An outsiders point of view.
Actually looking at the arguments from an outsiders point of view, as a passenger, extending 07/25 by 1000 metres gives a an estimated TODA of 2310 metres comparable with say Liverpool or Newcastle in the UK and along the prevailing wind direction in part and suitable for aircraft like the A321 or B737 800/900 or 787 and forthcoming A350 subject to LCN classification.
Bearing in mind what people have said re the site - I bet that the planning authorities on both sides of Irish Sea must, in the context of global warming; be looking again at airports like Prestwick or Dublin that have kept their secondary runways with a view to renovating/extending them.
Oh by the way I'm familiar with the historic "Shenanigans" of Irish politics re SNN & ORK, being of Irish extraction and my late father worked on the front end of the developments at BHX with J Laing, a site with just about everything not going for it as an Airport site.
The site at Filton outside Bristol had a long former mil runway that could have been developed at a cost. That's another story covered on PPRuNe.
The economic payback of projects is something like 30 - 40 years and I wonder why the existing primary runway at ORK 17/35 was not extended/strengthened by a relatively modest degree to accept medium haul aircraft without frequent restrictions ?
I do not work in operations or planning but is the airport site geologically restricting ? - OK cost is the limiting factor.
CAT III
[edit: Newcastle used as a an example not Bristol ]
Last edited by Guest 112233; 20th Apr 2013 at 13:54.
Reason: Bristol is actually very similar in some aspects