Because of the proximity to LHR air space.

Yes, Please can I have 5 years warning before we start to move LHR. My house in Weybridge will loose its value. Even more than members of my family spend on shoes.

A new airport in the Thames estuary could be built within 14 years, only two years longer than would be needed to build a third runway at Heathrow, according to new research.

The research has been done by Foster + Partners who - oddly enough - have a plan for an airport in the Thames estuary.

Funny that! ;) :p Yes it possibly could be built in 14 years if you don't count the time needed for the public enquiry, legal challenges, etc.

I love the comment from Clive Hurst on the Telegraph site
Here is someone who has no idea what he is talking about, given NATS say that the approach and departure will be over London for Boris Island.

I prefer another comment more:

:D

To be honest yes. When i lived in London Bridge I just used the early morning arrivals of all the wide bodies from the Far East as my alarm clock. In the absence of background noise at that hour the 747s are LOUD, even so far out on the approach. I dread to think what it's like living in Hounslow.

edited to add: as soon as the traffic starts around 7am you cant hear a thing from the aircraft.

Fortunately I'm a very heavy sleeper because I have never woken up despite having planes flying overhead in various places I have lived.

I live in the Royal Borough, which is close to the flight path and IME the aircraft noise is not a major issue here. As you say, traffic noise is more permanent and more intrusive.

Justine Greening has been replaced as Transport Secretary. She was a firm opponent to a 3rd runway, so this could be Cameron preparing for a change of policy...

Indeed its possible it will happen now.

I dont know much about Patrick McLoughlin, what his policy is.

I live under the flight paths of LHR (RBKC too), SYD and the former flight path to Kai Tak, and agree. Even in the early morning, the noise of a single car driving past is louder than a plane.

That is surprising. I live in NW6, which thankfully is only subject to LHR noise during part of the day - but even here it can be quite bothersome, especially on quiet summer evenings! When I first moved to London I briefly lived near Clapham Junction, and it was really bad there.

London would certainly be a more pleasant city to live in, for millions of people who live under LHR's flight paths, if LHR were to be down-scaled in the future in favour of a larger, more capable, more efficient hub.

In any case, the 3rd runway is not going to happen. Nick Clegg and Theresa May have both reaffirmed in recent days that the governments position has not changed on this. If David Cameron were to U-turn, he would look like a liar and a fool - and set up the Tories to lose a lot of marginal London seats in 2015.

I think Justine Greening's move out of the transport secretary position may well have had as much to do with the recent west coast rail franchise debacle as it does with LHR. Although it may have also been done to improve the administration's impartiality (and thus credibility) on the airport capacity issue.

Do you find, during the days of light rain the planes often fly lower or are noiser.

No.

Aircraft fly established traffic patterns, so they will invariably be at the same height. That's the way it all works - safely.

It is possible that noise attaches itself to raindrops, but I doubt it. BotB will be able to advise. It may be that an overcast sky allows a bit of noise reflection - possibly.

Sound will certainly reflect off low clouds and rain, so this could well be responsible for planes seeming louder during rain, as origin has observed.

This is why thunder tends to be followed by drawn out rumbling, the sound waves are reflecting off different clouds at different distances from you.