaign needs a big crowd inside and outside the court to show public opposition. The permission hearings will be at the Royal Courts of Justice, if you support the challenge and can attend, please be there by 9 am.

Hammersmith takes one for the TEAM

For those in any doubt as to what 3rd runway traffic might look like, this is what TEAM landing patterns already look like at 6.30 am on a Sunday morning even when the alternation schedule plans to only use the southern runway!  See this link for the current alternation schedule and an understanding of the carte-blanche that is TEAM. 

TEAM landings Sunday 30th Sept 2018, 6.30 AM. Image courtesy Flightradar24.com

Heathrow noise – Airports Commission final report

You may well be aware that the Government published a document on 5th June which would effectively give outline planning permission for a third runway at Heathrow. Parliament will vote on this in next 2 1/2 weeks. As the Hammersmith Society has said repeatedly, a third runway would have significant negative effects on Hammersmith: increased noise (with the health impacts that brings) from more flights and a new flightpath, increased pollution from more traffic on the A4 and A40 through the Borough, and vastly increased pressure on public transport infrastructure going into and out of central London. If you share these concerns, do email or write, as soon as possible,  to your MP who for most of us is Andy Slaughter (), and the Minister for Transport

The Chair of the  H&F Resident-Led Commission on Airport Expansion, Christina Smyth, has written the following blogpost on the Council’s website: