Happyberks
Sorry to be the one to pull this thread back on track (pardon the pun) but rail links, important as they are can be changed to suit any location - with planning and money admittedly. Placing an airport on the Essex or Kent coast or even in the Thames itself certainly makes sense in regards to the available land mass and away from denser areas of populous but where does Boris think the 100,000 workers who are required to make said airport and associated businesses operate come from?
You might have said the same about relocating the City of London to London Docklands, but it worked, eventually.
There would have to be a couple of newtowns built, of course, but the government is always saying we need new towns to cope with the huge influx of immigrants (one new Birmingham every 5 years is the requirement).
Strategic staff would have to be relocated, but with property prices being lower in Kent and Essex, that should not be such a problem. Although we might get a 'BBC to Salford' effect here [Salford, daarrling? Ooop north? Daarrling, I would rather be lashed with a whip (much rather) ]. Other workers would have to decide if they would rather keep eir jobs, or take a chance on Heathrow becomming the biggest technology park in the UK.
It may sound daunting, but many is the large company that has moved city, or even moved country, and still kept the operation running smoothly.
.