More Circles For Felixflyer ...
London is our capital city and money spent there has a knock on effect throughout the country
Money spent in the regions also has a knock on effect throughout the country. And we deliver better returns on investment than the SE as well [note the recent MAG proposals to rebuild terminals with capacity of 25mppa+ on a budget of £1Bn - and yes, that's privately funded BTW]. It is interesting that many resident in the SE appear to forget that we in the regions pay taxes to the very same exchequer at exactly the same rates you do. Enhanced prosperity in the regions driven by direct regional infrastructure upgrades benefits UK PLC too.
I know how unpopular that mindset is to my friends up north but it is the truth.
Ditto my reply to my friends in the SE.
Having a station in the airport is fine if you live near a station that is on the same line.
Manchester Airport Station is now one of the best connected airport railway stations in the country. Amongst the services offered are York via Leeds; Cleethorpes via Sheffield and Doncaster; Glasgow and Edinburgh; Windermere Lake District; Barrow-in-Furness; Liverpool; Southport; Crewe; Blackpool North. Services will be added along the Calder Valley line via Rochdale, Halifax and Bradford upon completion of the Ordsall Chord. A very large number of interim stations are directly connected to MAN without need for a change of train using the services listed above. Most routes are served hourly or two-hourly at the point of origin. Closer stations enjoy high-frequency service. Anyone who is not conveniently placed for one of these is unlikely to be well placed for the LBA-LHR Shuttle either.
Your argument about parking makes no sense as at the moment people have no other choice.
You mean apart from the trains, trams, coaches and buses which I specifically mentioned in my previous answer? [See posting timed at 14:19]. And taxis which I am adding now.
Ask people in Leeds/Bradford/York and further north if they would rather drive to Manchester or get a 40 minute flight from LBA and I think most would go for the LBA option
The people you reference already have this choice (BA serves LBA-LHR right now). Yet many choose MAN over this option. No doubt the reasons include the need to face a second full security check on transfer at LHR; a stressful change of terminals for many, and a double-dose of airport queues. And driving to MAN is just one of the choices available to reach that airport. They can avail themselves of the other modes of transport outlined above.
There is a lot to be said for less but larger aircraft serving the needs of a larger geographical area both in business and environmental terms.
Eco-extremists and vested interests argue this. The public demonstrates a preference for non-stop flights from their own regions, thanks. Or perhaps you'd like to promote a Soviet-style central planning model? So much better than letting the free market decide ...
To be fair I am not concerned about the growth in Low cost or package holiday flights as this is a thread about Heathrow expansion.
You may not be, but the Davies Commission is because the leisure sector is likely to be the largest source of growth for air travel demand in the SE. And how exactly do we debate LHR expansion if mention of alternative solutions is verboten? Of course, maybe that is a debate which you don't want to acknowledge.
Tfl would say £20bn as the infrastructure in the area is in dire need of investment as it is, frankly that figure is absurd
This upper figure quoted in the debate probably is too high, but likewise the lowest appears way too low. The truth will lie somewhere between the two numbers, and even £8Bn from the public purse for LHR is quite excessive.
My question was in response to you asking what else £40bn of mostly BAA's money could be spent on. A completely irrelevant question as you well know.
Do you wish to engage in serious discussion or do you prefer this slapstick pantomime nonsense? I have outlined the public-private funding split in detail in previous answers to you. Cut out the schoolyard slurs.
Yet you still try and use that very argument
Yes, because the cost of the LHR proposals forms the basis of my objection to them. Is that not clear to you?
If a mostly foreign owned company wants to use mostly foreign investment to upgrade the UK's premier airport and provide easier access to the whole of the UK for future business then to me that is a win win situation.
But if somewhere between £8Bn and £20Bn is required from public funds then it isn't. That is the problem here.