Rutan 16, I think you'll find that Prophead is more than happy for LHR to get the whole of the UK as its catchment area while other airports like MAN's reduce. Afraid it's the sort of arrogant attitude displayed by some avid proponents of LHR expansion. Do you recall his patronising comments about the MAN fan club and spotters which went unchallenged?
Would it really be in the overall national interest if NCL lost its EK flight, EDI its QR, BHX its AI or MAN its CX so airlines could boost already good frequencies from LHR? What about the job losses and investment in those areas even if a few might be created on Merseyside or Teesside if airlines decided flights to LHR might be viable.
And you are quite right. In terms of passengers, I believe higher growth is much more likely to come from leisure travellers and airlines such as the lo-cos than some extra feeder flights within the UK and perhaps a few more long haul routes. I would have thought LGW was more suitable for that sort of growth but then what do we ignorant Northerners know. Incidentally, in recent weeks, I've noticed there have been quite long periods of the day when holding for LGW has been far longer than that for LHR. One day last week I counted 20 a/c on approach or in the stacks for LGW. Traffic for LHR was getting in without delays or perhaps 1 small circuit.
Originally, I thought the purpose of setting up the Airport Commission was to assess the need to meet airport capacity in the South East. Wasn't it later that a requirement to retain the UK's hub status was added in the final brief?
It was almost tantamount to pointing the Commission in the right direction so they came up with the right conclusion, but I shouldn't be so cynical.