so if that is your true argument, why are you going out of your way to disprove the MAN catchment? Saying such as ‘the MAN catchment has been too large’ etc. But, You are still not answering the question, which why are you stating that MAN should not continue to attract pax from the north to bolster its pax but LHR should?
You are missing the point
again. MAN has enjoyed a large catchment area for years. So has LHR which serves a wide area out to the South West. Giving people the option to travel from their local airport into a main hub is the solution for many who find these airport inconvenient. The reason MAN was mentioned is because throughout this thread there have been large numbers of the airports supporters against LHR expansion.
You then ask why it's OK for people to have to travel to LHR instead of MAN. If I was suggesting people get the train to Heathrow, the way they have to to get to MAN then you would have a point. The flight will start at the regional not LHR. The bags will be checked and the journey is begun. When transferring in any other airport you do not say I am travelling to New York first to get my flight to Phoenix? The flight begins at the point you get rid of your checked in luggage and board the first aircraft. With an upgraded LHR there is already infrastructure in place to transfer bags from a new terminal into the existing network. There would likely be a rapid transport system to the other terminals and it would be done with relative ease. You cannot compare that to carrying luggage on numerous trains or having a long drive.
Your second point i have already responded to many times. You cannot use the existing system as proof that a totally redesigned project will not be a success. LHR is at capacity and its the SH flights that get axed. This is one of the reasons we need the new runway. Also, without the infrastructure in place at LHR it is not the seemless transfer that it will be and there are not the airline services in place at the moment that there will be. The BA flight from LBA is great and when I used it weekly there were lots of people connecting at Heathrow. I can see however why it has grown less popular due to the current setup at LHR. With someone like Easy or Flybe going into a dedicated runway it would be different so please can we stop this 'It won't work because it doesn't work now' nonsense that has been throughout this thread. Saying we shouldn't expand LHR because someone had a bad experience there a few years ago is like saying cancel the Northern Power House project because Leeds station is a dump.
Easier to be arrogant than answer some folks' legitimate questions and concerns, isn't it?
MANFOD, the North/South rubbish gets tiring very quickly. We are talking about improving access to the nations leading airport from the regions. That is a benefit to the people of those regions. The project is largely privately funded except upgrades to the road system that need doing anyway. It is also possible that the tax intake from the privately funded portion will cover most of the publicly funded part. You can be cynical all you like and pretend that benefit won't exist but you will be wrong. Improved access to the flights from LHR, many of which will never be viable from MAN, is a good thing for the regions. and the UK as a whole.
I am not against rw3. If HAL and The government want to provide a 1970s solution to a 21st Century problem by all means carry on.
We are all waiting to hear your design proposal. If you know more than all the experts that have worked on this scheme for many years. I am actually still waiting for you to follow up on your comment that the Super Sewer is a waste of taxpayers money when it is privately financed and will provide a huge tax income.