Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

HEATHROW

Old 31st Aug 2014, 23:53
  #3221 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Boris Johnson: third runway at Heathrow would be a 'disaster' | Environment | theguardian.com

Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson has taken time out from having sexual relations with women who are not his wife, his part time mayoralty and full time ego massaging to decry the barbaric and health risking possibility of not building the airport he sees cementing his name in history.
As a mere pleb who has been forced to undertake real work to make ends meet, I can only gaze with astonishment at the man's famed intellect.

I did not know LHR was 100 times noisier than CDG. Must be all those Tridents.... It really bugs me when people misuse stats like that. It's lying, plain and simple.
Skipness One Echo is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2014, 08:56
  #3222 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: London
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Johnson's tenuous link to truth -telling is legendary. Ego gone wild.
jdcg is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2014, 15:19
  #3223 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: MAN
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
While I agree with you, Skip, on the clear case for LHR expansion I don't think we should be glib about the noise issues. LHR is vastly worse on this issue than other London airports and this has to be faced. It is a difficult issue.

While Boris is being a bit apocalyptic in his comments I'm not sure we can accuse him of lying. An airport's noise impact is normally measured by the number of people who live within specific noise contours. I don't have the figures for CDG, but if we look at the LEQ57 noise contour for example Heathrow is 65 times worse than LGW and 192 times worse than STN. For higher levels of noise exposure LHR comes out even worse, ie 90 times LGW or 230 times STN at the LEQ60 noise level.

Again I'm not trying to argue against LHR expansion but we can't pretend this isn't a real problem.

(Source 2012 data at https://www.gov.uk/government/public...ondon-airports)
BasilBush is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2014, 17:27
  #3224 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,786
Received 196 Likes on 90 Posts
While Boris is being a bit apocalyptic in his comments I'm not sure we can accuse him of lying.
He's quoted as saying: "Heathrow is already by far the noisiest airport in Europe, about a hundred times worse than Paris."

While the first part of his statement can't be disputed, I can't think of any metric that supports the 100x assertion.

In round terms, there are about 5x as many people living within Heathrow's 55db Lden contour than within CDG's (roughly three quarters of a million vs about 150,000)
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2014, 18:59
  #3225 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: MAN
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes, I see now that CDG wasn't the best comparator for Boris to use. It's the third worst airport in Europe from a noise perspective, after LHR and FRA. Not much evidence of fact checking in his Telegraph article then...
BasilBush is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2014, 19:02
  #3226 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I was having a chat on the Northern Perimeter Road on Sunday as a B788 accelerated past on take off power. I did not have to as much as raise my voice. Boris is being selective as this is all about him and his place in history.
LGW had no one living on either approach, nor has STN but hard choices need to be made. You know, actual real and grown up decisions. Pfeffel is being wholly misleading for his own ends. Again.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...ommission.html

* sounds of dummy being spat out
Despite the setback, Daniel Moylan, chief aviation adviser to London’s Mayor, suggested Mr Johnson would not surrender over a Thames Estuary airport, hinting that he would resurrect the battle next year if he gains a seat in Parliament. Mr Johnson is seeking to become the Conservative candidate for Uxbridge and South Ruislip at the next general election.
Again, why is this millionaire politician and former banker, allowed to call himself an adviser on aviation?
http://politicalscrapbook.net/2011/0...-salary-boris/
Cos it's who you know...

Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 1st Sep 2014 at 19:56.
Skipness One Echo is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2014, 19:43
  #3227 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 5,675
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes on 17 Posts
Boris has been defeated - for now at least

BBC News - Boris Island airport plan 'to be rejected'
davidjohnson6 is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2014, 06:41
  #3228 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,630
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 14 Posts
I see that Sky News (the television version) this morning is describing Boris Island as a proposed airport "In East London".

Do journalists have the faintest idea what they are writing about nowadays ?
WHBM is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2014, 12:19
  #3229 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: North, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 936
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Boris just claimed on Radio 5 it would cost as much to build a new runway at LHR as build Boris Island.
pwalhx is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2014, 22:59
  #3230 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Age: 32
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Any timeline for the demolition of the CTA primary radar tower? I'm guessing it's going with T1 post 2015.. Bring on the 3rd runway . Also are there any plans to upgrade the CTA tube station?
FlyingEagle21 is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2014, 23:53
  #3231 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
While I agree with you, Skip, on the clear case for LHR expansion I don't think we should be glib about the noise issues. LHR is vastly worse on this issue than other London airports and this has to be faced. It is a difficult issue.

While Boris is being a bit apocalyptic in his comments I'm not sure we can accuse him of lying. An airport's noise impact is normally measured by the number of people who live within specific noise contours. I don't have the figures for CDG, but if we look at the LEQ57 noise contour for example Heathrow is 65 times worse than LGW and 192 times worse than STN. For higher levels of noise exposure LHR comes out even worse, ie 90 times LGW or 230 times STN at the LEQ60 noise level.

Again I'm not trying to argue against LHR expansion but we can't pretend this isn't a real problem.
I was having a chat on the Northern Perimeter Road on Sunday as a B788 accelerated past on take off power. I did not have to as much as raise my voice. Boris is being selective as this is all about him and his place in history.
Look at the long time-line proposed for the third rwy as suggested by the Commission. Noise won’t be a problem by the time the rwy(s) is/are built, if they ever are, all the aircraft we now consider to be “noisy” (e.g. B747-400s) will be long gone.



Yes, I see now that CDG wasn't the best comparator for Boris to use. It's the third worst airport in Europe from a noise perspective, after LHR and FRA. Not much evidence of fact checking in his Telegraph article then...
No change there then.




LGW had no one living on either approach, nor has STN but hard choices need to be made. You know, actual real and grown up decisions. Pfeffel is being wholly misleading for his own ends. Again.
Exactly.



Again, why is this millionaire politician and former banker, allowed to call himself an adviser on aviation?
My guess is that no “aviation advisor” who actually knew anything about aviation would tolerate this drivel.

How much public money has been wasted on this nonsense?




I see that Sky News (the television version) this morning is describing Boris Island as a proposed airport "In East London".

Do journalists have the faintest idea what they are writing about nowadays ?
Typical sloppy journalism, they are more interested in political correctness rather than geographical correctness, there is also no word for “geography” in Journalese.




Boris just claimed on Radio 5 it would cost as much to build a new runway at LHR as build Boris Island.
…and there are going to be 200,000 residents in the “redeveloped” Heathrow. That would mean several living on the streets, the Heathrow site isn’t that big.

Maybe the tune will change once Boris is the candidate in Uxbridge, many residents work on the airport and would probably quite like to keep their jobs.
Fairdealfrank is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2014, 23:46
  #3232 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
...and now we may be building another runway to service "the regions" , slight problem those regions may be in a new Country in 2 weeks.

Will Scotland really want to use LHR as much as those who want RW3 say they will, I doubt it given tonight's news. It's arrogance to think so.

And where on earth is Davies this has to be a significant change !
Bagso is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2014, 08:00
  #3233 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
the sole purpose of Davies is to delay until after the next election

If Scotland goes out we can then have another commission which will report in 2021 after the NEXT election
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2014, 08:28
  #3234 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,786
Received 196 Likes on 90 Posts
Will Scotland really want to use LHR as much as those who want RW3 say they will
Whatever the result of the referendum on the 18th, Glasgow, Edinburgh and Aberdeen are all going to be the same distance from London as they are today (roughly as far as Cologne/Bonn and Frankfurt, respectively).

Why would you expect the loads on those routes to reduce just because you need to start carrying your passport?
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2014, 09:49
  #3235 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Perth WA
Posts: 647
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
why would you need to carry passport....am sure agreement will be struck on that similar to inter euroland...and anyway most pax ex scotland probably all carry passport to LHR as on connecting flights...and just about all who fly EZY etc are passport carriers ex Scotland to LUT/LGW/STN etc etc...
nivsy is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2014, 13:20
  #3236 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Oil Capital of Central Scotland
Age: 56
Posts: 480
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts
Nivs..... There may be no option,but to carry your passport if the vote goes for independence.


Part of Alex's aim is to re-join the EU, so signing up to the Euro is mandatory for ALL new entrants - non negotiable. (Which he conveniently forgets). Plus a whole host of other conditions, some negotiable, some not, including Schengen. Hence it may well be necessary to carry your passport, or national ID card to fly between the two.
I don't claim to be an expert on all the implications of the Schengen Agreement on border controls, but I believe that there are different, probably bi-lateral, arrangements at land borders than operate at air or sea ports. So it's possible that there may be no need for a passport to drive across the border, but it will be needed to fly.
The corollary is also that a yes vote might well force the issue for a UK-wide introduction of ID cards.
Donkey497 is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2014, 14:07
  #3237 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Little RED

Branson U-turn as new British airline to shut | The Sunday Times
fjencl is online now  
Old 7th Sep 2014, 14:25
  #3238 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: BHX LXR ASW
Posts: 2,269
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
If that's the case I'm sure SRB will cry foul and blame everybody else for unfair competition as he always does when things go wrong.
crewmeal is offline  
Old 8th Sep 2014, 21:53
  #3239 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
...and now we may be building another runway to service "the regions" , slight problem those regions may be in a new Country in 2 weeks.

Will Scotland really want to use LHR as much as those who want RW3 say they will, I doubt it given tonight's news. It's arrogance to think so.

And where on earth is Davies this has to be a significant change !

It’s not a significant change for the Airports Commission, Scottish secession has no bearing on the need for LHR expansion.


Whatever the result of the referendum on the 18th, Glasgow, Edinburgh and Aberdeen are all going to be the same distance from London as they are today (roughly as far as Cologne/Bonn and Frankfurt, respectively).

Why would you expect the loads on those routes to reduce just because you need to start carrying your passport?

why would you need to carry passport....am sure agreement will be struck on that similar to inter euroland...and anyway most pax ex scotland probably all carry passport to LHR as on connecting flights...and just about all who fly EZY etc are passport carriers ex Scotland to LUT/LGW/STN etc etc...

Nivs..... There may be no option,but to carry your passport if the vote goes for independence.
It's not been debated, but the chances are that a breakaway Scotland would be part of the Common Travel Area with the UK and Ireland.


Part of Alex's aim is to re-join the EU, so signing up to the Euro is mandatory for ALL new entrants - non negotiable. (Which he conveniently forgets). Plus a whole host of other conditions, some negotiable, some not, including Schengen. Hence it may well be necessary to carry your passport, or national ID card to fly between the two.

Nothing is "non-negotiable". If a separated Scotland was re-admitted to the EU (i.e. Spain or any other country did not use a veto), would imagine that Salmond would ask for a very similar deal to that of the UK.

If it was not granted, Salmond could walk away. After all, two out of the three countries in the so-called "arc of prosperity" which he wishes to be part of, are outside the EU.




I don't claim to be an expert on all the implications of the Schengen Agreement on border controls, but I believe that there are different, probably bi-lateral, arrangements at land borders than operate at air or sea ports. So it's possible that there may be no need for a passport to drive across the border, but it will be needed to fly.

A country can be a recent member of the EU and not in the eurozone (by never joining the ERM) and not in Schengen (by never having secure borders) even if in theory they're obliged to join both.



The corollary is also that a yes vote might well force the issue for a UK-wide introduction of ID cards.

Both Labour and Conservative governments have tried to introduce identity cards (encouraged by the EU of course) and both came badly unstuck, and rightly so.
Fairdealfrank is offline  
Old 11th Sep 2014, 21:09
  #3240 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Birmingham
Age: 63
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Over 7m pax in August

7.03m busiest ever month
BHX5DME is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.