LHR27CIt's quite obvious where your loyalties lie without you even writing a word.
There are masses of destinations BA would love to serve from LHR if only they had the slots to.
Here you go again promoting the same self fueling argument. I'll turn it around, to make any sense to pax number increase then what you are implying is that these pax that are suddenly going to check in for this new flight to 'backofbeyondsville' or where ever would not have flown at all prior to it's introduction. Err no ! they would transit as they have always done. As an example the CDG LF's would be higher for those transiting to Central Africa via CDG. SAME NO. PAX "!
. May be LHR and the SE punters that it serves should stop being so arrogant that they need every destination conceivable on offer as non stop direct. As for London Airways looking for more slots to fill new marginal & in some cases potentially obscure new routes, well they aren't even able to record a profit with a virtual monopoly, so what is their justification to greater competition on offer with a third runway? The trouble with LHR is that too many people are standing on the perimeter looking inwards when maybe they should turn around and realize there will always be choice & even IF a third runway is created it comes with no guarantees.
And finally:-
The government have capped the 3rd runway at half its allowed capacity. This means the max capacity LHR will be legally allowed is 83% - so it will massively reduce holding times both airborne and on the ground
You really believe this?, desperate times ahead will lead to desperate measures. It will simply not be enforceable in 20 years time!