Fourth Kent hub airport proposal unveiled

[jackharr]

BBC News - Fourth Kent hub airport proposal unveiled (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20783474)

Is this new?

[BOAC]

Only 4th? I believe the Goodwin Sands are a little 'mobile' so they could probably tow this airport around if noise complaints get too much.

How does one handle the necessary expansion there eg extra runways.

[DaveReidUK]

Judging from the website of the company in question - Beckett Rankine - airport design and development is notably absent from their list of skills and expertise.

Still, it's a great way to get some cheap publicity, for not much more than the cost of registering a domain name. :O

http://www.goodwinairport.com/dls/RP/Plan_for_Goodwin_Sands_Airport.pdf

[Dannyboy39]

But Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) spokesman Jamie Weir said: "Many South East airports such as Manston currently have plenty of runway capacity, so why are new airport proposals being pitched on a daily basis?

When are people going to grasp the fact that this is not the issue!! :mad:

[jackharr]

I seem to recall that the objection to Manston was that the westerly approach or eastern departure would pass over a built-up area, namely Ramsgate.

Clearly Ramsgate rates more favourable treatment than London.

Jack

[davidjohnson6]

Dannyboy - you fail to grasp that most people and voters in the UK are not particularly knowledgable on the economics of aviation but think they know everything anyway. Given that, any half competent lobby group knows that the main way to ensure they triumph is to issue plenty of press releases containing lots of spin that are portrayed as facts for lazy journalists to then recycle in publications. As long as it cannot be shown to be a lie, spin can easily be used to divert people's attention between the relevant issues and sow confusion, fear, uncertainty and doubt.

We live in a society where soundbites and spin captures people's attention - may as well just get used to it.

[BALHR]

Waht we really need is a 4 runway LHR...

If that can't be done, then we should close them all down and build a 8-10 runway THA/Goodwin (anf stick to 1 plan, not 4...)

[ajfreeman]

BALHR you clearly have no clue about aviation or infrastructure of an airport and how airlines operate at all judging by your posts!

[Aero Mad]

10 runway THA/Goodwin

Hahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahaha :);):D:eek:

How very funny. :D

Please................................................. :ugh:

[Dannyboy39]

then we should close them all down and build a 8-10 runway THA/Goodwin (anf stick to 1 plan, not 4...)

I do hope you're on a wind up!

[Fairdealfrank]

Quote:
"Fourth Kent hub airport proposal unveiled
BBC News - Fourth Kent hub airport proposal unveiled (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20783474)

Is this new?"

Yawwwwwn. Is this London-Dover (White Cliffs) airport?



Quote: "Dannyboy - you fail to grasp that most people and voters in the UK are not particularly knowledgable on the economics of aviation but think they know everything anyway. Given that, any half competent lobby group knows that the main way to ensure they triumph is to issue plenty of press releases containing lots of spin that are portrayed as facts for lazy journalists to then recycle in publications. As long as it cannot be shown to be a lie, spin can easily be used to divert people's attention between the relevant issues and sow confusion, fear, uncertainty and doubt.

We live in a society where soundbites and spin captures people's attention - may as well just get used to it."

Indeed, one only has to read the "comments" posted by members of the public o naviation-related articles on the online versions of newspapers for this to become very apparent!



Quote: "Waht we really need is a 4 runway LHR..."

Yes, yes, obviously.

Quote: "If that can't be done, then we should close them all down and build a 8-10 runway THA/Goodwin (anf stick to 1 plan, not 4...)"

No chance of any of it, as you well know.

[Fairdealfrank]

Quote: "Yawwwwwn. Is this London-Dover (White Cliffs) airport?"


Oops, apologies to FR, shouldn't that be "Brussels north-west"?

[PAXboy]

It depends where they are advertising, to potential clients in Eastern Europe, Dover White Cliffs is known as: BirmingVentryDon, thus saving landing fees at BHX, CVT, LTN, STN, LCY, LHR, LGW and, also, thew new Hubs at Maplin Sands and Biggin Hill. :}

['Chuffer' Dandridge]

Have these eejits forgotten that the English Channel is one of the busiest waterways in the world???? With the Goodwin Sands fairly central to it...

Barking mad the lot of 'em. We should have invested in airport infrastructure properly in the 50s & 60s and got a world class London airport with available space to expand then.. We are now paying for decades of incompetence by MPs and stupid planning laws.:ugh:

[Sir George Cayley]

Before getting 2 more runways for Heathrow or a 3rd for that matter, how about maximising movement rates on the existing? Better not bigger.

The runways are far enough apart to be counted in ATC terms as 2 separate airfields. So, London North and London South.

Dispense with the Cranford agreement to remove alternation.
Introduce a combination of independent mixed mode and independent segregated mode ops driven by peak slot demand.
Establish 4D trajectory network management for SES arrivals and departures.
Use intelligent slot allocation to provide opportunities for Med Med - Heavy Heavy - Super Heavy sequencing.
Continue the TC north redesign to include point merge arrivals
Whilst the planned resurfacing work goes on for the next 2 years design in extra RETs and look at around the end of runway taxiways.

Say all of this cost £1bn? Still a lot less than Boris Island.

SGC

[Yola]

Judging from the website of the company in question - Beckett Rankine - airport design and development is notably absent from their list of skills and expertise.

Still, it's a great way to get some cheap publicity, for not much more than the cost of registering a domain name.

It looks like a bit more than a publicity stunt; working up CGIs with that level of detail is neither quick nor cheap. While Beckett Rankine don't seem to have any airport experience they could be a front for a larger team. Specialist airport designers working for airport owning clients are not free to promote rival greenfield schemes like this one.

If the govt. going to consider options for more runway capacity then it seems right that they should consider all the options, including the wacky ones. And this proposal is not nearly as wacky as the floating airport proposed by Gensler.

[Fairdealfrank]

Quote: "Before getting 2 more runways for Heathrow or a 3rd for that matter, how about maximising movement rates on the existing? Better not bigger."

Isn't "Better not bigger" a quote from former junior transport minister, Teresa Villiers? Think it was meant as an anti-expansion mantra when the Conservatives were going to be the "greenest government ever". Well, she ain't transport minister now!

Quote: "The runways are far enough apart to be counted in ATC terms as 2 separate airfields. So, London North and London South.

Dispense with the Cranford agreement to remove alternation.
Introduce a combination of independent mixed mode and independent segregated mode ops driven by peak slot demand.
Establish 4D trajectory network management for SES arrivals and departures.
Use intelligent slot allocation to provide opportunities for Med Med - Heavy Heavy - Super Heavy sequencing.
Continue the TC north redesign to include point merge arrivals
Whilst the planned resurfacing work goes on for the next 2 years design in extra RETs and look at around the end of runway taxiways.

Say all of this cost £1bn? Still a lot less than Boris Island.

SGC"

You're having a laugh! The government is not prepared to face down the vocal anti-noise lobby on more rwys, so there is no way they're going to dare implement any form of permanent mixed mode or end the Cranford agreement.

Even if they did this, it's still a "sticking plaster" remedy, and could only be justified for the period of the third rwy constuction.

[DaveReidUK]

so there is no way they're going to dare implement any form of permanent mixed mode or end the Cranford agreementThe Cranford agreement was ended more than 2 years ago.

[Fairdealfrank]

Quote: "The Cranford agreement was ended more than 2 years ago."

Its provisions are still being followed: takeoffs on 09R, landings on 09L.

[DaveReidUK]

Its provisions are still being followed: takeoffs on 09R, landings on 09L. That will change once the planned additional 09L access taxiways and 09R RETs are built, allowing alternation on easterlies.

[Fairdealfrank]

Quote: "That will change once the planned additional 09L access taxiways and 09R RETs are built, allowing alternation on easterlies."

Thanks for the info, DaveReidUK, will that increase overall capacity?

Cranford residents don't appear up in arms about it.

How come that there are more noise complaints from a vocal minority miles away from Heathrow than from those right next to the rwy threshold and practically on the airport?

[DaveReidUK]

Thanks for the info, DaveReidUK, will that increase overall capacity?No, it won't increase overall capacity. It will simply mean that 09L will be able to match the departure rate of 09R, and similarly 09R the landing rate of 09L.