A very good post Shed.
Another point that troubles me is this notion of maintaining the UK's hubbing capacity.
If we are concerned about this subject, then the biggest beneficiary of the State's largesse would be British Airways. This cannot be right. A new runway at LHR would essentially provide the capacity to run a small number of extra flights from places like LPL or EXT by BA for their benefit....if the numbers stack up. And there's no guarantee they will. After all other airlines offer much better point to hub service than BA can dream of - KLM being a case in point. If these opportunities are so lucrative why are KLM not offering them now?
I also totally refute the argument that what's good for London is good for the rest of the country - it's a line we've been fed for years - ''the Olympics will be good for the whole country'' indeed !!! Total bull.
Likewise an expanded LHR or LGW is likely to be be bad for UK regional airports such as BHX; it will also stymy MAN's aspirations to grow into a northern counterweight as airlines put all their efforts and energy into getting hold of new slots at an expanded LHR.
As Shed has said - if London wants new airport capacity, get the private sector to pay for it - it benefits the privately owned London Airports and the privately owned BA not the rest of the country.
I paid a large amount to the taxman last week and I'm getting sick of the thought that the CAPEX part of the national budget almost totally benefits London and the South East.
Taxpayer revolt anyone?