Heathrow has announced plans to ban night flights in an attempt to boost its bid to build a third runway.
It will support the introduction of an independent noise authority, and pledged not to add new capacity unless it can do so without delaying UK compliance with EU air quality limits.
The west London hub also revealed it would accept any Government decision to rule out building a fourth runway in the future.
In July last year the Airports Commission recommended that a third runway should be built at Heathrow alongside a "significant" package of measures to make Heathrow's expansion more acceptable to nearby residents.
Heathrow chief executive John Holland-Kaye has written to Prime Minister David Cameron claiming that expansion would provide a boost to the economy while balancing the impact on the environment.
The letter stated: "You set up the Airports Commission and it unanimously recommended expanding Heathrow. You demanded ambitious plans from my team to deliver expansion with a bold and fair deal for our neighbours.
"Today, I am proud to submit a comprehensive plan that meets and exceeds your demands. This is a big commitment from us, but it is the right choice for the country, local communities and jobs across Britain.
"We have acted now to let you and your government make the right choice, in the long-term interest of our country. It will enable you to choose Heathrow and secure a stronger economy and Britain's place in the world.
"Expanding Heathrow can help Britain win thousands more jobs and ensure that future generations have the same economic opportunity that we have enjoyed."
The commission recommend a ban on scheduled night flights from 11.30pm to 6am, but Heathrow has proposed that the restrictions should be in place from 11pm to 5.30am.
John Stewart, chairman of the main anti-Heathrow expansion group Hacan, said: "Heathrow's decision to move on night flights could turn out to be significant.
"Hacan has long campaigned for a ban on flights before 6am but things have remained the same for decades. Heathrow's proposals may prise open a door on night flights that has been firmly closed for 25 years."
In December the Department for Transport confirmed that the commission's shortlisted options - new runways at Heathrow or Gatwick, or extension of an existing runway at Heathrow - were "viable".
But it also announced that further work on noise, pollution and compensation - which it expects to be concluded "over the summer" - will be carried out before it makes a decision on which project to support.
London's newly-elected mayor Sadiq Khan's manifesto stated that he would oppose a third runway at Heathrow.
He pledged to continue to call for expansion at Gatwick as a "more viable, cheaper and easier to build alternative" even if the Government pursues the Heathrow option.
The Commons' Transport Select Committee published a report last week which urged ministers to set out a clear timetable for airport expansion after claiming the arguments for and against increasing aviation capacity "have changed little in a quarter of a century".
Mr Holland-Kaye claimed the airport is "going beyond" the commission's recommendations.
"That means a cleaner, quieter Heathrow delivering more for the UK economy and that clears the way for the Prime Minister to make the right choice to expand Heathrow and deliver a stronger economy," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.
Heathrow has proposed that the Environment Agency should be given the role of an independent aviation air quality authority to scrutinise the airport's plans.
Mr Holland-Kaye said: "We have had no more cars on the road even though over the last 25 years ... Heathrow has almost doubled the number of passengers, and that is because we have invested in better road connections, better bus services and better rail services.
"That is part of our plan. We can make sure that Heathrow will expand within EU air quality limits."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article