Quote: "No, I am making the argument for a decent interlining airport with full international and domestic capability - something with four international runways and two 'domestic' runways and modern terminals and good surface transport links to match its position and size."
So, Silver, you want Six rwys in the estuary? even Boris only wants/wanted(?) four.
Meanwhile, back in the real world, a "decent interlining airport with full international and domestic capability" has to be at LHR.
You know it, I know it, Boris knows it.
Why? because the largest UK airports are in the private sector and as such have to turn a profit. An estuary airport therefore has to be a good business proposition, but it isn't, because it's all expense, expense, expense, and no return on the investment.
Premium business pax don't want an estuary airport, so the carriers don't, so it won't happen.
You have always failed to explain realistically how this can be resolved.
Comments about "closing LHR" and "government funding" are not realistic.
Even Boris is back-tracking and is moving west all the time.
First he favoured 4 rwys in the estauary, then 4 rwys on the river bank, then 3 more rwys at STN.
Next he'll cross the Greenwich meridian into the western hemisphere...
Then it will become 3 more rwys at LGW, then 3 more rwys at LTN.
Finally, reality will prevail, and it will be 2 more rwys at LHR.
Quote: "As has been explained many times, LHR is simply too constrained and in totally the wrong location to be that new, modern, 21st century airport.
Silver"
So what is to be done?
Expand LHR so that it's not too constrained, obviously.
Last edited by Fairdealfrank; 1st Aug 2013 at 19:26.