Millions are dying every day due to global warming, and here we are talking about expanding Heathrow.
Every day polar bears are floating away on their lonely ice floes, while eco-criminal Branson wants to have more and more carbon footprints sullying the floors of Heathrow's pretty white tile floor

Peter Rice, Brighton, UK

Flying from Europe and transitting Heathrow is cheaper than journeys originating in the UK. There is less tax and security charge gained by the UK, so let AMS, CDG and MAD take on the role of super hubs, then British travellers can benefit from cheaper flights and have less polluted air & noise.

B Corbett, Miami, USA

One would expect Branson, of all people, to have greater vision. If planes solve the fuel problem and thus costs and demand are maintained, building at least 4 runways in the Estuary should be a goal. A modern airport for the 21st century.

michael c, london, uk

Its dissapointing to get the same tired old mantra of more capacity into an aiport that is bounded by residential communities and a road network that is already struggling to cope todays never mind the requirements of the next 40-50 years. Sound environmental case by adding more flights - Proof?

Bob, London,

With peak oil and climate change, a third Heathrow terminal is rather like a 4x4, expensive, unnecessary and outdated. Scrap internal flights, invest in high speed railways and gear up the Channel Tunnel to accept more freight. Then watch the airlines disappear one by one.

John Buckeridge, Harrow, EU

I thought aircraft were becoming more efficient and there sould be a need for less! Branson would say what he will from an airline prospctive, but at what cost the tranquility of rural life if Heathrow or Stanstead sprawls into peoples quality of life?!

Dave Farmer, Broxbourne, England

It is definitely hard luck if you live under the final approach flight path, and there should be fair compensation for those people.

But you can't sell out your tourist and international trade industries just because a few dozen people won't accept fair compensation.

Keith S, Winnipeg, Canada

The M4 cannot change it's size or location, so expansion at the airport they claim is so important to the City will not work.

Don't expand, relocate to Thames Estuary then the claimed lost jobs at Heathrow could be replaced by construction ones.

With any luck Branson would emigrate too!

Ken.H, Harrow, UK

"Don't run Heathrow into the ground" No need. The management have already been at that for years! Attempts to whitewash the image of our sorry principal airport fail abysmally under the constant barrage of customer complaints.

S. Barraclough, Huddersfield, W. Yorkshire

If the price of oil keeps rising at its current rate, air tickets will become so expensive that flying will be much curtailed - only for the very well off or the business traveller. Under those circumstances we will not need a third runway.

Nick, Charlotte, USA

Come on Branson, this isn't the 1980's. Heathrow is in the wrong place, we do not need a trade off between quality of life and the need for 'competing' hubs just to keep airlines in business. Life has moved on, so has the debate - so please catch up!

William, Bridgend, UK

We need a new airport built away from central London & an area of dense population: in the Thames Estuary. Heathrow blights the lives of millions & if a disaster occurs thousands will be affected. If Branson is so concerned to develop UK flight capacity he can make a large donation to a new airport.

Donna Walker, Effingham, England

I used H'Row last Friday night to fly to Stockholm. The flight was at 8:00 pm. I left Southend at 3.30 pm and it took 3 hours to drive around the M25. I just managed to catch my flight. The traffic infrastructure just isn't there - put H'Row out on a purpose built island in the Thames Estuary.

Dan, Southend,

Sir Richard would be more credible if he said he would be prepared to live under the Heathrow flight path and forego retreating to his West Indian island.

michael m, rye, east sussex

i do agree on the transit passenger but lets look at a example.
you fly from Nairobi and to Brussels via heathrow....it is a nightmare between the 2 terminals. You have to be Kenyan marathon runner to link the 2 terminals .
then you have the pasport control, once again.....

It is not very nice

mark, london,

Heathrow is in the wrong location - incidents on M25, M3, M4 or M40 and the road approach to Heathrow is gridlocked. BAA may be willing to invest in their business, but successive governments have baulked at road and rail infrastructure to serve the airport.

Michael Nye, Colnbrook, Slough, U.K.

With fuel prices at record levels all projections for future demand on capacity are pure speculation and likely seriously overestimated.

Sorry Richard, but the economic case for a third runway is far from "proven".

Ed Zuiderwijk, Cambridge, UK

LHR is unlike other airports. It's one of the busiest in the world so you can't compare it to other smaller airports. I flew two years ago at the height of the terrorism scare and the service was superb. Even under the extreme stress, the staff were all friendly and reassuring.

Matt, Frankfurt,

BA say that the existing runways can handle more aircraft by changing the way they are used. This would increase the capacity of the runways.

Many of the passengers are using LHR to transit onwards so it doesn't really matter to them which UK airport they use

alan, edinburgh, uk

I was uncertain about whether or not we ought to expand Heathrow, but Richard Branson's intervention has made my mind up for me. If the Bearded on wants it- we shouldn't have it. We'd be much better advised t build the new esturine airport east of London and gradually turn Heathrow into a business.

Mark, Hitchin, UK

If we had high speed rail links through the UK and to Europe, and decent rail connections to Heathrow, then we could eliminate nearly a third of Heathrow's flights. Then Heathrow would be a better place for Branson's planes and he could make more money from running the new train services. Win-win!

Colin Elliff, Harrogate, Yorkshire

Heathrow is geographically badly placed. In the UK the wind mostly blows from the west and east and so Heathrow's runways are alligned to take advantage of this. However, this means that the flights take off and land over West London. Surely we should look elsewhere for an airport expansion ?

Marcus, London, United Kingdom

Heathrow belongs to the Kai Tak and Templehof generation - its location is now obsolete and should become a business park, which would be highly profitable to its owners. Londoners and airlines would also profit from a new airport in the Estuary, where jobs are badly needed. Everyone can win.

michael c, london, uk

In our part of the country, Amsterdam and Paris already are the hubs for long-distance flights. There are no flights from Birmingham to Heathrow and nobody would choose to drive to Heathrow, park there and endure its hellish inefficiency if they could go via Schipol.

Frank Uptun, Solihull,

More partisan, biased rubbish from the airline industry. If we give in now there will be a 7th terminal and a 4th runway debate in a few years - just like T5 was to be the last request. SAY NO TO BAA AND THEIR PUPPY DOG - GORDON BROWN AND HIS SUPPORTIVE GOOD FOR NOTHING GOVERNMENT !

Tusker, London, UK

I fly Virgin but I won't use LHR anymore. Gatwick is fine but if I go to say San. Fran. I use Manchester and for European Flts. Bristol. There is always an alternative to LHR even if it is not going!

R James, Clifton, UK

I never realised airport building is a competition. So we might 'lose' to Paris or Amsterdam or Frankfurt. So what? At least we'll be able to sleep through the night and breath cleaner air.

Saying we must have more capacity at LHR is like saying we must have more cancer.

Ken Nunn, London,

Heathrow is horrible. If you're a Londoner, you can take the tube, I suppose. The rest of us find it impossible to get to. When you arrive, you can't park or stay locally at any reasonable price or comfort. The road layout is Byzantine. It's the pits.

Roger Pearse, Ipswich,

The problems at LHR are not cured by a 3rd runway. They are cured by an apt operator giving a great passenger service. As RB says other cities have big new airports of whihc they are proud. Lets us be radical and give the same to London. God help us if we still have LHR in2012.

Patrick Devlin, Taipei, Taiwan

It has nothing to do with runways. Heathrow always has been awful. Many years ago I was punched and knocked to the ground by a baggage handler simply because it was HIS job to remove my skis. Arrogance and dreadfully long queues simply to change planes are the norm. Avoid like the plague.

B Redfern, Zdole, Slovenia

Remarkable that we have fewer runways than the 1940's? At that time, we were a nation at war with aggressive self interest seeking to impose its will on others. And now....
Hmm, maybe it is remarkable....

Mike Van-Gent, Luton, UK

The Thames Estuary is the only sensible place for London's airport, complete with high speed rail links to London, North & West and to the Continent. Heathrow can then be made into housing that London so desperately needs...complete with excellent transport links!

Tim Carpenter LPUK, London, United Kingdom

Another self interested individual who wants to ensure his own profit not the life of peiople. Heathrow is in the wroing place it will if it grows mean 'increased morbidity' - RB seems to be comfortable with this - Is he comfortable with asthma for kids and the risks more aviation brings? Surely no

christian.ball, London, UK

Heathrow is a catastrophe waiting to happen.

There were more than twenty near misses - collisions over London - in 2006/7. This risk increases with the SQUARE of the number of flights. If the third runway is built 50% extra will be allowed, more than doubling this already grave hazard.

Noel Falconer, COUIZA, France

Heathrow is in the wrong location for a modern flight hub. Other cities in Europe have their airports to the north or south so that the flight paths are not over centres of population. Build a new third runway, but only as a temporary solution until a new airport and high-speed rail link by 2050.

Stewart Ware, London, UK

This is not a debate. Branson has outlined his case for, and the against response is rehashed personal invective or misrepresentation.
I bet Virgin is already studying its options very closely so that when Heathrow is finally sunk by bile they can quickly re-establish themselves somewhere worthwhile

Paul M, Puerto del Rosario, Spain

Of course Branson would have this opinion wouldn`t he writing from his quiet country mansion in deepest Oxforshire , he will back his personal interests.

Try living under this noisy and polluting operation which stifles your quality of lfe actively by noise and pollution 18 hours a day.

mike, Slough, UK

There's me thinking I was clicking on an article about our dire trains and how, in the north atleast, waiting for one is a joke.
Public, fast, frequent, safe (asin teenagers), accessible trains are what we need the taxpayer's money to go on, now and in the longterm.
Or atleast subsidise train's fuel

Tom, lancs,

A pointless and sterile debate. Heathrow is just simply in the wrong place, even more so post 9/11. Heathrow should be moved to the best side of London, given the prevailing winds. over London.

David Evans, Rotherham, S.Yorks

Heathrow's attractiveness? get real Richard how often do you use it as a normal passenger to make this comment? Never. It is diabolical, about as attractive as catching the plague, its already to late and something to be avoided, fly from Manchester, that's much nicer

Ian, Wirral, UK

with oil prices going up and up and up and air travel getter more and more expensive, less people travel by air. so why add a 3rd runway or add more concrete to what is there already?

michael penck, adelaide , australia

Forget a 3rd runway, build new and off/on shore as many other countries in the world have. Oh and start digging today! Only BAA/Ferrovial will benefit from rw 3 not the country or the thousands of people who's lives will be blighted.

Mel, Interlaken, Switzerland

Another short sighted view motivated by personal greed !
We are facing new runways at Stansted, Heathow, Gatwick and major expansion at Luton.
A new 24hr 4 runway airport in the Thames estuary will cater for growth and remove the 40% transfer passengers cluttering up Heathrow.

Peter Hooper, Windsor, UK

Who actually uses Heathrow local traffic of transit? if the later find another place. Join the big four with a Hi speed Maglev rail. Gatwick, Heathrow, Stanstead and Luton they are Londons capacity. Britain is more than London, decentralise. To central London is quicker from Gatwick than Heathrow.

Alexander, victoria, seychelles

"Does the UK want to shift the demand to fly ----and the thousands of jobs---to its European rivals? Asks Richard Branson. Agree and you will be branded paranoid but as virtually every other stake Britain once had in the modern world has been sold out so why not this industry also?

D.L. Stephens, York, England

It is remarkable that the South East of England has fewer runways today than in the 1940s.

Naughty Richard-you are including bomber and fighter commands!
is your battle for market share with lufthansa about to escalate?
and UK PLC, you mean S E England PLC.
Londoncentric thinking.

fraser kelly, singapore, singapore

Branson is only interested is in lining his own pockets. I bet he doesn't live under the flight path. Let him move to Madrid, or Paris, or Bombay, or wherever. Goodbye and good riddance.

Gordon, Glasgow,

More like the future properity of Branson willbe held back ----!!

OZ, Perth,

About time the economic & environmental case for a 3rd runway was properly argued and this knocks the opposition into a cocked hat. LHR's probelms are due to its success. Yes its ideally situated for its unique function relative to the UK and Europe and there are no alternatives in our crowded isle.

Alastair, Rye, UK

Why would investment at Heathrow improve the airport? It's an outdated relic and painting 'go faster' stripes is a poor solution. It's in the wrong location and is completely mismanaged. The EU hubs are successful because their governments have invested in new airports not facelifts the outdated.

Rich, London,

Richard Branson cannot run a railway never mind an airline. Have you ever been to the loo on the virgen line to the west country? You need wellies to go in. If you can't run the little things, how can you run the big ones.

M Wilson, Bidache, france