HEATHROW
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the edge of madness
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you look on the area surrounding LHR, there is enough space for up to 6 parallel runways (without knocking down too many homes), so there is space for LHR to expand further
As for what the commission should say about LHR, they should state that R3 and R4 need to built, LHR problems are in a state that R3 is not enough
As for what the commission should say about LHR, they should state that R3 and R4 need to built, LHR problems are in a state that R3 is not enough
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: London
Age: 33
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Building R4 would need to filling up of the King George VI and Staines reservoirs (to limit the number homes that are to be demolished
R5 should be located North of the M4 and south of the GWML (in other words north of the proposed R3)
R6 will be located in Ashford and parts of Feltham in Surrey
So only 2 reservoirs will need to be filled, surely we could cope with that
R5 should be located North of the M4 and south of the GWML (in other words north of the proposed R3)
R6 will be located in Ashford and parts of Feltham in Surrey
So only 2 reservoirs will need to be filled, surely we could cope with that
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: London
Age: 33
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If a 3rd and 4th runway opens, you can be sure BA and VS will move their LGW ops to LHR, the same will go for other full-service airlines at LGW
That will free up space at LGW for Easyjet and Charter airlines to expand (or move ops from other London Airports) and that in turn will free up space at Luton and Stansted
So the best solution (if we stick to expanding out current airports) is expanding LHR as much as possible, the only other choice is shutting all our current major airports and build a new one
That will free up space at LGW for Easyjet and Charter airlines to expand (or move ops from other London Airports) and that in turn will free up space at Luton and Stansted
So the best solution (if we stick to expanding out current airports) is expanding LHR as much as possible, the only other choice is shutting all our current major airports and build a new one
"One Hub or None"
BAA are due to present a report tomorrow as evidence to the Davies Commission, which will presumably also be released into the public domain.
According to the Independent, it will argue "that splitting a hub between Heathrow and Gatwick - the so-called Heathwick option - is not practical and that building up other airports as major hubs would not work either".
This is the same BAA who announced at a public meeting in Hammersmith just last week that they were "supportive of a second Gatwick runway".
Hmmmm.
According to the Independent, it will argue "that splitting a hub between Heathrow and Gatwick - the so-called Heathwick option - is not practical and that building up other airports as major hubs would not work either".
This is the same BAA who announced at a public meeting in Hammersmith just last week that they were "supportive of a second Gatwick runway".
Hmmmm.
Not sure this is the best argument for BAA/Heathrow to engage public opinion...
"Failure to keep a major hub airport could cost the UK up to one million front-of-the-aircraft passengers a year, Heathrow bosses are expected to say tomorrow... The possible one million lost passengers are those that fly in the first-class and business-class seats on flights through Heathrow."
Heathrow chiefs to make the case for keeping major UK airport hub - Home News - UK - The Independent
"Failure to keep a major hub airport could cost the UK up to one million front-of-the-aircraft passengers a year, Heathrow bosses are expected to say tomorrow... The possible one million lost passengers are those that fly in the first-class and business-class seats on flights through Heathrow."
Heathrow chiefs to make the case for keeping major UK airport hub - Home News - UK - The Independent
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote: “Building R4 would need to filling up of the King George VI and Staines reservoirs (to limit the number homes that are to be demolished”
This sounds like a variation on the “Free Enterprise Group” proposal, except they only envisage the demolition of Bedfont and Stanwell!
Quote: “R5 should be located North of the M4 and south of the GWML (in other words north of the proposed R3)”
this involves the demolition of West Drayton, a bigger town than either Bedfont or Stanwell.
Quote: “R6 will be located in Ashford and parts of Feltham in Surrey”
In Middlesex actually, and these two towns are even bigger than West Drayton!
So, all in all, this involves the demolition of several towns with a combined population approaching 100,000. Well done.
Quote: “So only 2 reservoirs will need to be filled, surely we could cope with that”
Well that’s alright then.
As mentioned before, open land across the M25 is the answer (for a 4 rwy airport).
This sounds like a variation on the “Free Enterprise Group” proposal, except they only envisage the demolition of Bedfont and Stanwell!
Quote: “R5 should be located North of the M4 and south of the GWML (in other words north of the proposed R3)”
this involves the demolition of West Drayton, a bigger town than either Bedfont or Stanwell.
Quote: “R6 will be located in Ashford and parts of Feltham in Surrey”
In Middlesex actually, and these two towns are even bigger than West Drayton!
So, all in all, this involves the demolition of several towns with a combined population approaching 100,000. Well done.
Quote: “So only 2 reservoirs will need to be filled, surely we could cope with that”
Well that’s alright then.
As mentioned before, open land across the M25 is the answer (for a 4 rwy airport).
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the current situation I agree with Fairdealfrank that Heathrow needs 1, ideally 2 new runways however as a sidenote I also believe that Gatwick has a clear and strong case for a second runway, regardless of what happens around the M23/25.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure this is the best argument for BAA/Heathrow to engage public opinion...
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Doncaster
Age: 63
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're not John Betjeman's great-grandson, are you?
(Oh happy bombs...)
(Oh happy bombs...)
Last edited by johnnychips; 13th Nov 2012 at 22:58. Reason: Just looked at above poster's age!
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: London
Age: 33
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This sounds like a variation on the “Free Enterprise Group” proposal, except they only envisage the demolition of Bedfont and Stanwell!
this involves the demolition of West Drayton, a bigger town than either Bedfont or Stanwell.
In Middlesex actually, and these two towns are even bigger than West Drayton!
So, all in all, this involves the demolition of several towns with a combined population approaching 100,000. Well done.
In Middlesex actually, and these two towns are even bigger than West Drayton!
So, all in all, this involves the demolition of several towns with a combined population approaching 100,000. Well done.
Also I doubt if the number of people that would have to move (if 6 runways where needed) is 100,000
Quote: “So only 2 reservoirs will need to be filled, surely we could cope with that”
Well that’s alright then.
As mentioned before, open land across the M25 is the answer (for a 4 rwy airport).
if 6 runways where [sic] needed
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also I doubt if the number of people that would have to move (if 6 runways where needed) is 100,000
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 14th Nov 2012 at 10:49.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: London
Age: 33
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When you get a spare moment, you might like to ponder why Googling "Heathrow fifth runway" gets precisely 8 hits, most of which are spoofs, and looking for the sixth gets only one, which definitely is.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: London
Age: 33
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like some other posters, you need to focus on what is likely and achievable, it's not a case of "well we could do it in an ideal world." There will not be six runways at LHR now will there?
What the government should be doing is give LHR planning permission for R3, R4, R5 and R6 (to prevent delays when LHR needs to expand) so at the very least LHR can build more runways depending on demand
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote: “Not sure this is the best argument for BAA/Heathrow to engage public opinion...
"Failure to keep a major hub airport could cost the UK up to one million front-of-the-aircraft passengers a year, Heathrow bosses are expected to say tomorrow... The possible one million lost passengers are those that fly in the first-class and business-class seats on flights through Heathrow."“
Quote: “Indeed, however this is the whole reason some of the fares down the back are cheap.“
Exactly, Skipness, a powerful motivator!
Quote: “You're not John Betjeman's great-grandson, are you?
(Oh happy bombs...)”
Hah! was looking at the picture, laughing, and thinking exactly the same before scrolling down to your post, johnnychips.
Great minds!
Quote: “Befont and Stanwell have been part of Surrey since 1965 because Middlesex no longer exists”
British Airways, don’t confuse local government and geographical locations. Trust me, geography is much easier!
Our discussions about LHR expansion are very much about geography, not councils, ... and demolition, of course.
Quote: “ (most of it is part of Greater London with some parts in Hertfordshire and Surrey)”
…..and Berkshire. Oops, Berkshire no longer exists.
Quote: “ Also I doubt if the number of people that would have to move (if 6 runways where needed) is 100,000”
Maybe not, but it’s not far off.
"Failure to keep a major hub airport could cost the UK up to one million front-of-the-aircraft passengers a year, Heathrow bosses are expected to say tomorrow... The possible one million lost passengers are those that fly in the first-class and business-class seats on flights through Heathrow."“
Quote: “Indeed, however this is the whole reason some of the fares down the back are cheap.“
Exactly, Skipness, a powerful motivator!
Quote: “You're not John Betjeman's great-grandson, are you?
(Oh happy bombs...)”
Hah! was looking at the picture, laughing, and thinking exactly the same before scrolling down to your post, johnnychips.
Great minds!
Quote: “Befont and Stanwell have been part of Surrey since 1965 because Middlesex no longer exists”
British Airways, don’t confuse local government and geographical locations. Trust me, geography is much easier!
Our discussions about LHR expansion are very much about geography, not councils, ... and demolition, of course.
Quote: “ (most of it is part of Greater London with some parts in Hertfordshire and Surrey)”
…..and Berkshire. Oops, Berkshire no longer exists.
Quote: “ Also I doubt if the number of people that would have to move (if 6 runways where needed) is 100,000”
Maybe not, but it’s not far off.
Paxing All Over The World
Until a better solution arrives, I'm going with the suggestion from (or linked by) FlyingEagle21.
Not least amongst the fine attributes of this plan is that BOTH the M4 and a main line railway are incorporated within the perimeter!! Absolutely brilliant. We need this kind of modern thinking in the UK.
Not least amongst the fine attributes of this plan is that BOTH the M4 and a main line railway are incorporated within the perimeter!! Absolutely brilliant. We need this kind of modern thinking in the UK.