Quote: “
Thinking of a location for a 'West London' aiport, if we simply look at where there is logical space could it not fit either north of the M4 between Reading and Maidenhead, or south of the M4 between Maidenhead and Bracknell?”
Nice one, the latter is slap bang in the middle of Teresa May’s constituency!
Quote: “That would be an unusual confiuration. For an airport with 4 parallel runways, assuming the terminals are in the middle, the norm is to use the two outers for landings and the inners for takeoffs.”
Permanent segregated mode? with alternation or not?
Quote: “Don't you think that, given the furore over the destruction of Sipson, if the planners thought that they could add both R3 and R4 in one fell swoop with a MAN-type offset dependent parallel arrangement, we would have seen some proposals before now ?”
Quote: “
You have yet to justify why you - alone among all the planners - believe that two autonomous runways can be accommodated in the space between the A4 and M4.”
Don’t need to. By the way, am NOT a planner.
(1) Look how close other pairs of parallel rwys are, on all the plans for new estuary airports, at Ringway, etc., so it will easily fit in.
(2) Did mention the need for more demolition (not as much as south of the airport obviously), so yes, there is room for two 7,200 ft rwys. Am
not alone, there are many suggestions for 2 more rwys including talk about crossing the M25 for a third and fourth (persumably to allow longer rwys). All options appear to be on/off the table.
(3) Actually it’s more realistic than the often mentioned 2 more rwys at Gatwick, as Horley and crawley are in the way. These are big towns as opposed to already blighted villages north of Heathrow (blighted because of thirty years of dither!).
(4) Of course BAA haven’t applied for this, look at the stick they are getting over just a third! Perhaps they should have as they'll have to sooner or later.
Quote: “I was referring to officially designated London Airports which are LHR, LGW & STN ... LCY comes along but isn't a real airport only being able to accept Puddle Jumpers.
It's not about location, it's about designation, if it were all about location then we could have London/Denham, London/Fairoaks, London/Stapleford Tawney, London/Rochester, London/Redhill, London/Farnborough, London/Blackbushe, London/White Waltham, London/Elstree, London/Booker, London/North Weald etc. etc. etc. and all of these, much the same as Luton, Southend, Lydd & Oxford etc. have, could call themselves "London" whilst not being designated as "London".”
It’s not just airports subject to this nonsense. There is, for example:
“West Thames College London” (former Isleworth Polytechnic, and nothing to do with London University);
“Kingston University London” (former Kingston technical College and nothing to do with London University);
and “West London University” (former Thames Valley University, former Slough and Ealing Technical Colleges).
Students attending these establishments may not be aware of the long train journey plus one or tube rides to get up to London and the same might to people staying at “London Twickenham Travelodge”.
Also don’t forget about going to "the dogs": “London Wimbledon Stadium”.
Guess it some kind of trendy passing marketing trend/fad (yawn).
Quote: “
This is by no means a new scheme. It's basically the original Cliffe design transplanted to Oxfordshire, and dates from about 10 years ago.
The DfT commissioned a review of the proposal in 2003:
http://www.pleiade.org/projectzone/L...ion_031864.pdf
Makes interesting reading.”
What a load of nonsense, and overtaken by events: Kidlington is now “London Oxford“!
A sensible librarian would put it on the “fiction” shelves.
Not surprising they then approved Heathrow expansion in 2003!
It’s fantasy island all over again, and way too far out. If we’re
seriously considering airports this distant, should we criticise FR if they decide to rename Hurn and call it “London West”?