Originally Posted by
highwideandugly
Here goes..thinking outside the box..and the SE...Would an extra 350 mts plus RESA for Luton,Bristol,Liverpool,Newcastle and Edinburgh/Glasgow not be a whole lot cheaper than the Billions proposed for Heathrow..and actually spread the load around? Or is that toooo simplistic?
The existing master plan, prepared in 2005, says this about the runway issue.
Option 1 – do nothing
From the analysis above it is clear that it is likely that a significant proportion of any long haul demand could be handled without the need for a runway extension. However, it is not possible to make precise estimates with any degree of accuracy over such a long time frame. This option carries some risk, but the timescales are such that this risk can be reassessed in subsequent revisions of the Master Plan if necessary.
Option 2 – extend the runway by 140m
This is assessed as the maximum extension that can be accommodated within the existing airport land, without the need for airport control of Felton Common. Nevertheless the A38 would need to be lowered into a tunnel for a length of 150m. The instrument landing system for runway 09 would need to be relocated to just inside airport land at the boundary with the Common. If the existing landing threshold is retained for runway 27 there would be no need to relocate the existing approach light array. There is a possibility that some regrading of the Common may be needed to maintain satisfactory clearances from obstacle limitation surfaces.
Option 3 – extend the runway by 389m
This has been assessed as the maximum extension that can be accommodated within the existing airport land. The end of the runway clear and graded area would then be at the boundary with Felton Common. The ILS localiser and, potentially approach lighting as well, would need to relocated on to the Common and a 240m by 150m area of the Common would need to come into airport control. It may be necessary to regrade parts of the Common.
Option 4 – extend the runway by 239m with a 150m starter strip
A starter strip is a length of aircraft pavement that can be used by aircraft at the start of their take off run, but not for landing purposes. This option would add 389m to the runway 27 take off run, but only about 150m to the runway 09 take off run. This therefore means that runway 09 has performance penalties compared with runway 27. However the need to encroach on to Felton Common is avoided.
Option 5 – extend the runway further, with further encroachment onto the Common.
Our overall conclusion is that the improvement in performance that might be achieved by extending the runway is relatively small in comparison with the costs and the potential environmental impact. Our preferred option at this stage is therefore the 'do nothing' option.
Originally Posted by
Wee Weasley Welshman
Spending a fraction of the HS2 money re-opening Filton would be extremely sensiblevand beneficial and thus discounted.
Unfortunately, that now seems an impossibility.
Plans approved for more than 2,500 homes on Filton Airfield - Bristol Post
Incidentally, I’m not aware of any news of a new CEO to replace Robert Sinclair who has moved to London City Airport as CEO. It might be thought by some that it’s not the most propitious time to embark on a major look at BRS’s future with no CEO in place.