Feasibility for a New Airport in the South of England (Not Thames)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We don't need any more runways in the U.K.
I live up here in the sticks, near the foot of Mt. Belzoni. If I want to travel abroad, our local airport is a £20 taxi-journey away. One-way, obviously.
If I want to go East or South-East, EHAM, EDDF, LFPG, OMDB and now, even LTBA offers me all the connectivity I need.
Westbound, KJFK, KATL, KORD and CYYZ are the 'hubs' of choice.
Spare all that land for housing the Roma.
I live up here in the sticks, near the foot of Mt. Belzoni. If I want to travel abroad, our local airport is a £20 taxi-journey away. One-way, obviously.
If I want to go East or South-East, EHAM, EDDF, LFPG, OMDB and now, even LTBA offers me all the connectivity I need.
Westbound, KJFK, KATL, KORD and CYYZ are the 'hubs' of choice.
Spare all that land for housing the Roma.
Paxing All Over The World
Nice one ZOOKER!
getonittt
Ah, I think you've spotted the problem. 
Shall we rewind 30 years and not start new airports again?
getonittt
... It already has 6 ...
Shall we rewind 30 years and not start new airports again?
The Government actually make a decision for once and allow LHR, LTN, LGW & STN to build 1 extra runway each.
Either way, you clearly have never been to Luton if you believe there is room for another runway on top of the hill.
Either way, you clearly have never been to Luton if you believe there is room for another runway on top of the hill.
From the 2004 2nd runway proposal...
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: EGNX country
Age: 68
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EGNX may have plenty of land around it but the airport happens to be on top of a hill with the contours dropping quite steeply on all sides.
Housing and a large freight depot have now passed planning so the north side is unavailable for development, to the east is M1 and Kegworth, to the west Donington Park Racing Circuit
The original proposal for a second runway to the south would have involved re-scuplturing the landscape massively and anyway HS2 is now proposed to cut through exactly where the second runway was supposed to go.
Housing and a large freight depot have now passed planning so the north side is unavailable for development, to the east is M1 and Kegworth, to the west Donington Park Racing Circuit
The original proposal for a second runway to the south would have involved re-scuplturing the landscape massively and anyway HS2 is now proposed to cut through exactly where the second runway was supposed to go.
Short memory Dave?
From the 2004 2nd runway proposal...
From the 2004 2nd runway proposal...
In fact, not content with that, they also suggested an alternative layout with parallel NNE/SSW-oriented runways. Apparently those little brown wavy lines on the map don't mean anything.
Anyway, have a read:
http://www.pavan.org.uk/Documents/2_runway_proposal.pdf
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: 285ft agl
Age: 35
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm very familiar with Luton thank you.
If they think they can build an airport in the Thames Estuary then I'd like to think it's possible to build an additional runway further south of the airfield where there's a lot of green room to build on!
The main point I was putting across was that 1 additional runway given to either LHR or LGW isn't going to change anything. Once it becomes operational in 15-20 years and NATS have done the required airspace changes they'll be talk of needing additional capacity because we're already behind.
Make the enhanced changes now, whilst NATS are already working on London Airspace changes, and catch up with the rest.
If they think they can build an airport in the Thames Estuary then I'd like to think it's possible to build an additional runway further south of the airfield where there's a lot of green room to build on!
The main point I was putting across was that 1 additional runway given to either LHR or LGW isn't going to change anything. Once it becomes operational in 15-20 years and NATS have done the required airspace changes they'll be talk of needing additional capacity because we're already behind.
Make the enhanced changes now, whilst NATS are already working on London Airspace changes, and catch up with the rest.
The main point I was putting across was that 1 additional runway given to either LHR or LGW isn't going to change anything.
They both seem to be under the mistaken impression that an additional runway will provide around 250,000 ATMs pa of increased capacity.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: 285ft agl
Age: 35
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's the obvious gain to the one airport who gets it, everybody knows that...
The wider picture is what the UK needs, not one airports financial gain, and the amount of planning and consultation it's taken us to come up with plan A or B with just one extra runway is ridiculous.
Think of the money that's already been spent and we're still not realistically closer to a conclusion. Whatever happens someone is going to get upset whether it's local residents, airport owners, airlines or 'Plane Stupid'.
To reiterate what I'm saying, say in 2030 when we have our extra runway at whichever airport, do you really think our capacity issues will be well and truly sorted or do you think the air travel industry will have continued to grow over the time it's taken us to build the runway and we'll start discussions again about the next solution.
I'm not saying I'm correct with my idea but I think our Government are being very short sighted and most likely scared to make a decision with the fear of losing public support when it comes to election time.
The wider picture is what the UK needs, not one airports financial gain, and the amount of planning and consultation it's taken us to come up with plan A or B with just one extra runway is ridiculous.
Think of the money that's already been spent and we're still not realistically closer to a conclusion. Whatever happens someone is going to get upset whether it's local residents, airport owners, airlines or 'Plane Stupid'.
To reiterate what I'm saying, say in 2030 when we have our extra runway at whichever airport, do you really think our capacity issues will be well and truly sorted or do you think the air travel industry will have continued to grow over the time it's taken us to build the runway and we'll start discussions again about the next solution.
I'm not saying I'm correct with my idea but I think our Government are being very short sighted and most likely scared to make a decision with the fear of losing public support when it comes to election time.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not saying I'm correct with my idea
As the management of Gatwick have implied, if a runway is built at Heathrow, they would struggle to make the financial case to build one there too.
The same applies, probably to a greater extent, at Luton and Stansted.
Runways are very expensive to build, and their owners need to make a return on their investment. Bearing this in mind, and the fact that the major London area airports are in different private ownership, I can't see any justification for new runway capacity (to create a sustainable hub) anywhere but Heathrow.
Although it's an academic point, the land to the south of Luton's runway is relatively flat farm land on the same plateau as the current airport site, and very sparsely populated. It is eminently developable but faces a lot of political opposition (It's in Herts, not Luton; it's not owned by the airport freeholder (LBC); it is greenbelt land; it could never take the place of LHR as a hub).
The same applies, probably to a greater extent, at Luton and Stansted.
Runways are very expensive to build, and their owners need to make a return on their investment. Bearing this in mind, and the fact that the major London area airports are in different private ownership, I can't see any justification for new runway capacity (to create a sustainable hub) anywhere but Heathrow.
Although it's an academic point, the land to the south of Luton's runway is relatively flat farm land on the same plateau as the current airport site, and very sparsely populated. It is eminently developable but faces a lot of political opposition (It's in Herts, not Luton; it's not owned by the airport freeholder (LBC); it is greenbelt land; it could never take the place of LHR as a hub).
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: 285ft agl
Age: 35
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However the hub capacity, and there's only one of them, at Heathrow, is maxed out.
Also something that does get overlooked is contingency. If Heathrow lose a runway and go single runway ops it puts pressure on pilots & controllers, not to mention the additional fuel pollution when the stacks get busy for the environmental friendly people!
Dave Reid , I remember well the hilarity that accompanied Luton Airport's original 2002 proposal to built a second runway and terminal (in effect a second airport) in the valley to the south
The proposed Southern E-W runway isn't in a valley is it?
Appoaching the runway 26 threshold of London Luton Airport | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
I don't remember any hilarity at all, just significant concern from HCC as they realised the proposal was actually realistic as far as airfield construction and operation was concerned. The residents of Peters Green, Kimpton and Whitwell weren't laughing either. Don't remember the Consultative Comitteee laughing either, I presume you weren't part of HCC or LLACC or part of the earlier RUCATSE reporting team either, as your name isn't familar from the time. I'm sure we'd have recalled someone laughing.
The SW/NE alignment would have worked quite well, problems being the environmental impact on NE Luton, Hitchin and Harpenden who all would have been significantly affected by approach and departure, not to mention pointing most of Lutons departures and arrivals straight at the BNN hold. It is clearly explained in that report that the runway allignment annotation is indicative only. You did read and understand that I presume Dave? Because with slight changes to that allignment, the topographical picture improves 'considerably'.
Ah, Dave, you are showing a spectacular lack of knowledge of Lutons topography, well done mate.
The proposed Southern E-W runway isn't in a valley is it?
The proposed Southern E-W runway isn't in a valley is it?
The SW/NE alignment would have worked quite well, problems being the environmental impact on NE Luton, Hitchin and Harpenden who all would have been significantly affected by approach and departure, not to mention pointing most of Lutons departures and arrivals straight at the BNN hold. It is clearly explained in that report that the runway allignment annotation is indicative only. You did read and understand that I presume Dave? Because with slight changes to that allignment, the topographical picture improves 'considerably'.
Not that it hasn't been done before, of course.
But then debating Luton R2 is all a bit academic now, isn't it?
Join Date: May 2011
Location: LTN
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We cant even fill in the land to extend taxiways to each end of the runway as it is in the latest plan. If you think we could put a whole new runway up on the little hill and surrounding green belt you are living in la la land, not to mention its Hertfordshire and not Bedfordshire. They would be extremely opposed to that from day one and find a million ways to delay it for all eternity..
A new runway isnt even required, some days you can go hours and hours without airline movements at LTN. It would be a waste of time. If airlines really were so desperate they would have started flooding in years ago. Instead a couple of eastern european airlines picked up some routes and Flybe/Arann/Adria Left.
A new runway isnt even required, some days you can go hours and hours without airline movements at LTN. It would be a waste of time. If airlines really were so desperate they would have started flooding in years ago. Instead a couple of eastern european airlines picked up some routes and Flybe/Arann/Adria Left.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As the management of Gatwick have implied, if a runway is built at Heathrow, they would struggle to make the financial case to build one there too.
The same applies, probably to a greater extent, at Luton and Stansted.
Runways are very expensive to build, and their owners need to make a return on their investment. Bearing this in mind, and the fact that the major London area airports are in different private ownership, I can't see any justification for new runway capacity (to create a sustainable hub) anywhere but Heathrow.
The same applies, probably to a greater extent, at Luton and Stansted.
Runways are very expensive to build, and their owners need to make a return on their investment. Bearing this in mind, and the fact that the major London area airports are in different private ownership, I can't see any justification for new runway capacity (to create a sustainable hub) anywhere but Heathrow.
Blackbush?
why not shift some capacity to some of the smaller struggling to survive GA airports?
why not shift some capacity to some of the smaller struggling to survive GA airports?
100% - and construction of a 3rd runway at Heathrow should have started years ago.
Also something that does get overlooked is contingency. If Heathrow lose a runway and go single runway ops it puts pressure on pilots & controllers, not to mention the additional fuel pollution when the stacks get busy for the environmental friendly people!
Also something that does get overlooked is contingency. If Heathrow lose a runway and go single runway ops it puts pressure on pilots & controllers, not to mention the additional fuel pollution when the stacks get busy for the environmental friendly people!
DR OK, I'll settle for "dip" rather than valley
DR Nor can I find any reference in the proposal to the NNE/SSW alignment being "indicative only", but assuming you're correct and I need a visit to Specsavers,
DR I still fail to see how tweaking the orientation slightly can produce a pair of runways that don't each cross at least half a dozen contour lines.
I'm guessing you've not been involved a great deal in the hilarious and jovial pastime of airport planning/development, airport environmental issues and the consultations thereof. Am I right?
runway08not to mention its Hertfordshire and not Bedfordshire
Exactly which capacity do you have in mind? GA at LHR is minimal, it would make hardly any difference.
Ditto for the often-quoted argument that removing all-freight flights from LHR would ease congestion - they currently account for about 1 movement in every 400 or so.
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
"If I want to go East or South-East, EHAM, EDDF, LFPG, OMDB and now, even LTBA offers me all the connectivity I need.
Westbound, KJFK, KATL, KORD and CYYZ are the 'hubs' of choice.
"
Westbound, KJFK, KATL, KORD and CYYZ are the 'hubs' of choice.
"
OTB, who's off to see the World via Hamsterjam soon in a Fokker (mmm, nice).
Who needs Eefrow?, apart from those big, soft, Southern Jessie's.