Runway rumours
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Inside the M25
Posts: 2,404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Northolt has taken 737's in the past - although not with many passengers, I suspect.
There are all sorts of things that could be done rail-wise for Heathrow. Any connection into the main rail network would be a good idea!
Heathrow's short does get used, when there's a strong southerly, which makes the approach really uncomfortable, but there you go.
Why, why, why, why, why don't we use the lovely long MOD runways more?
There are all sorts of things that could be done rail-wise for Heathrow. Any connection into the main rail network would be a good idea!
Heathrow's short does get used, when there's a strong southerly, which makes the approach really uncomfortable, but there you go.
Why, why, why, why, why don't we use the lovely long MOD runways more?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most of the Sundays are carrying stories about Darling's announcement, expected on Tuesday, which is expected to call for a second STN and third LHR runway and a new LGW runway in or about 2019(?). Some rumours suggest Cliffe is likely to be proposed; most think it's for the birds.
Ominously, the Swampy brigades are lining up against ANY airport expansion and are threatening legal action; expect LHR, which will be the real battleground, to be the focus of this. A new lobby group, rather aggressively called "Airport Watch" has been set up and advocates controls being put on aviation growth.
Let battle commence . . .
Ominously, the Swampy brigades are lining up against ANY airport expansion and are threatening legal action; expect LHR, which will be the real battleground, to be the focus of this. A new lobby group, rather aggressively called "Airport Watch" has been set up and advocates controls being put on aviation growth.
Let battle commence . . .
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Cheshire, UK
Age: 56
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an ex airline employee and someone who lives under the LHR flight paths I think we have to accept the expansion of Heathrow.
Yes, I feel bad about the potential of having to bulldoze houses and relocate people. But the expansion to Heathrow simply has to be done if we are not to lose it's very coverted status as THE international hub in Europe if we haven't lost it already.
Yes, due to it's location the flight paths mean overflying densely populated areas and despite quieter aircraft, disturbance has got much worse in the past 5 years or so. I live with it, but I also live with the fact that Heathrow provides employment for thousands of people in the locality. As one of the posts above states - many companies have located themselves in order to make the most of Heathrow.
The major problem is that it will take so much time - T5 had a 2 or 3 year long inquiry (correct me if I am wrong) and will not be operational until 2008.
What we really need is a decent transport infrastructure. The Paddington - LHR link is excellent. I have used it many times. The Tube is not geared up for passengers with luggage - it takes an age to travel into Central London. So why not run non-stopping Tube trains into Central London ? Because the track layout does not permit this - well address that issue. Why not extend the proposed London Crosslink (now an active project I believe) via Reading or on to Gatwick (as suggested above). As for the roads/M25 - there we have another problem.
Crews travel from a very large catchment area and need to travel by car due to the nature of shift hours etc. So Mr. Darling, lets see see some plans to beef up transport to and from Heathrow for both passengers and employees in addition to these grandiose plans to expand Heathrow which I fully support.
Soap box put away now !
Yes, I feel bad about the potential of having to bulldoze houses and relocate people. But the expansion to Heathrow simply has to be done if we are not to lose it's very coverted status as THE international hub in Europe if we haven't lost it already.
Yes, due to it's location the flight paths mean overflying densely populated areas and despite quieter aircraft, disturbance has got much worse in the past 5 years or so. I live with it, but I also live with the fact that Heathrow provides employment for thousands of people in the locality. As one of the posts above states - many companies have located themselves in order to make the most of Heathrow.
The major problem is that it will take so much time - T5 had a 2 or 3 year long inquiry (correct me if I am wrong) and will not be operational until 2008.
What we really need is a decent transport infrastructure. The Paddington - LHR link is excellent. I have used it many times. The Tube is not geared up for passengers with luggage - it takes an age to travel into Central London. So why not run non-stopping Tube trains into Central London ? Because the track layout does not permit this - well address that issue. Why not extend the proposed London Crosslink (now an active project I believe) via Reading or on to Gatwick (as suggested above). As for the roads/M25 - there we have another problem.
Crews travel from a very large catchment area and need to travel by car due to the nature of shift hours etc. So Mr. Darling, lets see see some plans to beef up transport to and from Heathrow for both passengers and employees in addition to these grandiose plans to expand Heathrow which I fully support.
Soap box put away now !
Last edited by Lost_luggage34; 23rd Jul 2002 at 18:38.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heathrow's 3rd Runway
I haven't been through LHR since 1993... but what ever happened to that slab of concrete north of 27R/09L? It looked about 5,000-6,000 feet long. Was the the beginning of a failed exapnsion project, or left overs from the previous layout that was LHR?
If there were a shorter 3rd runway at LHR, why limit it to just smaller aircraft? Wouldn't the most efficient use of it be a dedicated arrivals runway? This would leave 27/R09L as a runway dedicated to departures, and arrivals in VMC... plus the southern runway with both arrivals and departures. 8,000 feet is all you need... LAX's north complex is proof of the concept.
If there were a shorter 3rd runway at LHR, why limit it to just smaller aircraft? Wouldn't the most efficient use of it be a dedicated arrivals runway? This would leave 27/R09L as a runway dedicated to departures, and arrivals in VMC... plus the southern runway with both arrivals and departures. 8,000 feet is all you need... LAX's north complex is proof of the concept.
