the fact of the matter is that airlines only fly from LGW because they can't fly from LHR
This gross generalisation does not stand up to scrutiny. There is a section of the market that craves access to LHR - notably business-orientated long-haul - but the suggestion that all airlines at LGW, STN and LTN would rather operate everything from LHR is complete nonsense. All three of those airports have distinct, prosperous, heavily-populated catchments of their own. And many of the airlines which call them home wouldn't dream of switching their operations to LHR en masse. Companies such as Thomas Cook, Thomson, Ryanair, Monarch and many others could be relied upon to operate the bulk of their programmes from the gateways they already choose today.
Some traffic at these airports may be LHR overflow, but the vast majority is not. Note that EasyJet proposes a supplementary base at LHR. The company has never contemplated abandoning LGW, they would be crazy to do so. And they serve distinct markets at LTN, STN and SEN too.
Why does no one listen to the experts, i.e. The airlines, the people who's business it is to make money from transporting people by air.
Excellent suggestion. Let's follow the advice of Willie Walsh on all this.
It is genuinely laughable that second runways at STN or LGW are considered as options.
Not to anybody who does the maths without getting hung up on glamorous niche long-haul routes in isolation.
A third runway at LHR is the right decision and is wanted by the people that matter.
And
not wanted in equal measure by many influential people who also matter. [Who
doesn't matter, anyway?]. And LHR R3 is not the right decision for as long as the proposed costings associated with delivering it make no financial sense.
wait for the moaning to stop whilst a once great country crumbles to insignificance.
Is that really how you see the UK today? You need to travel abroad more!