Heathrow expansion won't happen
How about build the third runway, tunnel the M25 west of LHR and build 1 or 2 more runways and associated infrastructure to the southwest of LHR where the reservoirs are. Lets build and airport where people want to fly to/from and make it big enough for 100 years of expansion.
If we are going to do it then lets do it properly. Never happen of course as no government will look that far ahead.
If we are going to do it then lets do it properly. Never happen of course as no government will look that far ahead.
Guest
Posts: n/a
In all of these discussions there appears to be no account taken of the independent commercial entities which have invested money in their Heathrow operations. And it's not just Ferrovial (can we stop calling them BAA - HAL would be better) or BA or Virgin or Emirates. There are thousand and thousands of SMEs that earn a living from LHR.
Where would the investment come from to fund construction a new airport in any part of the UK let alone the southeast of london?
And supposing that investment was available, the Govt facilitated approval to build and NATS found a way of integrating traffic, by what direction would a move out of LHR be enforced?
Can you really see BA walking away in any shape or form from T5? Would Ferrovial's investor say "Ho hum, goodbye money"?
Leaving the flights of fancy, the political infighting, the lack of CBA and the free market aside can we say Heathrow is too big now to scale back or close?
Better not bigger will produce capacity with very little capital spent on infrastructure. Removing operational constraints such as the Cranford Agreement to get rid of alternation, extending hours for ops and improving the ratio of seats per movement (eg more 380s) is worthwhile before committing billions to another site which all the major LHR operators have poo pooed.
Lastly, how long is the Atlanta Hartsfield terminal transfer shuttle? Humour me - I have a cunning plan.
Where would the investment come from to fund construction a new airport in any part of the UK let alone the southeast of london?
And supposing that investment was available, the Govt facilitated approval to build and NATS found a way of integrating traffic, by what direction would a move out of LHR be enforced?
Can you really see BA walking away in any shape or form from T5? Would Ferrovial's investor say "Ho hum, goodbye money"?
Leaving the flights of fancy, the political infighting, the lack of CBA and the free market aside can we say Heathrow is too big now to scale back or close?
Better not bigger will produce capacity with very little capital spent on infrastructure. Removing operational constraints such as the Cranford Agreement to get rid of alternation, extending hours for ops and improving the ratio of seats per movement (eg more 380s) is worthwhile before committing billions to another site which all the major LHR operators have poo pooed.
Lastly, how long is the Atlanta Hartsfield terminal transfer shuttle? Humour me - I have a cunning plan.
Last edited by Sir George Cayley; 11th Sep 2012 at 10:45.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 79
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LHR? What really is wrong with Northholt anyway?
Any new airport needs to be at least 30 miles from London.
Last edited by The Ancient Geek; 11th Sep 2012 at 11:58. Reason: fix formatting
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK, sometimes USA
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In terms of hub connectivity, I see no mention made so far about the vital need for new routes fior air-freight purposes. The whole issue of O&D v. transit passengers and freight is connected to make a route viable or not. You simply can't separate these and hive off some of the activity to other airports.
Also no one seems to realise the approach and departure paths for any hub airport are vast. An estuary airport will still generate noise over London, albeit primarily in the east end. This is particularly so for aircraft landing eastwards towards an estuary airport.
Perhaps they should do it the other way around. i.e. reclaim the reservoirs for airport use (as someone has already suggested), then build new reservoirs for London in the estuary. That would leave the West London economy intact and the estuary habitat intact. Possible the new reservoir project could also address the replacement Thames Barrier/flooding of London risk?
Also no one seems to realise the approach and departure paths for any hub airport are vast. An estuary airport will still generate noise over London, albeit primarily in the east end. This is particularly so for aircraft landing eastwards towards an estuary airport.
Perhaps they should do it the other way around. i.e. reclaim the reservoirs for airport use (as someone has already suggested), then build new reservoirs for London in the estuary. That would leave the West London economy intact and the estuary habitat intact. Possible the new reservoir project could also address the replacement Thames Barrier/flooding of London risk?
Possible the new reservoir project could also address the replacement Thames Barrier/flooding of London risk?
An estuary airport will still generate noise over London, albeit primarily in the east end. This is particularly so for aircraft landing eastwards towards an estuary airport.
Further West?
The idea of moving the airport further West is interesting.
Someone suggested between Reading and Maidenhead.
As their centres are both concrete dumps, maybe locate the airport on either Reading or Maidenhead. Very few would miss these towns/dumps.
In reality, any politician with Victorian Vision would back Boris Island, funded by flogging off the land around lhr.
Someone suggested between Reading and Maidenhead.
As their centres are both concrete dumps, maybe locate the airport on either Reading or Maidenhead. Very few would miss these towns/dumps.
In reality, any politician with Victorian Vision would back Boris Island, funded by flogging off the land around lhr.
More bang for your buck
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: land of the clanger
Age: 82
Posts: 3,512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, you build a third runway at Heathrow along with yet more fragmented and badly integrated passenger facilities and if you're lucky in 10 years time it will be open for business. Then in 15 or 20 years time it'll be "we need a 4th runway at Heathrow"................
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And that, in my opinion, is the major problem with expansion at LHR. Presuming that permission were given for a third runway, that still would not really be enough, as four would be the minimum to guarantee that the airport remains functional well into the latter part of this century.
The question should not be about runway 3, but about runway 3 AND 4 at LHR. Why go through all this trouble when we know that 3 isnt really enough, and by the time it's operational we will be crying out for a fourth?!
The question should not be about runway 3, but about runway 3 AND 4 at LHR. Why go through all this trouble when we know that 3 isnt really enough, and by the time it's operational we will be crying out for a fourth?!
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thinking outside the perimeter fence
I recently read an article which points to a sandbank in the English Channel.
The author suggests that, if all neighbouring countries pooled their finances, it would be possible to build a super hub with no noise restrictions, no loss of land, 24 hour service and hi-speed rail connections to all major cities. This would make lhr, cdg etc. redundant. If you can dream it, then it's possible. The arguments about fog etc. also apply to the existing airports. I was once stuck at lhr for 3 days, due to fog.
The author suggests that, if all neighbouring countries pooled their finances, it would be possible to build a super hub with no noise restrictions, no loss of land, 24 hour service and hi-speed rail connections to all major cities. This would make lhr, cdg etc. redundant. If you can dream it, then it's possible. The arguments about fog etc. also apply to the existing airports. I was once stuck at lhr for 3 days, due to fog.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: On the ground too often
Age: 49
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only if you were happy to let seawater mix into freshwater reservoirs during tidal surges! Hosepipe bans all round...
The question should not be about runway 3, but about runway 3 AND 4 at LHR.
Has handling departures and arrivals simultaneously from the west side of the airport ever been considered - tailwind limitations taken into account of course? Not sure if it is possible, but I guess that could alleviate noise over west London on certain days quite considerably.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 79
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has handling departures and arrivals simultaneously from the west side of the airport ever been considered
Sorry, the idea is just crazy.
Noise abatement may sound fine but do you have any idea how much noise it makes when two jets collide and fall onto the houses below ?
And where would you find the space to build two vast reservoirs anywhere near London-as impoartnat as LHR is Londons water supply is abit higher up the priority list even for regualr travellers.
If you're going to expand an existing airport, there are better options.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: England
Age: 65
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair point about reservoirs being essential but why not drain one at a time, excavate and rebuild reservoirs at a level commensurate for an airport satellite terminal on top?
Heathrow gets a world class satellite terminal for transit passengers with a 5 minute link to Heathrow itself with all the associated infrastructure, satellite would have easy access to M25 and extending the Piccadilly line isn't out of the question.
This would create more movements in an already congested airspace which is a huge issue and may prove a bridge too far.
Heathrow gets a world class satellite terminal for transit passengers with a 5 minute link to Heathrow itself with all the associated infrastructure, satellite would have easy access to M25 and extending the Piccadilly line isn't out of the question.
This would create more movements in an already congested airspace which is a huge issue and may prove a bridge too far.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Northern Territory Australia
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The first step to parallel mixed mode operations at LHR seems to have been taken with the scrapping of the Cranford Agreement.
So why is it taking so long for someone with the right trouser equipment to get this into operation? Well, presumably the new Minister of Transport and his lieutenant have been put there to get it moving after the Greening disaster so Minister GYAIG
So why is it taking so long for someone with the right trouser equipment to get this into operation? Well, presumably the new Minister of Transport and his lieutenant have been put there to get it moving after the Greening disaster so Minister GYAIG
The first step to parallel mixed mode operations at LHR seems to have been taken with the scrapping of the Cranford Agreement.
Officially, the ending of the Cranford Agreement is to allow, for the first time, segregated mode alternation on easterlies similar to what has been done for for many years on westerlies.
However that can't be done until there is a more symmetrical arrangement of taxiways on the 09s. At the moment, there aren't enough RETs on 09R to allow a sustained landing rate, nor enough access taxiways on 09L for continuous departures. This will be addressed over the next couple of years.
You are right in saying that those changes, of course, would also allow parallel mixed mode operations on easterlies, if a decision was taken to go down that route.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: On a foreign shore trying a new wine diet. So far, I've lost 3days!
Age: 75
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"..so Minister GYAIG"
Fat chance with the likes of "Dithering Dave", "Nervous Nick" and "Deadwood Merely-bland" supposedly leading this country and unable to make a decision to save their lives.
Now, if Boris were P.M.
In the meantime, the only quick way LHR can increase capacity is to lift the night-time restrictions, then move to simultaneous mixed-mode operations, although the lack of standardised RETs may make that somewhat more difficult.
Let's face it, the 3rd runway is never going to happen and it would only ever have been a "stop-gap" bodge job before a 4th. runway would have been needed. So, let's hope one of the politicians has the g*nads to make a quick decision to start the reclamation work for a new state-of-the-art 4/6 runway airport east of London, aligned NE/SW. That way all noise is away from the City allowing full 24 hour operations. It might even be compatible with EGMC if a 5th./7th. runway was required.
OTB
P.S. London Gateway is showing everyone how to reclaim and build infrastructure in the Thames estuary. Europe's largest logistics park. All it needs is an airport to become a totally integrated transport solution.
London Gateway
Fat chance with the likes of "Dithering Dave", "Nervous Nick" and "Deadwood Merely-bland" supposedly leading this country and unable to make a decision to save their lives.
Now, if Boris were P.M.
In the meantime, the only quick way LHR can increase capacity is to lift the night-time restrictions, then move to simultaneous mixed-mode operations, although the lack of standardised RETs may make that somewhat more difficult.
Let's face it, the 3rd runway is never going to happen and it would only ever have been a "stop-gap" bodge job before a 4th. runway would have been needed. So, let's hope one of the politicians has the g*nads to make a quick decision to start the reclamation work for a new state-of-the-art 4/6 runway airport east of London, aligned NE/SW. That way all noise is away from the City allowing full 24 hour operations. It might even be compatible with EGMC if a 5th./7th. runway was required.
OTB
P.S. London Gateway is showing everyone how to reclaim and build infrastructure in the Thames estuary. Europe's largest logistics park. All it needs is an airport to become a totally integrated transport solution.
London Gateway