The people who live next to Heathrow and moan should move or deal with it, Harsh yes I know but Heathrow was built first it was used during the war and the houses came later on, so the airport was there first! Secondly they obviously viewed the house before they moved in so they knew the UK's biggest airport was on there doorstep, so they have no right to moan. Heathrow needs a 3rd runway more than anything for safety, the arrival and departure lanes are full of flights and they cant extend the birdcage surrounding the airport so the only way to help the dangerous congestion is to build a 3rd runway. Plus with the next gen engines from rolly Royce and gen elec the noise is a lot quieter than what jet engines were a decade ago. I will probably get slagged of for this but it's the truth
I do agree that Heathrow needs a third runway. However owing to the astronomical house prices in London and how many of the areas around Heathrow are less well off, many people probably can't afford to move unless they move out of London which I'd assume they don't want to do. Also I have an old school friend who lives very close to Heathrow and he said he doesn't mind the noise because he has a magical new invention. Double glazed windows
@@noahbowie5985 😂😂😂😂😂 loved the magic invention. I get hounslow is pushing for some less well of people, but what I was trying to get at is that people cant really moan about the airport as it gas always been there. But thank you for your comment.
There where houses prior to to Heathrow airport and most houses including the hamlet of Heathrow was demolished from 1946 on-wards to make way for the airport expansion.
I live under the flight path of Heathrow airport, and I've been saying the same thing for years, people moaning about the airport noise, yet the airport was there before people living there these days and probly 20yrs ago, aircraft noise has massively reduced in the last 15 to 20 yrs as with the pollution from them
Matt Jones This is true. But Heathrow doesn't deal with frequent summertime severe thunderstorms and the associated wind direction changes, or with frequent wintertime snowstorms where accumulation is in excess of 5 centimeters per hour. Heathrow does get snow, but nowhere near the severity that Chicago does.
Won't work. 90% of all Heathrow cargo arrive on passenger planes' cargo hold. There are very few cargo freighters in Heatheow, compared to airports like Hong Kong.
@MaidenAir Modern widebody twinjets, e.g. 77W, has a cargo hold comparable to smaller freighters. As most flights to LHR aren't that long a.k.a. below max payload range, a considerable amount of cargo can be carried carried.
I love the fact that in this simulation the show the M25 to have no congestion because that strip of the M25 is always full of traffic that doesn't move for ages
The problem is not just about noise near the airport, but also noise along the departure and arrival routes. HKG or HND, for example, are built on reclaimed islands, but neither of them are immune of limited operations at midnight, as airplanes have to fly by residential areas.
Reminds me of the Economist's proposal to replace the current runways with 4 new ones spaced closer to one another to the west of the airport (i.e. nearer to Windsor Castle)
The only issue with overnight flights is that it will make Heathrow EVEN BUSIER than before with more passengers meaning it would need to expand or it’ll have to be closed.
To be honest the third runaway at Heathrow is a waste of time and money in my opinion. By the time they finish building it, Heathrow will again find itself at maximum capacity. My solution would be increase number of runways at Gatwick. After that, I’d suggest a high speed rail link that would connect Heathrow & Gatwick in less than 20mins. Cargo could also be moved to Gatwick.
Also the environmental impact would reduce, I know Gatwick is surrounded by green land but long term would be less of an impact, the destruction and pollution caused by that and rebuild would make more of a negative impact than building on some grass if which some will still be there between the runways/taxiways
Gatwick is not fully surrounded by green land at all. You have a misconceived idea that is the case. On the northern flank you have horley a town of 23000 people some are only hundreds of yards from the airport boundary. Also to the south you have Crawley, a town of over 100000 people a bit further away and then villages all around it. Just almost like Heathrow. Yes Heathrow expansion would mean the loss of two villages under tarmac and concrete but Gatwick would lose out as well. Charlwood, would probably cease to existing sandwiched between two runways. Living in horley which is still expanding would be hard and the green barrier between the airport and Crawley would disappear
There is no way in hell, you would get night flights approved at any major airport in Europe, that does not have them currently. And I get it, I spent a weekend in Frankfurt in a hotel right under the departing traffic and it was extremely annoying as soon as it set in in the morning. The truth is, people living close to the airport don´t care for economic advantages for a country, noone would if it´s your sleep that gets ruined.
In frankfurt planes are not allowed to fly from 11PM to 5AM... so saying that they benefit at night doesnt really make sense. I live close to frankfurt airport and you hear nothing at night until 5AM.
Obviously, the third runway is going ahead, but could this have been a better alternative? I'm not saying this was a better solution, but rather presenting the pros and cons so that you can draw your own conclusions. Have a great day captains!
It would work for a short while but the our goverment is terrible and they have bigger problems to sort out. The third runway is the best idea but i exspect ot means changes to landing and take-off procedres.
Karl Johan Lea do you know how bad it is to connect between two airports? I did a LHR to Gatwick transfer not by choice and it was hell. I had to go through customs, and go to Gatwick on a bus, check in again just for my ticket, and then go through security again, and then get to my flight. Staying on the same property is more efficient, cost effective, and simply just better for people. I'd recommend trying a LHR to Gatwick transfer first before such proposal is even offered. On top of that, they lost my bags in transfer and my bag got sent to Romania. Didn't get it until three days after I arrived in my final destination
Who would want to change flights that involves a trip to another airport lol, the entire point of a Hub airport is easy connections. You either drop chasing the Hub traffic or do it properly.
For someone like me who lives around 15 miles south of Heathrow and has aspirations to become a pilot within the coming years, an expansion of LHR and also potentially LGW (around 30 miles away) is an exciting prospect. It would allow for great employment opportunities in a sector that is already in need of new pilots. It’s an exciting future indeed.
The NIMBYS are not going to allow night flights, your idea is dead in the water. IMO the third runway is needed and they should also move the cargo planes to Gatwick or Stansted.
very interesting video. I have only used Heathrow airport about 3 times, last was in 2009. I do come from London; now live in Clacton on Sea, on the East coast so not many planes fly over this area. Night flights. would be very noisy for planes using the main flight paths. the proposed 3rd runway was discussed in our Parliament many times and the go-ahead happened about a year ago; because many homes would need demolishing and new motorway road will need to be planned for a section in the west side of the existing airport The government plans may be available, but I do not know when they can be seen
London still have 2 airports to go for - Stansted & Gatwick...they can fill the roles like cargo, budget terminal & even hub for transcontinental flight...
Personally I think that both runways should be used for arrivals and departures so it eases the congestion for waiting to take off and also allows planes to land quicker instead of circling above London. I also think that the new runway should be used like Gatwick’s where it has arriving and departing flights, if Heathrow did this they’d be able to handle the traffic better.
Heathrow is already running at 99% capacity for over a decade and no other airport in the world would use departure methods as extreme as Heathrow to squeeze as many flights into those 2 runways as possible. Most airports departure intervals at 60 - 90 secs, LHR has to make do with 30 secs by arranging departing aircraft to go in different directions to evade traffic and each other's wake turbulence. There really is no room for further capacity or margin for error.
I thought about this ages it makes so much sense. You can have a small ammount of night flights from the west for landings. The sounds bad but maybe only allow new gen quiter aircraft only not a380 or 747.
As expensive as the Thames Estuary Airport (or TEA as I call it) would be, I think it’s inevitable. Heathrow is located way too close to living areas. Build TEA and add a high speed rail links str8 to London, Manchester and Liverpool.
It's become really ridiculous in Heathrow now with so much traffic. Sometimes when a plane lands, you could spend 20 to 45mins waiting for a gate or parking bay, that is if you didn't spend minutes holding in the sky to land in the first place! About time they started working on a viable solution to the congestion!
I’ll never understand why progress is impeded by idiots who decide to build/buy houses near airports who don’t like the noise. Get over it. Move away. Heathrow has so much lost opportunity because it caters to these folks. If I were in charge I’d get rid of all restrictions AND build the 3rd runway! LHR can finally start competing with DXB again!
England doesn’t have many legitimate real industries left, so this service-related expansion makes sense to keep LHR at the forefront of international commercial aviation in Europe.
@@cam8396 , not compared to what used to be there. Obviously you have no clue what's been outsourced and/or closed down over the years. Also, telling people to "shut up" is poor manners, and if you're British, highly un-British, okay?
I’m skeptical about this decision. The lack out space outside LHR is the main reason why they’re unable to expand too far. Heathrow itself is very congested. But will give more time and money to arrivals and departures bring easier and faster
No way anybody around would support night flights. It's bad enough to have to listen the A380s until almost midnight. Even now when I'm writing this comment I have to pause the video cause I don't hear anything due to an A380 flying above me. We will not accept this to happen over night every night.
@@noahbowie5985 the problem with A380 is that despite being slightly quieter they hang above for longer due to their size. The others just fly over in 10-15 sec and they are gone but A380s just stay there for ages
@@noahbowie5985 I love all of them I just don't want them above my head in the middle of the night. :) And yes A380 is just an amazing piece of engineering.
@@fpupesh I understand how much that must annoy you. I live in Central London so I constantly hear planes fly overhead but as mentioned in this video. It doesn't affect me at night and the area I live in doesn't have too many flights above it as it's a bit too far north
3rd runway may not happen now Boris Johnson is PM. He was vehemently against it and I would not be surprised if he scraps the idea in favour of his Boris Island plan in the Thomas estuary. Bonkers but then he is mad. It is blatantly obvious we need new air traffic capacity ASAP but as per usual in UK, government are too concerned about the damage such big decisions might have on their immediate electoral prospects. If anything ever happens, I will probably pass out with shock.
Three Flashes I see it more like an invesment. They will earn that money back in no time because a new airport could handle way more pax and cargo traffic.
Heathrow need a third runway and also night time flight but the local communities have to be consider but im sorry to say in PC britain it will never be easy for much growth the job night flight for people who need work or these PC group who seem to complain about any and everything under the sun
Thats good and all but i t would be alot more money and plus people want to go to heathrow and not an airport miles away possibly even the other side of london And also heathrow is private so they would not be the ones building it.
90% of all Heathrow cargo arrive on passenger jet cargo holds. Freighters only account for a small percentage of Heathrow's traffic, compared with places like Hong Kong.
The people who live next to Heathrow and moan should move or deal with it, Harsh yes I know but Heathrow was built first it was used during the war and the houses came later on, so the airport was there first! Secondly they obviously viewed the house before they moved in so they knew the UK's biggest airport was on there doorstep, so they have no right to moan. Heathrow needs a 3rd runway more than anything for safety, the arrival and departure lanes are full of flights and they cant extend the birdcage surrounding the airport so the only way to help the dangerous congestion is to build a 3rd runway. Plus with the next gen engines from rolly Royce and gen elec the noise is a lot quieter than what jet engines were a decade ago.
I will probably get slagged of for this but it's the truth
I do agree that Heathrow needs a third runway. However owing to the astronomical house prices in London and how many of the areas around Heathrow are less well off, many people probably can't afford to move unless they move out of London which I'd assume they don't want to do. Also I have an old school friend who lives very close to Heathrow and he said he doesn't mind the noise because he has a magical new invention. Double glazed windows
@@noahbowie5985 😂😂😂😂😂 loved the magic invention. I get hounslow is pushing for some less well of people, but what I was trying to get at is that people cant really moan about the airport as it gas always been there. But thank you for your comment.
There where houses prior to to Heathrow airport and most houses including the hamlet of Heathrow was demolished from 1946 on-wards to make way for the airport expansion.
I live under the flight path of Heathrow airport, and I've been saying the same thing for years, people moaning about the airport noise, yet the airport was there before people living there these days and probly 20yrs ago, aircraft noise has massively reduced in the last 15 to 20 yrs as with the pollution from them
@@glennelliott1320 you sir should are a legend and I'm so thankful a resident gets my point. Thank you for your comment
O’Hare makes Heathrow look like a playground.
Heathrow actually has more passengers
Matt Jones and also has only 2 runways for a major hub airport in 2019😂😂
@@thethrowbackguy4319 and uses them to a better effect than O'Hare does.
Matt Jones
This is true. But Heathrow doesn't deal with frequent summertime severe thunderstorms and the associated wind direction changes, or with frequent wintertime snowstorms where accumulation is in excess of 5 centimeters per hour. Heathrow does get snow, but nowhere near the severity that Chicago does.
@@hostilepancakes Whats that got to do with the Playground jibe?! Doesnt make any sense.
another solution: move cargo aircrafts to another airport it will free up the runway
dispatchnig vomitory exactly what I was thinking
You will still need the third runway, Heathrow has too many planes for two runways even without cargo planes
@@AdamSmith-gs2dv Yes, indeed.
Won't work. 90% of all Heathrow cargo arrive on passenger planes' cargo hold. There are very few cargo freighters in Heatheow, compared to airports like Hong Kong.
@MaidenAir Modern widebody twinjets, e.g. 77W, has a cargo hold comparable to smaller freighters. As most flights to LHR aren't that long a.k.a. below max payload range, a considerable amount of cargo can be carried carried.
I love the fact that in this simulation the show the M25 to have no congestion because that strip of the M25 is always full of traffic that doesn't move for ages
The problem is not just about noise near the airport, but also noise along the departure and arrival routes.
HKG or HND, for example, are built on reclaimed islands, but neither of them are immune of limited operations at midnight, as airplanes have to fly by residential areas.
heathrow should make 2 more runways, instead of just 1.
And were are they gunna Sh*t out the space?
Reminds me of the Economist's proposal to replace the current runways with 4 new ones spaced closer to one another to the west of the airport (i.e. nearer to Windsor Castle)
The only issue with overnight flights is that it will make Heathrow EVEN BUSIER than before with more passengers meaning it would need to expand or it’ll have to be closed.
To be honest the third runaway at Heathrow is a waste of time and money in my opinion. By the time they finish building it, Heathrow will again find itself at maximum capacity. My solution would be increase number of runways at Gatwick. After that, I’d suggest a high speed rail link that would connect Heathrow & Gatwick in less than 20mins. Cargo could also be moved to Gatwick.
Also the environmental impact would reduce, I know Gatwick is surrounded by green land but long term would be less of an impact, the destruction and pollution caused by that and rebuild would make more of a negative impact than building on some grass if which some will still be there between the runways/taxiways
Gatwick is not fully surrounded by green land at all. You have a misconceived idea that is the case. On the northern flank you have horley a town of 23000 people some are only hundreds of yards from the airport boundary. Also to the south you have Crawley, a town of over 100000 people a bit further away and then villages all around it. Just almost like Heathrow. Yes Heathrow expansion would mean the loss of two villages under tarmac and concrete but Gatwick would lose out as well. Charlwood, would probably cease to existing sandwiched between two runways. Living in horley which is still expanding would be hard and the green barrier between the airport and Crawley would disappear
Perhaps both are going to be implemented
There is no way in hell, you would get night flights approved at any major airport in Europe, that does not have them currently.
And I get it, I spent a weekend in Frankfurt in a hotel right under the departing traffic and it was extremely annoying as soon as it set in in the morning.
The truth is, people living close to the airport don´t care for economic advantages for a country, noone would if it´s your sleep that gets ruined.
Erm, did they move there before the airport was built?
Peak time at DXB is midnight to 02:00 hrs 👍
In frankfurt planes are not allowed to fly from 11PM to 5AM... so saying that they benefit at night doesnt really make sense.
I live close to frankfurt airport and you hear nothing at night until 5AM.
@MaidenAir its because of noise not because of that.
Obviously, the third runway is going ahead, but could this have been a better alternative? I'm not saying this was a better solution, but rather presenting the pros and cons so that you can draw your own conclusions. Have a great day captains!
It would work for a short while but the our goverment is terrible and they have bigger problems to sort out. The third runway is the best idea but i exspect ot means changes to landing and take-off procedres.
Improve the connections between London and both Gatwick and Stansted. Make better use of those airports first.
Karl Johan Lea do you know how bad it is to connect between two airports? I did a LHR to Gatwick transfer not by choice and it was hell. I had to go through customs, and go to Gatwick on a bus, check in again just for my ticket, and then go through security again, and then get to my flight. Staying on the same property is more efficient, cost effective, and simply just better for people. I'd recommend trying a LHR to Gatwick transfer first before such proposal is even offered. On top of that, they lost my bags in transfer and my bag got sent to Romania. Didn't get it until three days after I arrived in my final destination
Who would want to change flights that involves a trip to another airport lol, the entire point of a Hub airport is easy connections. You either drop chasing the Hub traffic or do it properly.
For someone like me who lives around 15 miles south of Heathrow and has aspirations to become a pilot within the coming years, an expansion of LHR and also potentially LGW (around 30 miles away) is an exciting prospect. It would allow for great employment opportunities in a sector that is already in need of new pilots. It’s an exciting future indeed.
The alternative was ruining marsh land and habitats for many birds
Ah, like Seb Coe did for the Olympic event on Hackney Marshes?
Good job they were their own planning authority or it could never have happened.
He’s a theory, why don’t we expand Gatwick, move smaller aircraft to another airport
The NIMBYS are not going to allow night flights, your idea is dead in the water. IMO the third runway is needed and they should also move the cargo planes to Gatwick or Stansted.
No. NO.
NEJ!!! Give Gatwick or Luton something
add an extra runway at gatwick also in 2035 !
Why did the most cancerous name comment on this video?
Anyways, Luton is 😒 and 🤮
GLaDOS Gatwick then?
very interesting video. I have only used Heathrow airport about 3 times, last was in 2009. I do come from London; now live in Clacton on Sea, on the East coast so not many planes fly over this area. Night flights. would be very noisy for planes using the main flight paths.
the proposed 3rd runway was discussed in our Parliament many times and the go-ahead happened about a year ago; because many homes would need demolishing and new motorway road will need to be planned for a section in the
west side of the existing airport The government plans may be available, but I do not know when they can be seen
Both airport need run way when they going to start ??
Great grammar bud.
🙏
@@ricardosam8050 just to clarify im not trying to be mean or anything 😁
That’s fine u do what u got to do
London still have 2 airports to go for - Stansted & Gatwick...they can fill the roles like cargo, budget terminal & even hub for transcontinental flight...
Personally I think that both runways should be used for arrivals and departures so it eases the congestion for waiting to take off and also allows planes to land quicker instead of circling above London. I also think that the new runway should be used like Gatwick’s where it has arriving and departing flights, if Heathrow did this they’d be able to handle the traffic better.
Heathrow is already running at 99% capacity for over a decade and no other airport in the world would use departure methods as extreme as Heathrow to squeeze as many flights into those 2 runways as possible.
Most airports departure intervals at 60 - 90 secs, LHR has to make do with 30 secs by arranging departing aircraft to go in different directions to evade traffic and each other's wake turbulence. There really is no room for further capacity or margin for error.
Yat Sum Leung Surely if both runways are used for arrivals and departures then the capacity is stretched between the 2 and would mean less delays
I thought about this ages it makes so much sense. You can have a small ammount of night flights from the west for landings. The sounds bad but maybe only allow new gen quiter aircraft only not a380 or 747.
As expensive as the Thames Estuary Airport (or TEA as I call it) would be, I think it’s inevitable. Heathrow is located way too close to living areas. Build TEA and add a high speed rail links str8 to London, Manchester and Liverpool.
Or an expansion of Southend?
they should build an underground crossing for aircraft to move while aircraft are landing as in Altanta Georgia !
They should expand.
Yet another solid video
It's become really ridiculous in Heathrow now with so much traffic. Sometimes when a plane lands, you could spend 20 to 45mins waiting for a gate or parking bay, that is if you didn't spend minutes holding in the sky to land in the first place! About time they started working on a viable solution to the congestion!
I’ll never understand why progress is impeded by idiots who decide to build/buy houses near airports who don’t like the noise.
Get over it. Move away. Heathrow has so much lost opportunity because it caters to these folks.
If I were in charge I’d get rid of all restrictions AND build the 3rd runway! LHR can finally start competing with DXB again!
WE NEED YOU
England doesn’t have many legitimate real industries left, so this service-related expansion makes sense to keep LHR at the forefront of international commercial aviation in Europe.
"England [like most developed countries] doesn’t have many legitimate real industries left ... "
@@johnclayden1670 , unfortunately that's so true and scary for the working class, especially in light of AI and robotic automation.
@@lrg3834 ow shut up its The United kingdom and they do have ALOT OF INDUSTRY LEFT
@@cam8396 , not compared to what used to be there. Obviously you have no clue what's been outsourced and/or closed down over the years. Also, telling people to "shut up" is poor manners, and if you're British, highly un-British, okay?
I’m skeptical about this decision. The lack out space outside LHR is the main reason why they’re unable to expand too far. Heathrow itself is very congested. But will give more time and money to arrivals and departures bring easier and faster
Tha been good to have a new run way
give Gatwick and Heathrow new runways so that Gatwick can take all the low cost airlines
Really liked this video. Much more interesting than talking about the same old aircraft again and again.
No way anybody around would support night flights. It's bad enough to have to listen the A380s until almost midnight. Even now when I'm writing this comment I have to pause the video cause I don't hear anything due to an A380 flying above me. We will not accept this to happen over night every night.
I find A380's to be quieter compared to the likes of the 747 and A340
@@noahbowie5985 the problem with A380 is that despite being slightly quieter they hang above for longer due to their size. The others just fly over in 10-15 sec and they are gone but A380s just stay there for ages
@@fpupesh I see what you mean. So the noise isn't the problem it's the duration of said noise. I still think the A380 is a fantastic aircraft though.
@@noahbowie5985 I love all of them I just don't want them above my head in the middle of the night. :) And yes A380 is just an amazing piece of engineering.
@@fpupesh I understand how much that must annoy you. I live in Central London so I constantly hear planes fly overhead but as mentioned in this video. It doesn't affect me at night and the area I live in doesn't have too many flights above it as it's a bit too far north
Final plan isn’t agreed until October 2019
3rd runway may not happen now Boris Johnson is PM. He was vehemently against it and I would not be surprised if he scraps the idea in favour of his Boris Island plan in the Thomas estuary. Bonkers but then he is mad. It is blatantly obvious we need new air traffic capacity ASAP but as per usual in UK, government are too concerned about the damage such big decisions might have on their immediate electoral prospects. If anything ever happens, I will probably pass out with shock.
Why not making an big airport like new Istanbul airport outside the city?
Thereal Imp had the same idea but it’s so expensive...
Three Flashes I see it more like an invesment. They will earn that money back in no time because a new airport could handle way more pax and cargo traffic.
Because England does not have enough space
Heathrow need a third runway and also night time flight but the local communities have to be consider but im sorry to say in PC britain it will never be easy for much growth the job night flight for people who need work or these PC group who seem to complain about any and everything under the sun
That’s a bad idea they need to male a complete new airport somewhere else
Thats good and all but i t would be alot more money and plus people want to go to heathrow and not an airport miles away possibly even the other side of london
And also heathrow is private so they would not be the ones building it.
Im against, people important than tourists that ruin things
Well cargo flights should be moved, that’s gonna free up atleast 1%
90% of all Heathrow cargo arrive on passenger jet cargo holds. Freighters only account for a small percentage of Heathrow's traffic, compared with places like Hong Kong.
again look lion share of new transport projects again,hoping not up disaster like cross rail or final price HS2