The cross runways are as has been pointed out irrelevant because they are now under terminals and even before that intersected with each other making use of more than any two at a time difficult to say the elast although I am sure it has been done on occasion it would have probably only lead tyoa tiny increase in movements.
However the land north of LHR has never really been developed and there are surprising ly large areas of open ground between the A4 and the M4. development along the A4 is much the same as 50 years ago aside froma few hotels and isa sort of ribbon development parrlaleling the road. Problem is that there are three villages, Harlington, Harmondsworth and Sipson which are agin essentially ribbon developments and old lanes that cross the area north to south to north from what was the old Bath road and at least one, Sipson, would pretty much have to go to build a third runway but that is the History of Heathrow. named for the village sacrificed to the airport along with Hatton , parts of Stanwell and Stanwell Moor , Yeovany and Poyle . Sadly in a crowded country somethings have to go to make way for progress and my personal view ios that the victims are more afraid of being screwed over by biased compulsory purchase prices than the actual loss of habitat, although there are a few nice old buildings these places are not that desirable being in the middle of a flat desolate plain with poor public transport links and lots of the disadvantages of being very close to a huge airport.
But in Uk we just do not have the stomach to do anything at all like this, if the amount of Government and Civil service effort that was put into covering up the Hillsborough tragedy was directed at Heathrow expansion the runway would be ten years old by now.
Indeed it would! When the previous third rwy plan was mooted under the Labour government dithering, indecision and procrastination, as opposed to that of the coalition or Conservative governments (yawn!), much of Sipson and the surrounding area was bought up by the airport company and the houses rented out on short-term lets.
A second rwy at LGW without a third at LHR will resolve nothing.
But perhaps thats the Boris master pan, leave the EU to cut short haul travel and make it difficult for anyone to get to Britain at all to deal with immigration
People still need to travel, and the medium and long term growth in aviation will continue, with the usual short term blips.
Interestingly, if you look at the A4 to the north of the airport you will see two open areas that have never been built on, either side of the Heathrow Hotel.
I don't know if it's an urban myth, but the story goes that those areas have been safeguarded for possible link taxiways ever since the original 9-runway proposal (3 of them north of the A4) back in the late 1940s.
Yes, this is correct, but not the entire 2mi. length needed. Heathrow Ltd. has been buying up much of this land over the last 50 years or so.
As I understand it those fields belong to a farmer who has refused to sell to anyone.
BA tried to acquire them once when considering the replacement for Tristar House but it was a no go.
If the rwy gets the go ahead, the sale will proceed......everyone has their price, if not, there's good old compulsory purchase.