Aviation Review Predictions
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: London
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aviation Review Predictions
I don't know about you but I'm getting a bit bored with the endless arguments about future airport capacity in the South East. It's all in Howard Davies' hands now so how about a thread where we just make our predictions now as to what will be the outcome - then we can all see who was right in a year or so's time? (Probably no-one!). Rules as follows:
a) No debate or direct replies - just our hunches
b) No cynical quips
c) It's not what we think should happen - but what we think will be the outcome.
For what it' worth, I say:
1. Permanent mixed mode at LHR
2. New runway at LGW
3. New runway at STN
4. Detailed feasibility study into additional Thames Estuary airport
a) No debate or direct replies - just our hunches
b) No cynical quips
c) It's not what we think should happen - but what we think will be the outcome.
For what it' worth, I say:
1. Permanent mixed mode at LHR
2. New runway at LGW
3. New runway at STN
4. Detailed feasibility study into additional Thames Estuary airport
5. None of the above will be an outcome of the commission, which has no power to make anything happen, only to make recommendations.
Politicians will determine what, if anything, is done as a consequence of those recommendations. In order to predict that, it's necessary first to predict the result of the next election.
Politicians will determine what, if anything, is done as a consequence of those recommendations. In order to predict that, it's necessary first to predict the result of the next election.
A shortlist of four sites for the "Third London Airport" (after Luton and City, obviously
):
Foulness, Essex
Nuthamstead, Essex
Wing/Cublington, Bucks
Thurleigh, Beds.
What goes around, comes around...
):Foulness, Essex
Nuthamstead, Essex
Wing/Cublington, Bucks
Thurleigh, Beds.
What goes around, comes around...
Politicians will determine what, if anything, is done as a consequence of those recommendations. In order to predict that, it's necessary first to predict the result of the next election.
Paxing All Over The World
Very good adfly.
By the time there is a politician with the cojones to do ANYTHING, it will be too late. The hub traffic will have moved further east, Britain will be in the same financial black hole we are now. There won't be any money or any pax. Nothing will happen because LHR will be able to cope with the rump demand.
By the time there is a politician with the cojones to do ANYTHING, it will be too late. The hub traffic will have moved further east, Britain will be in the same financial black hole we are now. There won't be any money or any pax. Nothing will happen because LHR will be able to cope with the rump demand.
Care to share your knowledge with the rest of us ?
Do you actually think Cameroon would allow a situation where Govt's desire would not have already been communicated to a couple of the key influencers.........
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Key point is that post 2015, the coalition as we know it will cease to exist.
Therefore -
Davies will push for the logical answer the industry wants, namely LHR R3. His committee will try and push the other options, including do nothing, STN or LGW R2, or even BHX as a hub.
Boris Island will remain a non-starter.
The problem then comes in whether findings are accepted. If Cameron gets re-elected, he will have a mandate for R3, and Goldsmith might be out of the way. Replacement of any current MP by Boris makes LHR 3 extremely unlikely - too much of a pledge and London is his current remit. He can always plump for STN R2 as a "stepping stone" to a Boris Island that we all know will never happen.
Under Labour, there is verbal agreement to accept Davies, but will Milibland agree to that post 2015? That's probably the biggest challenge.
Then you will have other mitigating factors - surface access will be defined by rail above road. So if Xrail is already going to be full, Boris / TfL will want another new route option as part of a Section 106 (planning gain) agreement.
Alternatively, given that Xrail will be built, they might back STN and a new route out that way - easier to push through than new capacity from LGW into central London - unless that feeds into an Xrail 2.
More worryingly, BHX might get pushed, because 4 shuttle trains an hour firing up HS2 will be a huge boost to the business case. Suddenly, Londoners will have a reason to back HS2. Expect a BHX terminal and BHX Through station "solution" to the problem.
So sorry I can't just give a list. As already commented on other threads, there are too many factors at play. This isn't about quips from Sir Humphrey anymore, you could write a whole series of YM on the subject.
You want me to put money on the outcome? Well tonight I'll go for STN2 + new moderate speed link in to it.
Tomorrow I'll stick my chips on LHR R3. Do any of us really know?
Therefore -
Davies will push for the logical answer the industry wants, namely LHR R3. His committee will try and push the other options, including do nothing, STN or LGW R2, or even BHX as a hub.
Boris Island will remain a non-starter.
The problem then comes in whether findings are accepted. If Cameron gets re-elected, he will have a mandate for R3, and Goldsmith might be out of the way. Replacement of any current MP by Boris makes LHR 3 extremely unlikely - too much of a pledge and London is his current remit. He can always plump for STN R2 as a "stepping stone" to a Boris Island that we all know will never happen.
Under Labour, there is verbal agreement to accept Davies, but will Milibland agree to that post 2015? That's probably the biggest challenge.
Then you will have other mitigating factors - surface access will be defined by rail above road. So if Xrail is already going to be full, Boris / TfL will want another new route option as part of a Section 106 (planning gain) agreement.
Alternatively, given that Xrail will be built, they might back STN and a new route out that way - easier to push through than new capacity from LGW into central London - unless that feeds into an Xrail 2.
More worryingly, BHX might get pushed, because 4 shuttle trains an hour firing up HS2 will be a huge boost to the business case. Suddenly, Londoners will have a reason to back HS2. Expect a BHX terminal and BHX Through station "solution" to the problem.
So sorry I can't just give a list. As already commented on other threads, there are too many factors at play. This isn't about quips from Sir Humphrey anymore, you could write a whole series of YM on the subject.
You want me to put money on the outcome? Well tonight I'll go for STN2 + new moderate speed link in to it.
Tomorrow I'll stick my chips on LHR R3. Do any of us really know?
Last edited by jabird; 12th Nov 2012 at 23:27.
Do any of us really trust the commission to come to the correct decision?
The commission was formed expressly for that purpose - to come to the "correct" decision.
Of course that includes deciding not to decide ...
Alternatively, given that Xrail will be built, they might back STN and a new route out that way - easier to push through than new capacity from LGW into central London - unless that feeds into an Xrail 2.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: London
Age: 33
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What this commission should so is suggest that LHR should get R3 and R4 and be allowed to operate all its runways simultaneously (the best solution overall)
If not, then it will suggest replacing London's main airports with a new purpose built one (the 2nd best solution overall)
If not, then it will suggest replacing London's main airports with a new purpose built one (the 2nd best solution overall)
2 runways operating at the same time (as some have suggested)
How would that provide more capacity than currently exists ?
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: London
Age: 33
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has been at the end latter part of this thread
http://www.pprune.org/airlines-airpo...rt-london.html
Also using 4 runways at the same time means that more take-off and landing slots are available than when only 2 are being used
http://www.pprune.org/airlines-airpo...rt-london.html
Also using 4 runways at the same time means that more take-off and landing slots are available than when only 2 are being used