LHR given permission to build 3rd runway?

[Andy_S]

Originally Posted by Navpi

Er NO, let's not !

Let's have a root and branch evaluation of where the figures came from and identify who is paying for what and when and finalise exactly where the runway is supposed to be going.

Up , down, under or over OR On a gradual slop to Maidenhead !!!!

Off you go then. Drop back in from time to time to let us know how you’re getting on……….

Seriously, hasn’t there already been enough prevarication and deferral? Or do you simply want us to keep on talking and talking until you eventually get the answer that YOU want?

I’m the first to admit that expansion of Heathrow is far from an ideal solution. But it’s what the airlines want and it’s what UK plc wants. And that should be the end of the matter.

Let’s just get on with it.

[Navpi]

Well like most posters on here I would prefer to deal in facts.

Heathrow expansion: Manchester Airport boss urges government to work with all airports to realise economic potential - Manchester Evening News


The CEO has indicated Manchester would generate £75bn. That's MORE than the revised Heathrow figure I suppose you would give THEM Carte Blanch to expand on that basis.

The airport commission report has some airbus size holes in it and when the forecasts are disputed not by a protest group but ANOTHER lever of government you know you are in trouble.

Deal in facts and you win the arguments!
Deal in fiction and the papers will have a field day

[Skipness One Echo]

The CEO has indicated Manchester would generate £75bn. That's MORE than the revised Heathrow figure I suppose you would give THEM Carte Blanch to expand on that basis.

MAN should certainly expand in my view. I am not sure what your point is?
Some numbers are being bandied about long after the lengthy commission reported.
Do we throw all of that away? Have ANOTHER review? Pause again?

No, the UK is finally moving forward with expanding it's one true hub airport.
MAG and GIP (LGW) will disagree and present conflicting figures as it impacts their bottom line, especially Gatwick.

Might I suggest you start your own thread here ? You've really gone off on a rant...
Jet Blast - PPRuNe Forums

[Fairdealfrank]

Meanwhile, does anyone else share my feelings of mild irritation on the following, of children as innocent victims?:-

Growing up under Heathrow's flightpath - BBC News

How much does Heathrow pump in to Greater West London's economy?

Billions, it is the economy of the entire Thames Valley.

And why move near an airport (with your children) then complain about the noise?

Indeed, and/or near a pub and complain about the noise!

Has anyone observed that current aircraft are quieter than the pre-stage three machines that used to be my wake-up call when I was lodging at The Heston Hilton, circa 1982? Ah, didn't think so...

Of course they are, ask anyone who is old enough and who has lived under the flightpath since the 1960s.

The question has to be asked: if it so bad living under the flightpath why are house prices amongst the highest in the country?

Bet the NIMBYs and the Libdems can't answer it (correctly).

Silver-Boris Thames airport.
This has already been debated ad-nauseum on the following thread. This is an interesting thread, because it covers every topic of this debate, from every angle. There is something there for everyone.

New Thames Airport for London

The bottom line of my argument, is that LHR does not have the flight or ground infrastructure to be a world-hub airport. This is not about runways in the S.E., this is about an international hub airport, and LHR cannot provide that capacity. We need a 2- or 3-runway international airport-terminal, linked to a 2- or 3-runway regional terminal, which provides the regional feeder traffic to and from the international flights. And because LHR cannot accommodate lo-co carriers, I always travel to AMS for my international flights. It is quicker than travelling to LHR by train, especially since there is no overnight train to get me into LHR for 06:00. Thus LHR is not, and never can be, a world hub airport.

What we need is a 6-runway worldhub airport, with no city overflights, no noise problems, and no night ban. A true 24/7 airport. And it would be nice if it had motorway links north and south, train links to London and the west via Crossrail, TGV links to Paris and Brussels, plus HS2 links to the north and northwest. Only a Silver-Boris Thames airport can provide all of this. And in addition, the Silver-Boris Thames airport will form a part of a Thames barrage, which is long overdue and expensive in its own right.

Another runway at LHR will merely kick this can another 5 years down the road. It will not solve anything.

Ah Silver, you're back! Brilliant, about time too, but you're still wrong!

Forget about Silver Island, you'll never live long enough to see it, none of us will. That particular ship sailed in 1946 when RAF Heathrow became a civil airport.

In 1968, Harold Wilson's government first mooted the idea of another rwy in the south east, nothing has happened.

If it takes 50 years to NOT get another rwy at Heathrow, how long do you think it would take to get an entire airport built in the middle of nowhere and all the accompanying required infrastructure? Seriously how long?

Do you think the NIMBYs and Libdems would not peddle their nonsense in the estuary?

Do you not realise that it also cannot be built because no business will touch it, and government (any government) involvement in facilitating, as opposed to blocking, aviation improvements is non existant?

Do you seriously believe that any carrier, especially those who have paid millions for slot pairs, would ever leave Heathrow?

Importantly, home owners around Heathrow including those under the flight paths should be able to breathe a sigh of relief that this much needed development will help support property prices for sometime to come. Heathrow generates direct wealth for these very fortunate people. Pity some fail to appreciate what it is worth to them having such easy access to Heathrow and the direct and indirect jobs generated. If they don't like the thought of a third runway - sell out and move somewhere else but don't stop the much needed third runway. Now let's get on and let's try and build it as quickly as possible. It needs a Kennedy "we'll put men on the moon by the end of the decade" focus, especially post-Brexit.

Bit harder to fake a third rwy in 2016 than a moon landing in 1969!

jonnymac
Are the authorities aware that a new Airport is planned for the central belt in Scotland," closing and/or downgrading Glasgow and Edinburgh where expansion is impossible" with excellent road and rail links already in place, two of the longest runways in Europe, and backing from some of the largest airlines in the world, this will alter the whole economy of Scotland, and just maybe eliminate the need for any expansion in the South.

No disrespect, but have just seen a massive flock of pigs fly over that proposed site!

Of course LHR isn't ideal but it is the only realistic choice -the reason it is there in the first place is because its on the only bit of flat ground anywhere near London and with usual lack of foresight (perhaps pardonable at the time) was not to leave all the area north of LHR as open land rather than just half of it and developed the airport with that area shown from the start as provision for a third parallel runway.

Actually some of it might have been safeguarded in the early days. It is still less urbanised than equivelant areas on other sides of the airport.

Now its on to HS2 - 2050 anyone?

Waste of time and public money, let's have the M25 tunnel.

Why not somewhere like Upper Heyford ? Excellent transport links (M40 and a railway are very close), decent length of runway .... I expect to be shot down though :-)

Same problems and impracticalities as Silver Island (see above).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rivet Joint
By the way, I wouldn't be surprised to see EZY move all if not the majority of their LGW operation to LHR. You heard it here first.

No you didn't. Other's have speculated the same for several weeks. Although personally I'm not convinced.

It's on record. Easyjet stated in its submision to the Airports Commission that it supported a third rwy and in the event would open a large base at Heathrow.

Think of the positive news from this decision - Zac Goldsmith is going to resign as an MP!

That's the good news, now the bad: he's going to stand again, what a waste of public money. How can it be a referendum on Heathrow when his only serious (Libdem) opponent will agree with him? Gesture politics at its worst.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Council Van
What purpose would a rail link between Heathrow and Gatwick serve?

No way would I fly part way around the World to Heathrow to collect my baggage, get on a train, check in at Gatwick, go through security to get on another aircraft to fly to my final destination.

If you have a 20 minute link, it's not much different to changing terminals.

Actually it is: border control (maybe visa needed), baggage reclaim, customs, walk with luggage to the train, train journey, walk to check in, drop baggage, security.

That's why "Heathwick" was rejected out of hand.

There's a lovely big runway sitting at Manston that has all it's approaches from over water. Just build decent road/rail links. Kent will welcome the extra revenue.

See above, "Heathston" is the same as "Heathwick".

A fast link that allowed terminal to terminal connections between LGW and LHR could actually work quite well for transit passengers. If it was an airside transit link then it would work for passengers from domestic flights transiting to international flights.

A 30 minute frequent airside link wouldn't be so much worse than the inter-terminal transfers at LHR over the years where a 150 or 180 minute connection time could easily be consumed by the queues and congestion.

My bet is another runway at Gatwick linked by a high speed transit. Probably built around 2030 when we eventually get a decisive government.

Paid for by who?

Quote:
Originally Posted by msjh
I want some of what you're smoking ...

If you think aircraft noise is bad, try living next to a high speed rail line...

.....or a main road.

Seeing these poor things on the news complaining about noise from the almost silent A380's it does make me wonder how I ever coped living in Slough in the 80's with the Tridents and Concorde. I really don't remember it being a problem or anybody complaining. This was probably long before many of these people chose to move near a major airport.

Me too, but from the other side of the airport.

[Navpi]

Heathrow faces its first legal challenge just days after the government gave backing for third runway | Daily Mail Online

And this is what I mean about due diligence etc

Having a chairman of the Airport Commission who decides on Heathrow who is also on the board of "another" company who are set to benefit financially from the decison is absolute bonkers.

Yes "skipness" you may be correct with your assertion of
"Let's just get on with it"

and in Turkey, China , Russia I suspect they would. But in the UK we still have the "semblance " of fair play....just.

Any idiot could see this coming !

In addition todays FT ( behind paywall sorry) have quoted HAL management as incompetent. Will HAL shareholders be willing to hand over billions in gold bullion ?

Ps watch your word count there Frank , interesting observations but others have been shot for much less!

[portmanteau]

fairdeal frank, an illuminating address if I may say so. You can see what's coming: " In the light of new information concerning the crossing of M25, the up-to-date pollution and noise issues and the new economic figures, it has been decided to bring back Sir Howard Davies and his team to examine again and report back. We must get this right."

Whatever happened to sound decision-making? Take the Lakeside Incinerator for instance.
Built between 2005 and 2008 so around 2002 someone must have asked is it ok to put it here, slap opposite the airport? No problem said the government of the day, there is absolutely no chance that land will be needed, ever, so go ahead but dont forget to put some obstruction lights on it...
It cost £160million to privately build according to its website. I'm fairly certain that Davies said the cost of demolition, land cost old and new and rebuilding would be circa 1 billion but now cannot find any reference to these costs in his Final Report so I could be out by a few hundred mill.. All this for a plant only 8 years into a 25 year life. Same could be said of digging up M25 only a few years since its last upgrade. Its enough to make the accountants weep.

[Trash 'n' Navs]

Interesting to see RABA supporting Heathrow expansion.

Airports in support:
•Alderney
•Barra
•Belfast City
•Benbecula
•Biggin Hill
•Blackpool
•Campbeltown
•Cardiff
•Carlisle
•City of Derry
•Coventry
•Doncaster Sheffield
•Dundee
•Durham Tees Valley
•Exeter
•Glasgow
•Glasgow Prestwick
•Gloucestershire
•Guernsey
•Humberside
•Inverness
•Islay
•Isle of Man
•Jersey
•Kirwall
•Lands End
•Leeds Bradford
•Liverpool John Lennon
•Lydd
•London Southend
•Newcastle International
•Newquay Cornwall
•Norwich
•Stornoway
•Sumburgh
•Tiree
•Wick John O’Groats

Or will the anti-Heathrow posters claim they've ALL been duped??

[01475]

Originally Posted by Navpi

Having a chairman of the Airport Commission who decides on Heathrow who is also on the board of "another" company who are set to benefit financially from the decison is absolute bonkers.

It would be quite hard to find, in the UK, a person who couldn't benefit from this decision.

[T250]

It would be quite hard to find, in the UK, a person who couldn't benefit from this decision.

Oh yes, the shareholders will benefit to the tune of millions, those in West London a bit more convenience and the rest of us perhaps b***er all

[01475]

It's no exaggeration that this benefits the whole country! It's beyond essential.

[inOban]

01475

You are entitled to your opinion. I am sure that there are benefits, but whether they justify the cost, that's definitely a matter of opinion. The main advantage to Scotland will be if the government invests money, because then, under the Barnett formula, Holyrood will get money to invest also.

[Logohu]

Interesting to see RABA supporting Heathrow expansion.

Would that be the Richmond Area Bicycle Association, or the Reading Area Bus Authority ? That's what comes up number 1 and 2 on a Google search anyway.

I suspect in another 15 or 20 years many of those "airports" listed will be housing estates, and those that aren't will still be waiting for the promised squadrons of LHR shuttles to arrive.

[MANFOD]

I suspect in another 15 or 20 years many of those "airports" listed will be housing estates, and those that aren't will still be waiting for the promised squadrons of LHR shuttles to arrive.

Expressed much better than I could Logohu. Didn't spot BHX, MAN, STN, LTN. EMA, or EDI in that list. Are they not in the Bicycle Association or Bus Authority?

[Navpi]

Anybody remember Brian Rix.
Specialist subject FARCE.


•Alderney
•Barra
•Belfast City
•Benbecula
•Biggin Hill
•Blackpool
•Campbeltown
•Cardiff
•Carlisle
•City of Derry
•Coventry
•Doncaster Sheffield
•Dundee
•Durham Tees Valley
•Exeter
•Glasgow
•Glasgow Prestwick
•Gloucestershire
•Guernsey
•Humberside
•Inverness
•Islay
•Isle of Man
•Jersey
•Kirwall
•Lands End
•Leeds Bradford
•Liverpool John Lennon
•Lydd
•London Southend
•Newcastle International
•Newquay Cornwall
•Norwich
•Stornoway
•Sumburgh
•Tiree
•Wick John O’Groats


Utter desperation is not the term.

Lydd or Gloucestershire to Heathrow !!!!!!!!!!

Commercially it would more viable to use the local vicars tandem.

Good grief man get a grip.

Have we missed Llanbedr, Hawarden, Kemble ?

On this basis i can see a case for Mr Chumley of North Devon or West Cornwall County Council or some such local tinpot authority suggesting the re opening of Brawdy,Predannack etc.

Let's keep a semblance of factual argument otherwise we simply look desperate.

I can just about make a case for Exeter and Humberside and even that is flaky but Tiree.

Assuming the tide is out which aircraft type are we talking here Short Sunderland ?

This is a commercial operation you know. It's not part of AgeUK or some other branch of the local social services.

and HAL is an airport operator NOT an airline.

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by Navpi

On this basis i can see a case for Mr Chumley of North Devon County Council suggesting the re opening of Brawdy.

I suspect that if he did, the Welsh government would tell him to mind his own business.

[Navpi]

Ha ha I knew it was remote ! 😂

Memo to self.

[Trash 'n' Navs]

Originally Posted by Navpi

Anybody remember Brian Rix.
Specialist subject FARCE.

Utter desperation is not the term.

Lydd or Gloucestershire to Heathrow !!!!!!!!!!

Good grief man get a grip.

Have we missed Llanbedr, Hawarden, Kemble ?

This is a commercial operation you know. It's not part of AgeUK or some other branch of the local social services.

and HAL is an airport operator NOT an airline.

Fair dinkum navpi, chill. Where did I say these airports would/should/could connect to Heathrow??

I know you're a fan of colourful vitriol but do me a favour and stop playing the man.

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by Trash 'n' Navs

Interesting to see RABA supporting Heathrow expansion.

Or will the anti-Heathrow posters claim they've ALL been duped??

Well no, not duped, but there's a certain amount of self-delusion going on when RABA can come out with a statement like

"For many of our members, it is clear that demand for such a connection exists, often in abundance, but the only barrier to an economically transformative connection is the lack of runway slots at Heathrow".

Particularly when you consider that most, if not all, of the yellow dots shown as "potential new routes"



could equally have been labelled "routes that existed in the past, but have proved unsustainable".

[Trinity 09L]

DRUK
Thankyou. I attend SASIG and they are all pro 3rd runway, many members saying it will increase their local firms freight exports - alas all will travel by road from the Northern powerhouse.

[Haven't a clue]

DaveReidUK

"routes that existed in the past, but have proved unsustainable"

Er not necessarily. In the case of Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey (and probably some others) the routes were moved by BA to LGW to free up slots for bigger planes going to places I've never heard of. A commercial decision yes, but not because the route was unsustainable.