HEATHROW

[compton3bravo]

I thought there was a second runway at Manchester!

[Skipness One Echo]

I thought there was a second runway at Manchester!

There is, however the economic benefits were overstated whereas the economic benefits of a new runway at Heathrow would be much greater.
Gatwick can do on one runway much less than MAN which "needs" two.

[chaps2011]

Firstly MAN used to have a very landing rate on 1 runway but there are
many difference between MAN and LGW. The mix of traffic at MAN is much more than at LGW, at the time MAN runway 2 was built it was pushing right on the limit but a big hit on traffic over a period has hit the north of England
more than the south east but is coming back strongly.

Ian

[racedo]

The point is, racedo and it's important, is that LHR expansion is private sector money. Unlike the HS2, the Olympics, etc., and other government projects/follies this will cost taxpayers nothing.

Can we put this "transfer pax"-knocking to bed please, we've been over it ad nauseum. They make some routes viable when otherwise they would not be, and that gives more choice to OD traffic. It benefits UK carriers who hub at LHR i.e. BA, BD, VS.

Think you will find that public sector billions will have to go in to support this with little if any payback in return.

Making routes viable is not worth taxpayers money nor should it be the reason for a new runway..

It has nothing to do with "Willy waving", it affects the real economy. There are 70,000 jobs on the airport and over 100,000 directly related. Over and above that many companies are based in the Thames Valley because of the convenience of LHR on the doorstep, and the range of destination it offers.

That is rubbish as the setting up of businesses anyway have the international airport close by as 25th on the list of importance.

Its a nice to have but not even close to being essential, availability of skilled labour, business space, overhead costs come way up the list.

If LHR is to be run "so it adds real value" it needs to be enlarged so that it is not running at 98-99% capacity (compared to 70-75% in the cases of AMS, CDG and FRA). The congestion needs to be reduced and this can only be done two ways: expansion, or a mass reduction in slot availability which easier said than done (who decides who loses slots, decisions open to legal challenges, etc.).

Two more runways are needed now: 2 for landings, 2 for takeoffs; existing for large aircraft, the new ones for any (they would be shorter).

Let's get them built as soon as.

Lets not waste resources on projects that offer little payback.

[racedo]

The public purse has to learn to live within it's means, something no politician in recent years has contemplated. The answer is always "tax more". If the market supports an hourly JFK then well done, London and New York are two world cities. Business operates in a market that won't use STN or LGW. Either support the market or watch it move to FRA or CDG before it glances at another UK airport.

Besides which, APD is a smokescreen, all these connecting passengers create lots of jobs in baggage handling, cabin crew, cargo, back office as well as flight deck. Jobs in the real economy, not parasitic pretendy public sector jobs that serve no purpose beyond getting the underskilled into overpaid positions.

A new runway at LHR would help the economy more than building a second runway at say, MAN believe me.

A new runway will suck up resources and not solve the crowded airspace problems.

Frankly spending £2 billion on a high speed LHR-LGW would solve more of the LHR crap than building a new runway, people would question the travelling time between airports but think nothing of sitting for 35 minutes queueing once they land awaiting a gate.

[Skipness One Echo]

Frankly spending £2 billion on a high speed LHR-LGW would solve more of the LHR crap than building a new runway

So like landing in Glasgow and connecting in Edinburgh? Is there an easier option? Yes, so I wouldn't do that then now would I? May I suggest we don't spend billions doing that unless you want to christen it "Project Mirabel".

[bcn_boy]

Vested interests

All this talk of the 3rd runway is nothing more than government lobbying by BA and BAA. Expanding LHR has nothing to do with the economy as LGW is already taking up the slack from LHR on Asia routes by offering Vietnam Airlines, Air China, Korean and Hong Kong Airlines. The new owners at LGW no doubt have more Asian routes lined up and even Cameron himself suggested that LGW is rapidly becoming a business airport. If the routes to China were as lucrative as BA would have you suggest then where is the expansion along with Virgin into these new cities? CAN is coming online in June but that is offered by China Southern, why not BA? BAA's interest stems from more planes which equals more lucrative revenue from landing slots,more passengers which equals more shoppers to spend money in the airport which eqauls more profit and more dividends for shareholders. None of this has anything to do with the UK's competitiveness and access to other growing trading nations. We have LGW, STN and other airports around the UK which are suitable for long haul expansion and can take up the slack quite easily.

[racedo]

So like landing in Glasgow and connecting in Edinburgh? Is there an easier option? Yes, so I wouldn't do that then now would I? May I suggest we don't spend billions doing that unless you want to christen it "Project Mirabel

Its a less worse option than spending billions at LHR to sustain 19 plus million transfer passengers.

[Dairyground]

The public purse has to learn to live within it's means, something no politician in recent years has contemplated. The answer is always "tax more".

On the contrary, recent governments, including the current UK government, have taxed less and borrowed more. Greece is a prime example of where such policies lead. Does nobody who thinks UK Income Tax rates are too high remember the days when we mostly accepted without too much objection a basic rate of 7/9d (about 39p) in the pound?

But back to Heathrow. As a transfer passenger, I never like having to change airports to make a connection. I care a lot less where exactly the intermediate city might be. so, somewhat reluctantly, I would support a third runway. However, if the demand for new routes to economic hot spots is really there, why not offload some of the services from routes with multiple fligts per day to a secondary hub in MAN or EDI? BA could surely fill one of the current JFK services from MAN, and use the vacated slot to initiate a service to somewhere new, like Seoul.

[Skipness One Echo]

It doesn't work like that. It simply just does not. MAN-JFK would have a marginal impact on LHR-JFK. You hub through one place for economies of scale, not some "share with the regions" policy like the BBC pretending to move to Salford. Explain why Virgin don't operate a single MAN-EWR/JFK?

[pwalhx]

I am sorry but a High Speed rail line between LHR and LGW is nto a good option, do you really think passengers arriving at LHR would want to get on a train to connect to a flight at LGW. More likely they would think 'sod that' and look at an airport where they can connect without such messing about, I would.

[Heathrow Harry]

15 million voters in the London area = no third runway

[compton3bravo]

Sorry BCN boy, Gatwick could take up the slack but the airlines you mentioned are only operating into Gatwick solely because they cannot get slots at Heathrow. Nobody wants to fly long haul from Stansted and there are very few long haul long flights - and some of them are struggling - from other airports in the UK with the exception of the Middle East carriers.
It is just a simple fact - everybody wants to fly in and out of Heathrow - simples!

[PAXboy]

Also, the carriers only want to operate at one site - the cost savings of having a BIG hub are significant. The current recession only emphasises that.

[Skipness One Echo]

A vocal NIMBY class does not speak for man voters, many of whom WORK in the industry! The country needs a third runway and the only realistic place is LHR. Worth mentioning they are thinking of selling off RAF Northolt so airspace capacity may not be such an issue.

[North West]

The developments in the middle east should be proof enough of the wider benefits of creating a scale hub. There must be a reason why the gulf states are pouring money into developing airlines and airports around a hub spoke model. It's possible that rather than seeing transit passengers coming through Abu Dhabi or Dubai as worthless freeloaders, the more enlightened thinkers in the Middle East released such passengers are the critical mass in a model that would allow Abu Dhabi and Dubai to be linked to far more places than would otherwise be the case. That in turn would be good for business and tourism.
If that was the plan (and I'm sure it was) then you'd say so far so good. But just because LHR has evolved over 70 years and not just the 20, doesn't mean the same principles aren't in play here in the UK

[Baltasound]

It is also cobblers to suggest that a 3rd runway at LHR will be entirely funded by the private sector - nope. The public sector will be paying more than a chunky wedge in terms of servicing the airport - transport costs for one.

And the project is not shovel ready either. It will be bogged down in the courts for at least 2 years and the environmental case will have to be watertight to the nth degree or it will be bye bye.

Personally I don't see the need for another runway, but then I am almost certainly in a minority.

If the Tories want one (and the Labour Party as well) - run on that platform in 2015.

[racedo]

Nortwest

Mid east oilconomies have more money than sense and investing more and more into airports and airlines that never have a hope of paying their way.

Not really want to emulate anything they do, even though Brokeback Dave is prostituting himself to sell off RBS as payback for Libya involvement.

[Skipness One Echo]

that never have a hope of paying their way.

The defintion of the British economy then? This is what happens when all you need to run policy is a PPE from Oxbridge. *u**wits to a man.

[racedo]

The defintion of the British economy then? This is what happens when all you need to run policy is a PPE from Oxbridge. *u**wits to a man.

or have been to Eton like Brokebaxck Dave.......

Sadly too many career politicians stay and never do anything useful in life....