Heathrow Plans (Merged)
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North of England
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But critics have said it will irreparably damage the UK's credentials on tackling climate change.
Definitely has more to do with the creation of construction jobs and infrastructure development than meeting what BAA need.
Big infrastructural projects will start getting the go ahead as they can create thousands of jobs.
Not a real shock.
Big question is where are all these extra flights going to go to ?
Big infrastructural projects will start getting the go ahead as they can create thousands of jobs.
Not a real shock.
Big question is where are all these extra flights going to go to ?
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: West Yorkshire Zone
Posts: 976
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I Agree, Where will all the extra capacity go???
Very Good For LHR.
But it has been quoted many many times before, One of these days.....They will be a 'major' catastrophie over London???
BANG - Aircraft will collide due to a very congested sky!!
It's only a matter of time.....
Common Sense dictates that there is only so many Aircraft that can be handled SAFELY in a day!!
Think about it.
Very Good For LHR.
But it has been quoted many many times before, One of these days.....They will be a 'major' catastrophie over London???
BANG - Aircraft will collide due to a very congested sky!!
It's only a matter of time.....
Common Sense dictates that there is only so many Aircraft that can be handled SAFELY in a day!!
Think about it.
Government White Paper 2003.
My italics;
11.62
The Government supports a third runway..............once we can be confident that the key condition relating to air quality can be met. We judge that there is a substatially better prospect of achieving this with a third runway and terminal capacity built in the 2015 - 2020 period, as long as we take action without delay to tackle the NO2 problem. The Government's support would also be conditional on measures to prevent deterioration of the noise climate and improve public transport access as set out above.
And they wonder why no-one believes a word they say.
My italics;
11.62
The Government supports a third runway..............once we can be confident that the key condition relating to air quality can be met. We judge that there is a substatially better prospect of achieving this with a third runway and terminal capacity built in the 2015 - 2020 period, as long as we take action without delay to tackle the NO2 problem. The Government's support would also be conditional on measures to prevent deterioration of the noise climate and improve public transport access as set out above.
And they wonder why no-one believes a word they say.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, the government appear to be right in line with their white paper. By the time they've had all the legal challenges and dragged all the protesters off the site it probably will be 2015.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BAI
The fact that it's been "quoted many many times before", usually by the anti-expansion lobby and/or by others who don't actually know anything about how air traffic is managed, doesn't make it correct.
But it has been quoted many many times before, One of these days.....They will be a 'major' catastrophie (sic) over London???
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: London, Berlin, Bucharest
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
listening to the radio on the way home tonight, i heard them say somthing about a T6 to go with the new runway. that would give the extra apron space.
many people complain about the extra pollution but with the new aircrafts coming out now the fule consumption per person and KG of freight on the aircraft is less that a car would use!
and if it means more aircrafts flying, hopefully it means i find a job quicker!!
many people complain about the extra pollution but with the new aircrafts coming out now the fule consumption per person and KG of freight on the aircraft is less that a car would use!
and if it means more aircrafts flying, hopefully it means i find a job quicker!!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: OXF
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, even with the third runway approved (although we have yet to see what happens from here onwards), some of the Whitehall geniuses have seen the light on a Heathrow hub for trains to connect the north, west and south to Heathrow better than before (the Arup proposal).
S.
S.
Whilst I was stationary for nearly 2 hours on the M6 due to an RTA on the northbound I was listening to 5 Live discussing the third runway at LHR. They had a lady from Plane Stupid talking - I could have strangled her - never heard so much rubbish spouted, rang the show to protest but they wouldn't put me on as I was calling from the car!! It's about time we all put the counter arguements to the Climate change/Green issues before these clowns get even more air time. Aviation is being very unfairly targeted.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love that old map. Three pairs of parallel runways. I assume that since then the 9/27 pair got extended to the west and T3 was built on what must have been 23R/5L and 15R/33L (or close)? If one of the BBC journos is reading, how about a good article on the history of Heathrow, it would certainly be topical.
Well, Labour are in for a well-deserved ar$e-kicking over this nonsense.
Have you seen how many peoples' homes would be destroyed to feed the greed of BAA with this absurd third runway idea?
At least an early election win by the Conservatives will put an end to this folly.
LHR creaks at the seams already. Nothing to do with runway capacity, everything to do with woeful infrastructure, poor access, expensive car parking, inadequate immigration manning, slow baggage transfer - it's an utter shambles. And it's the only airport with traffic jams inside it that I know of. For such basic reasons as stupid positioning of pedestrian-priority crossings on main roads instead of proper underpass links.
I don't normally support activists, but good luck to all those protesting against Brown's folly - I support your right to lawful protest 100% and hope that you will do everything legally possible to obstruct the absurd idea of another runway at this abysmal London airport.
LHR is the closest airport to me, yet I never use it unless there is absolutely no alternative. Instead I use the markedly superior BHX! Easier access, cheaper to park, no M25 - and it's free of the leaden hand of BAA!
Have you seen how many peoples' homes would be destroyed to feed the greed of BAA with this absurd third runway idea?
At least an early election win by the Conservatives will put an end to this folly.
LHR creaks at the seams already. Nothing to do with runway capacity, everything to do with woeful infrastructure, poor access, expensive car parking, inadequate immigration manning, slow baggage transfer - it's an utter shambles. And it's the only airport with traffic jams inside it that I know of. For such basic reasons as stupid positioning of pedestrian-priority crossings on main roads instead of proper underpass links.
I don't normally support activists, but good luck to all those protesting against Brown's folly - I support your right to lawful protest 100% and hope that you will do everything legally possible to obstruct the absurd idea of another runway at this abysmal London airport.
LHR is the closest airport to me, yet I never use it unless there is absolutely no alternative. Instead I use the markedly superior BHX! Easier access, cheaper to park, no M25 - and it's free of the leaden hand of BAA!
I lived just south west of LHR as a child. There were two extensions of what is now 27L at the western end compared to this map. The first one I think actually predated my 'awareness' of aicraft as interesting. things So am going to make at stab at early/mid 50s for the map based on the runway config and the fact that there are central area buldings-say 1953-56
Incidentally although as one poster pointed out there were six runways , on this map 23R/05L is labelled Runway number 7 ??
PB
Incidentally although as one poster pointed out there were six runways , on this map 23R/05L is labelled Runway number 7 ??
PB
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: west side
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
new runway for takeoffs only?
To appease west London residents would it work if the new runway was only used for take-offs/departures towards the west? I think FRA and other noise sensitive EU airports have operated new runways with this type of restriction.
Also is there any firm news yet on the runway length? ie. is the plan to squeeze in a shortened runway for regional ops only?
I suspect a new runway will simply mean all the longhaul scheduled operators at LGW move up the road to LHR leaving LGW more lifeless than it is today bar the active orange fleet.
Also is there any firm news yet on the runway length? ie. is the plan to squeeze in a shortened runway for regional ops only?
I suspect a new runway will simply mean all the longhaul scheduled operators at LGW move up the road to LHR leaving LGW more lifeless than it is today bar the active orange fleet.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why can't we ever think outside the box, and far enough ahead in this country.
As soon as the M25 was completed they were digging it up and widening it and we are still doing it !!!!
Why keep bolting bits onto Heathrow? It's already overcrowded, a nightmare to get to (what time do you have to leave your home to try and get there?) and aircraft noise disturbs 10's of thousands. As one poster has already said it's only a matter of time before shoe horning all these aircraft into this confined area of West London will result in an accident on the ground or worse still a crash into a built up area of London.
The solution? A totally new airport in the Thames Estuary. They have done it in Japan and Korea (and to a certain extent Hong Kong) so why not in the UK. It would be the kick start to the economy from heaven. Thousands of construction jobs overnight. Why not start with a blank piece of paper? No noise worries, 24 hour ops so capacity should not be a problem. Workers will migrate there so could regenerate a pretty run down area. Tailor made infrastructure....
It's obvious. Any airport that is looking at 3 runways and a Terminal 6 is past it's useful life. Just ask anyone at JFK.....
As soon as the M25 was completed they were digging it up and widening it and we are still doing it !!!!
Why keep bolting bits onto Heathrow? It's already overcrowded, a nightmare to get to (what time do you have to leave your home to try and get there?) and aircraft noise disturbs 10's of thousands. As one poster has already said it's only a matter of time before shoe horning all these aircraft into this confined area of West London will result in an accident on the ground or worse still a crash into a built up area of London.
The solution? A totally new airport in the Thames Estuary. They have done it in Japan and Korea (and to a certain extent Hong Kong) so why not in the UK. It would be the kick start to the economy from heaven. Thousands of construction jobs overnight. Why not start with a blank piece of paper? No noise worries, 24 hour ops so capacity should not be a problem. Workers will migrate there so could regenerate a pretty run down area. Tailor made infrastructure....
It's obvious. Any airport that is looking at 3 runways and a Terminal 6 is past it's useful life. Just ask anyone at JFK.....
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Age: 50
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seeing as the thread has drifted away from [FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']professional[/FONT] opinion...
I live by the Thames on the extended centerline of 09R. (We chose to move here 4 years ago). I have minor issues with the idea of a 3rd runway, after all it will be a good few miles north of me. However, buried some 50 pages into a recent report was the aim to introduce full time mixed mode use of runways at Heathrow. This I doo have an issue with as currently we get around 1/2 the day with LOW noise and the other half with higher.
As PAX Heathrow is a pain in the a$$ and we choose to use other routes where possible.
As a the owner of a small business I benefit from the Heathrow bump to the local economy too.
CO2 trading and technology will mitigate the climate impact anyway so this is a red herring as an excuse for blocking the development.
my own view despite the above is we need a 24 hour airport elsewhere, Thames estuary, Bristol/Birmingham/oxford area etc....
iX
I live by the Thames on the extended centerline of 09R. (We chose to move here 4 years ago). I have minor issues with the idea of a 3rd runway, after all it will be a good few miles north of me. However, buried some 50 pages into a recent report was the aim to introduce full time mixed mode use of runways at Heathrow. This I doo have an issue with as currently we get around 1/2 the day with LOW noise and the other half with higher.
As PAX Heathrow is a pain in the a$$ and we choose to use other routes where possible.
As a the owner of a small business I benefit from the Heathrow bump to the local economy too.
CO2 trading and technology will mitigate the climate impact anyway so this is a red herring as an excuse for blocking the development.
my own view despite the above is we need a 24 hour airport elsewhere, Thames estuary, Bristol/Birmingham/oxford area etc....
iX