Originally Posted by
Herod
It's about time someone realised that because a field was selected as London Airport immediately after the war doesn't mean it's the right place for the foreseeable future. This argument will still run for a long time.
It's about time that someone realized that once an airport is there, you should not be building residential neighborhoods around it. Problem is: people want convenient access to a large international airport, but don't want it in their backyard. You see the same thing all around the world: airports built in the 50s, 60s and 70s, and then residential neighborhoods being built around them. And 30 years later, people complain about the noise and pollution, and demand that the airports be closed or moved. I do feel sorry for the inconvenience, but 99.9% of people knew about the airport before they moved in. I live within 10 miles of an airport myself, and I knew that when I bought my house. Of course I can't go and demand that the airport be moved. I work within 1 mile of an airport. In fact, I walked to my interview from the airport on interview day. Yes, it can get noise in the office during peak times. But I knew that before I accepted the job offer. Want me to hold up a sign to move the airport? Of course not.
Heathrow is a vital piece of infrastructure to the U.K. economy. Those transfer passengers are flown in and flown out by U.K. based airlines, bringing U.K. based jobs and U.K. based revenue.
That said, there are many options to mitigate the impact to the surrounding communities: alternate flight paths, a ban on scheduled flights between 11pm and 6am, and many other things. These should all be considered so that Heathrow can at least try to be a good neighbor.