| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:I'm all for Heathrow expansion (not). | |
| Posted by: | Tom Pike | |
| Date/Time: | 28/11/07 14:35:00 |
| My belief, as I said earlier in the other thread, is that a return to alternation of the current runways is the most likely outcome with a third runway. Certainly mixed mode will no longer then be possible. But there is potential for a pact with the Devil as far as residents of Grove Park and BAA are concerned. As for departures over Dukes Meadows in this scenario, only 6% of flights are predicted to travel that route. I think landings on the southern runway are likely to cause greater noise, judging by the 57 dB contour just nudging into the southern tip of Grove Park (the images in the technical report are slightly clearer). Ending the Cranford agreement marginally increases the chosen yardstick of the 57dB contour area, so given the political costs I might have expected it to stay. If a third runway comes in, the agreement becomes history, and a noise comparison in that case was not even modelled. |