Shivering sand is thirty kilometres further east which puts those corridors you mentioned over the less heavily populated areas in the vicinity of Foulness Island......
This thread is about the Norman Foster proposal to site a new airport on the Isle of Grain. The proposed site is at the eastern end of the IOG, with an east/west runway alignment. From the diagrams provided, it shows that the extended centrelines of the 4 parallel runways, to the west, lie over Grays, Tilbury, the Dartford crossing, to the Erith & Bexleyheath area.
Population densities closer in to the proposed site are relatively low, but increase towards outer London. However, when landing from this direction (easterly landing configuration), aircraft have to get to that final approach path. Whatever efforts are made to design airspace and procedures to keep approaching aircraft in this runway configuration to the east of central London, we can be pretty sure that there will be significant impact to the east of a line from approximately the M25/M11 junction, through London City airport, to the M25/M26 junction at Chipstead.
From the Dartford Crossing eastwards will be the equivalent of Heathrow to Central London, in terms of being directly under the final approach flightpath.
Naturally, there will be far less disturbance to central London than at present, although depending on what other airports continue to operate, it's not inconceivable that aircraft may still have to route over the capital, albeit at higher levels than they do now.
So far, I have only described the "easterly" landing configuration. When in a "westerly" configuration, which will be the predominant arrangement due to the prevailing winds; the area to the west of the IOG will be subject to the noise from departing aircraft, which will all take-off towards the capital.
There is some scope for designing minimum noise routings to avoid the most densely populated areas, however, there will be an impact on those settlements in N Kent, S Essex and the edges of outer London.
Again, depending on which other airports are to continue in operation, the design of the various departure routes and procedures may require some aircraft to pass over London.
To the east of the proposed site, which is mostly water, the minimal effects are self evident, whatever direction of landing and departure is in force. I have no idea how much noise impact will affect Southend and Shoeburyness to the north (due to proximity and sound carrying across the estuary).
However, the north Kent coast from Whitstable to Margate and the Isle of Sheppey is almost certain to be affected by noise from both arriving or departing aircraft.
The point is that all the areas described currently do not suffer from the level of aircraft noise that will result from this proposal being carried forward.
If Heathrow closes as a result, it is true that there will be a benefit to hundreds of thousands, if not a couple of million people being relieved of noise from low flying aircraft. However that benefit is not without an environmental cost elsewhere.
It's naïvety in the extreme (I'm speaking in general here and not attacking anyone) to believe that all aircraft movements associated with the Norman Foster IOG plan will be carried out over water.
.
