Shed, I'm delighted you took the trouble to reply to the felixflyer posting, especially his assertion that for Yorkshire folk, MAN is the only option at present, which it plainly is not, and with a hint of MAN being 'the airport of last resort'.
Then there was the expectation or assumption that folk from all over Europe, rather than using direct viable long haul services from their own airports, should be persuaded to fly via what he hopes would be the new super-hub 3 runway airport at Heathrow, whatever the inconvenience.
If I may say so felixflyer, you may think the case for R3 is irrefutable, but it is only an opinion, no more or less valid than those who are against or not convinced. Opinion should not be expressed as fact or assertion.
As a Northerner, I accept that there is a strong case operationally for a third runway given that LHR is 98% capacity now. However, I feel the arguments against, such as cost and road congestion for example, while not necessarily overriding, cannot lightly be dismissed as some are prone to do.
Again, only an opinion, but I think the argument that the UK would financially lose billions because airlines would go to AMS, FRA, PAR etc. is exaggerated to support the case. And why should passengers from the UK regions who seem perfectly happy to use hubs like Amsterdam or Dubai at present (and use MAN, LBA, NCL or GLA to get there) suddenly be expected to switch to LHR in such numbers as to make more long haul services from LHR viable?
I believe the case is more finely balanced than some are prepared to accept.
And as an aside, how many more daily flights to New York do you want?
Last edited by MANFOD; 10th Jun 2015 at 18:35.