Another runway at Heathrow
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah - and he's probably going to be the next leader of the Tory party................
TBH we should close this thread and come back in 10 years to see if it ever was built - my guess is not.........................
TBH we should close this thread and come back in 10 years to see if it ever was built - my guess is not.........................
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Birmingham
Age: 53
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or how about moving the capacity elsewhere in the country. If APD was reduced for Birmingham and Manchester the airlines would soon follow the money. The astronomic cost of any additional London runway would cover a massive reduction in APD and probably a load of advertising overseas..
I can see the Advert Now..
'Britain.. Not just London..'
But god forbid someone spends money elsewhere in the country..
I can see the Advert Now..
'Britain.. Not just London..'
But god forbid someone spends money elsewhere in the country..
This is the seventh decade in which south east runway capacity has been debated, enquired about, reported on, ideas floated, commissions etc etc etc. Still no extra runway!!
Interesting to consider what has happened at Amsterdam, Paris, Frankfurt etc airports during this time. Moreover population growth and general development in the south east [particularly west of London] during the last seventy years has rendered development of runways at existing airports significantly more problematical.
Boris Island is ambitious and futuristic. Yes there are lots of problems, costly yes, but none are insurmountable........didn't they do something like that in Hong Kong? The Foulness solution proposed by the Roskill Commission could have been in service for years by now!
As someone said earlier, we'll probably still be debating it in ten years!
Interesting to consider what has happened at Amsterdam, Paris, Frankfurt etc airports during this time. Moreover population growth and general development in the south east [particularly west of London] during the last seventy years has rendered development of runways at existing airports significantly more problematical.
Boris Island is ambitious and futuristic. Yes there are lots of problems, costly yes, but none are insurmountable........didn't they do something like that in Hong Kong? The Foulness solution proposed by the Roskill Commission could have been in service for years by now!
As someone said earlier, we'll probably still be debating it in ten years!
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Hartlepool
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So finally the report is released recommending the proposal which 90% of people know needs to happen
BUT...
Let's all prepare to watch it go away very quietly again
can't help but feel this whole study was a complete waste of time
BUT...
Let's all prepare to watch it go away very quietly again
can't help but feel this whole study was a complete waste of time
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And sunk before the day is even out....
David Cameron 'will not break promise' on opposing new Heathrow runway, sources claim - Telegraph
"Sources here....Sources there, my God, there is sauce everywhere !
What an utter, utter waste of money !
Oh and indebted to the CEO chairman who an hour before said in a rousing Churchillian speech
"we can do this "
We built the Channel Tunnel, The Olympic Village, Crossrail.... anybody cost AND spot where all these are located ?
#Northerworkhouse
David Cameron 'will not break promise' on opposing new Heathrow runway, sources claim - Telegraph
"Sources here....Sources there, my God, there is sauce everywhere !
What an utter, utter waste of money !
Oh and indebted to the CEO chairman who an hour before said in a rousing Churchillian speech
"we can do this "
We built the Channel Tunnel, The Olympic Village, Crossrail.... anybody cost AND spot where all these are located ?
#Northerworkhouse
I would love to know who these thousands of people are who currently live under aircraft free skies but will be suddenly blighted by noise from the third runway.
BAA have also been buying up houses in Sipson for years and currently rent them to staff at reduced rates most of the residents were paid out handsomely and moved on long ago.
As for STN get real. The business case was is and always will be for LHR. If we are going to do it lets get the most value out of it. If it goes ahead I would think BAA would be lobbying for a 4th runway by the time construction starts.
BAA have also been buying up houses in Sipson for years and currently rent them to staff at reduced rates most of the residents were paid out handsomely and moved on long ago.
As for STN get real. The business case was is and always will be for LHR. If we are going to do it lets get the most value out of it. If it goes ahead I would think BAA would be lobbying for a 4th runway by the time construction starts.
Interesting to note a whole bunch of recommendations that the Commission has included as part of its R3 verdict:
A Balanced Approach to Expansion
Expanding Heathrow provides a unique opportunity to change the way the airport operates. The additional income generated as a result of operating a third runway should be allocated in a new way, and the airport should be obliged to develop a better and more collaborative relationship with its local communities, as some overseas airports have done.
The Commission therefore recommends that a number of measures should be taken forward, in parallel with the approval, construction and operation of any new capacity at Heathrow, to address its impacts on the local environment and communities:
• Following construction of a third runway at the airport there should be a ban on all scheduled night flights in the period 11:30pm to 6:00am. This is only possible with expansion.
• A clear ‘noise envelope’ should be agreed and Heathrow Airport must be legally bound to stay within these limits. This could include stipulating no overall increase above current levels.
• A third runway should allow periods of predictable respite to be more reliably maintained.
• Heathrow Airport Ltd should compensate those who would lose their homes at full market value plus an additional 25% and reasonable costs. It should make this offer available as soon as possible.
• Heathrow Airport Ltd shoud be held to its commitment to spend more than £1 billion on community compensation. In addition, a new aviation noise charge or levy should be introduced to insure that airport users pay more to compensate local communities. Taken together these would fund enhanced noise insulation and other schemes. Support for schools should be included as a priority.
• A Community Engagement Board should be established under an independent Chair, with real influence over spending on compensation and community support and over the airport’s operations.
• An independent aviation noise authority should be established with a statutory right to be consulted on flight paths and other operating procedures.
• Training opportunities and apprenticeships for local people should be provided so that nearby communities benefit from jobs generated by the new infrastructure.
• A major shift in mode-share for those working at and arriving at the airport should be incentivised, through measures including new rail investments and a continuing focus on employee behaviour change. A congestion or access charge for motor vehicles should also be considered.
• Additional operations at an expanded Heathrow must be contingent on acceptable performance on air quality. New capacity should only be released when it is clear that air quality at sites around the airport will not delay compliance with EU limits.
• A fourth runway should be firmly ruled out. The government should make a commitment in Parliament not to expand the airport further. There is no sound operational or environmental case for a four runway Heathrow.
Expanding Heathrow provides a unique opportunity to change the way the airport operates. The additional income generated as a result of operating a third runway should be allocated in a new way, and the airport should be obliged to develop a better and more collaborative relationship with its local communities, as some overseas airports have done.
The Commission therefore recommends that a number of measures should be taken forward, in parallel with the approval, construction and operation of any new capacity at Heathrow, to address its impacts on the local environment and communities:
• Following construction of a third runway at the airport there should be a ban on all scheduled night flights in the period 11:30pm to 6:00am. This is only possible with expansion.
• A clear ‘noise envelope’ should be agreed and Heathrow Airport must be legally bound to stay within these limits. This could include stipulating no overall increase above current levels.
• A third runway should allow periods of predictable respite to be more reliably maintained.
• Heathrow Airport Ltd should compensate those who would lose their homes at full market value plus an additional 25% and reasonable costs. It should make this offer available as soon as possible.
• Heathrow Airport Ltd shoud be held to its commitment to spend more than £1 billion on community compensation. In addition, a new aviation noise charge or levy should be introduced to insure that airport users pay more to compensate local communities. Taken together these would fund enhanced noise insulation and other schemes. Support for schools should be included as a priority.
• A Community Engagement Board should be established under an independent Chair, with real influence over spending on compensation and community support and over the airport’s operations.
• An independent aviation noise authority should be established with a statutory right to be consulted on flight paths and other operating procedures.
• Training opportunities and apprenticeships for local people should be provided so that nearby communities benefit from jobs generated by the new infrastructure.
• A major shift in mode-share for those working at and arriving at the airport should be incentivised, through measures including new rail investments and a continuing focus on employee behaviour change. A congestion or access charge for motor vehicles should also be considered.
• Additional operations at an expanded Heathrow must be contingent on acceptable performance on air quality. New capacity should only be released when it is clear that air quality at sites around the airport will not delay compliance with EU limits.
• A fourth runway should be firmly ruled out. The government should make a commitment in Parliament not to expand the airport further. There is no sound operational or environmental case for a four runway Heathrow.
We built the Channel Tunnel, The Olympic Village, Crossrail.... anybody cost AND spot where all these are located ?
The 'LONDON 2012' Olympic village was funnily enough built in London.
As for Crossrail, anybody that has to commute into London and then get on the tube to get into the centre will tell you it was needed and will be an asset for decades. I have worked and commuted in many parts of the country and nothing compares to the tube in rush hour. A large percentage of the travellers are tourists during the day and these people bring money into the country.
There are many viable projects in the north and south west too. If the business case is there then they should be built. Look at the mine that has just been approved. Will create thousands of jobs and bring in cash to the north east. Look at HS2, we need a modern railway to cater for the trains of the future but it is being opposed by people living near the route.
Until we can build infrastructure without years of consultations the north will always come second to the capital as the money and will just isn't there to carry on fighting the nimbys without major investment at the pre approval stage.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Channel Tunnel was indeed built in the ideal spot especially for Londoners Spiffing !!!!!
Must confess i have never heard of Nimbies having such influence that we can dress it up as an excuse re lack of investment in the North. Deary me that's a new one.
Like Davies it is London Authoritariasm, coupled to a complete lack of will to make a change NOT by subsidies but capital investment in worthwhile infastructure.
Look at the debacle with network rail last week. Can you blame is for getting a tad peeed off ?
No shortage of billions for investment in the capital but stuff everyone else !
Must confess i have never heard of Nimbies having such influence that we can dress it up as an excuse re lack of investment in the North. Deary me that's a new one.
Like Davies it is London Authoritariasm, coupled to a complete lack of will to make a change NOT by subsidies but capital investment in worthwhile infastructure.
Look at the debacle with network rail last week. Can you blame is for getting a tad peeed off ?
No shortage of billions for investment in the capital but stuff everyone else !
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: uk
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
druk: this is a staggering new list of yet more bodies apparently needed to run and oversee/regulate this sacred cow of an airport. where is the sane voice of someone with genuine aviation experience?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: STANSTED & MANCHESTER
Posts: 1,893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't understand why the government can't just say give LHR. LGW and STN a new runway.
How can it be legal for a government to tell three companies that only one can expand it it has the choice as to which one can that is not fair competition and I bet if LGW or STN went to the European courts it would be see as unlawful.
But if this government had any credibility it would plan well ahead for the future and let LGW and STN build a 2nd runway so they could go after the same but ever changing market.
We have already started to see a change in the long haul market with more and more no frills airlines operating flight across the pond a hub airport will be less important to travellers as Aircraft become more capable of longer routes already people have moved from National flag carrier Airlines making the largest airline in the world for international travel RYANAIR with its main European Hub at Stansted so like it or not things change dramatically in the time a decision is made an a runway is built.
Another reason we need more runways at more London Airports is, we all know that the world is changing fast has anyone even realised the threat to the UK. Is huge what would happen if Heathrow was targeted and major damage ment LHR could not operate at all .... LGW is full STN has room but not a peak times ... So what do we do if something happens at LHR ?
It's not rocket science we need to plan ahead.
It will cost this country dear if we stick all our eggs in one Basket sorry Airport.
How can it be legal for a government to tell three companies that only one can expand it it has the choice as to which one can that is not fair competition and I bet if LGW or STN went to the European courts it would be see as unlawful.
But if this government had any credibility it would plan well ahead for the future and let LGW and STN build a 2nd runway so they could go after the same but ever changing market.
We have already started to see a change in the long haul market with more and more no frills airlines operating flight across the pond a hub airport will be less important to travellers as Aircraft become more capable of longer routes already people have moved from National flag carrier Airlines making the largest airline in the world for international travel RYANAIR with its main European Hub at Stansted so like it or not things change dramatically in the time a decision is made an a runway is built.
Another reason we need more runways at more London Airports is, we all know that the world is changing fast has anyone even realised the threat to the UK. Is huge what would happen if Heathrow was targeted and major damage ment LHR could not operate at all .... LGW is full STN has room but not a peak times ... So what do we do if something happens at LHR ?
It's not rocket science we need to plan ahead.
It will cost this country dear if we stick all our eggs in one Basket sorry Airport.
Curfew
Typically HKG flights to LHR arrive very early, before 0600.
If there is to be a curfew with a third LHR runway, the flights will need to depart HKG well after 0100 - too late for convenience.
Such a curfew will feed Emirates and their Dubai hub, taking customers away from Cathay, BA, Virgin.
If there is to be a curfew with a third LHR runway, the flights will need to depart HKG well after 0100 - too late for convenience.
Such a curfew will feed Emirates and their Dubai hub, taking customers away from Cathay, BA, Virgin.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: STANSTED & MANCHESTER
Posts: 1,893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
David Cameron ... Just said no decision will be made until everyone has read the report and a decision will be made by the end of the year 🙊 the waster can't even give a yes answer to any question why would he pay millions to go against the report .... Have some balls and make a decision simple Yes or simple No it's not hard
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
David Cameron is evasive at PM Question Time today when Labour leader Harriet Harman asks what he intends to do about Heathrow. He tries to avoid the topic by changing the subject. Ms Harman responds: "It seems like he's in a holding pattern above Heathrow and Boris won't let him land." She stresses the need for a "swift decision" on the Davies report - and pledges that Labour will support them. Will he put the national interest first? she asks. Mr Cameron repeats the government's need to read and consider the report and says a decision will be made by the end of the year.
Dodgy Dave......
Dodgy Dave......
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Tamworth, UK / Nairobi, Kenya
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The answer is not to expand Heathrow, it's to expand West Midlands or Birmingham and run more trains to/from London.
People are already staying in towns like Rugby and Tamworth when they come for business in London, or moving there, because the commute is less than from a Hotel within the city.
So why not land the planes an hour (by train) away, you'll hardly notice the difference between that and the time you spend standing in queue with your shoes in your hands.
People are already staying in towns like Rugby and Tamworth when they come for business in London, or moving there, because the commute is less than from a Hotel within the city.
So why not land the planes an hour (by train) away, you'll hardly notice the difference between that and the time you spend standing in queue with your shoes in your hands.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newcastle NI
Posts: 824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Midlands as an alternative is a non starter,put simply its not where people want to go, they want to go to London, be it business or leisure, you don't fly to Nantes to visit Paris because there might at some stage be a quick train (unless their burning tyres on the tracks)
LHR will have some major obstacles to overcome, the political ones being the biggest
LHR will have some major obstacles to overcome, the political ones being the biggest