PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - MANCHESTER 1
Thread: MANCHESTER 1
View Single Post
Old 3rd Apr 2015, 00:23
  #1497 (permalink)  
Shed-on-a-Pole
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
North West -

The thread you reference was set up specifically to direct those interested to video uploads from the 'Runways - UK' event held in early December. There was never any expectation that the thread would host discussions over the longer term. The thread was there to provide a signpost whilst the event was still topical. It did that. My own contribution to that thread was two brief postings, hardly befitting the description you give.

Who on this thread is suggesting that MAN is a substitute market for LHR? I have seen only claims that it is the best solution for the North [of England]. Why would anyone in route development believe that MAN is a substitute market for LHR? Please explain.

My own objection to LHR R3 is based upon the extraordinary projected cost of the proposals which I contend represent a huge financial risk far exceeding the potential rewards of the project. Thus I find myself agreeing with MAG's view that developing the major regional airports (including MAN) to serve their own regions as comprehensively as possible represents the most financially responsible course for the UK as a whole. I do not question the *operational* desirability of an expanded LHR, only the value of funding it at the eyewatering price-levels proposed.

My other concern is the pressing need to redress the huge imbalance of taxpayer investment in infrastructure serving London and the SE versus spend across the rest of the country. The additional funding required for supporting infrastructure enabling LHR expansion is estimated at £20 Billion in a report just published by TfL. Taxpayer support for even a portion of this would seriously jeopardise funding for serious infrastructure investment in the regions for years to come. The money can only be allocated once.

If you do wish to debate these issues with myself or other interested contributors, by all means put your case. But challenge us on the arguments we actually present, not your own "entirely false premise" scenario which you appear keen to discredit us with. I can't recall anybody arguing that standpoint on here.
Shed-on-a-Pole is offline