Sir, -The letter from Jeremy Rodell (January 25th) concerning the ineptitude of BAA in not answering the simple question, on which nights will Richmond be free of aircraft noise?' is easy to understand if one appreciated the conflicts of interests which BAA is subject to.

It is a public company quoted on the London Stock Exchange and one of its purposes in life is to expand its operations at Heathrow.

BAA is not an independent organisation as far as flight evaluation is concerned. Recently for example, it has joined other interested parties in forming Freedom to Fly, whose aim is to expand the airport at Heathrow.

At the present time, BAA's flight evaluation office denies there has been a change in flight patterns, when clearly there has been.

The flight evaluation records are not kept up to date; letters are not answered and misleading information is fed to the public. It is perfectly clear that BAA is not the proper body to do this work and it should be taken away from them and given to an independent party.

Perhaps Arthur Andersen might have time available!

Whilst on the subject of BAA, it might be more appropriate for that company to spend some money on Terminal 1 and existing facilities rather than a fifth terminal.

The short stay car park would not be tolerated in a third world country.

-A D Dawson, Hillbrow, Richmond Hill

Sir, -No sooner had Terminal 5 been announced, than the government said it wanted a third runway at Heathrow.

From past experience, what the government and big business want, they get. So the third runway is almost a certainty.

The new planning laws will mean that there is unlikely to be a public inquiry and we can force the prospect of devastating effects on massive areas of the south east. Communities whose lives are currently blighted by aircraft noise will suffer not only the effects of the gigantic new terminal, but the inevitable loss of runway alternation, and the prospect of further night flights. Many areas currently unaffected by noise will have their lives wrecked as well.

Our record at fighting Heathrow's expansion has been dismal. Local MPs make the right noises but have had no effect whatsoever.

Our local councils have proved impotent in the face of determined and arrogant government officials.

The tens of thousands of objections letters to MPs and the T5 inquiry and the huge march along Whitehall were all ignored. The valiant, passionate and painstaking work by volunteers at HACAN and Friends of the Earth proved a poor match against BAA's expensive propaganda and professional lobbyists. Even when the residents thought they had won a victory in the European Courts over night flights, the government is fighting it.

So, what can we do about it? If this was France, all roads to the airport would have already been blocked by angry objectors in their tractors. We desperately need the government to listen, and to understand that Heathrow is one of the most environmentally unfriendly places for a major airport. If they won't listen, then maybe we should get our tractors out?

-Ian Swankie, Shaftesbury Road, Richmond.