I have no fight in the MAN vs LHR debate
You are quite right to correct the factual error concerning the statement about strength of based-fleets, L_L.
But, addressing all contributors on here: can we be clear that
there is no MAN vs LHR debate. One regular contributor in particular has pursued a tactical strategy of drawing MAN into the discussion at every opportunity. His objective is to 'prove' that all those who oppose LHR R3 do so out of 'loyalty' to another airport rather than based upon the glaring deficiencies inherent within the case presented for LHR R3. And I don't apologise for stressing this once more: the case against LHR R3 is rooted within the insupportable costs associated with making it happen and the risks to the exchequer in terms of the public funding required. Both directly in terms of the GBP12Bn-18Bn for support works, and indirectly by underwriting (how much of?) the remainder. For a grand total approaching 36 Billion Pounds. Monstrous numbers. There are nation-states with less debt burden than this. And the taxpayers threatened by this gross misallocation of capital are distributed across the whole of the UK, so it is appropriate that the debate not be limited only to residents of the SE.
If there is a case for an airport vs airport angle to the SE capacity debate on here, then it has to be the LHR proposals versus the competing LGW proposal. With honourable mention to STN, LTN and LCY which affect the balance of the London air travel market.
MAN has no place whatsoever being discussed within this context. Can we leave it out please.
Mr A Tis. I understand your frustration, but according to the media a decision on a new runway for the SE could be less than a month away now. This is a
crucial national debate. It is the most significant discussion topic directly concerning LHR in a generation. If this is unsuitable discussion material for PPRuNe regulars on the LHR thread then what is the purpose of the forum continuing to exist at all?