BA boss shocked that third LHR runway will raze his HQ

[ve3id]

https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2016/nov/22/ba-boss-shocked-to-find-out-that-third-heathrow-runway-will-raze-his-hq?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+main+NEW+H+categories&utm_term=200986&subid=13227597&CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2

Isn't this poetic justice?

Somebody didn't keep his eyes on the ball!

[BOAC73]

Maybe he could build a much smaller HQ on the east engineering base and call it Speedbird House ?

[Doors to Automatic]

I thought I was reading a Daily Mash article at first!

[Chris Scott]

You simply could not make it up.

Astonishing incompetence, not to say complacency.

Adios to the vanity project, which should have been scrapped with the ethnic tail-fins.

[t211]

Poetic Justice Indeed, That's the Funniest thing i have heard all year:D:D

[wiggy]

You simply could not make it up.


Err, actually in reality you can indeed make it up...

Given WW is an ex pilot so probably still has a glancing knowledge of things called aircraft and runways, given that he knows the geography of LHR, given he spent a lot of time in the Waterside building over the years, and given that just about anybody who has worked or does work at BA has known for years that Waterside could be in conflict with the northern runway do any of you folks here really seriously believe this story as is being told by the press?

Still,, great click bait that obviously worked........straight out of MOL or Sir Richard's playbook.....

Earlier comment from elsewhere in pprune here, page 56 and onwards:

http://www.pprune.org/airlines-airports-routes/523133-british-airways-57.html

[HZ123]

I doubt he cares as like many of us he will have long moved on to pastures new. I doubt that when WTS was planned little / no consideration was given to extra runways and potential conflict with the building location.

[Wycombe]

Story I've read elsewhere is that Waterside was built "low" so as not to conflict with a shorter (mainly for short-haul) 3rd runway.

[DaveReidUK]

Story I've read elsewhere is that Waterside was built "low" so as not to conflict with a shorter (mainly for short-haul) 3rd runway.

The line of the originally-planned 2200m runway was going to be well north of Waterside:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/78/Heathrow_Airport_map_with_third_runway.svg/512px-Heathrow_Airport_map_with_third_runway.svg.png

[ZOOKER]

It was indeed, Dave.

[DaveReidUK]

Thanks for the endorsement of my map-reading skills. :O

[ZOOKER]

On your map Dave, 'Waterside' is the thing that looks like a beetle, aligned NE-SW, just to the SE of where it says M25.

[DaveReidUK]

Yes indeed, I've visited there several times over the years.

[Fairdealfrank]

Relax.......................look at the date, it's April 1st.

[Groundloop]

Of course he knew. He just said this to make a headline so he could get his dig into LHR about increased charges, etc.

[anothertyke]

The bit which is true is that BA's customers will end up paying a proportion, as yet undefined, of the compensation costs for relocating the BA HQ. It's a RAB parable.

[El Bunto]

Tangentially, Waterside was one of the first civilan buildings to be designed with a reduced radar cross-section ( 'stealth' ), towards the axis of the Heathrow ground-surveillance radar. As a result there are lots of 'odd' overhangs and unusual angles on the external structure, kind of like an architectural version of the F-117. What I've never read is whether this results in radar-return spikes in other directions ( such as on aircraft radars ).

[vctenderness]

Where in the vicinity would be suitable to relocate BA's headquarters? Given that crew report directly in T5 proximity to the airport is not high priority.

[DaveReidUK]

Where in the vicinity would be suitable to relocate BA's headquarters? Given that crew report directly in T5 proximity to the airport is not high priority.

Hatton Cross ? :O

Nothing has ever been built on the space where Speedbird House and Comet House used to be.

[pabely]

Maplin Sands, Cublington???:}

[wiggy]

Don't be silly DR, Hatton Cross would make the commute by public transport far too easy..:oh:

(On a more serious point wasn't the move to Waterside in part done because there was a financial advantage to be gained by moving the HQ from east base..anyone remember the gory details?).

[Trinity 09L]

Plenty of empty office space in Slough. Would make a good TV series

[Evanelpus]

Blimey Dave, from that map, one mistake and they could be landing on the M25!

[Gonzo]

BA most certainly knew and have for years.

Whether they informed WW is another matter.

[Gonzo]

El Bunto,

Are you mixing up Compass Centre on the northern peri road with Waterside? Compass Centre was built with concave facias towards the airport to negate A-SMGCS SMR returns as you say.

Compass was originally occupied by BA, but is now used by Heathrow.

Waterside is not in line of sight for any of our SMRs, it's blocked some hotels and the Harmondsworth reception centre.

[PAXboy]

Irish CEOs are always game for a laugh ...

[racedo]

Evanelpus, M4 you mean?

Given M25 and M4 are currently nose to tail for hours every day the idea of more traffic makes it funny.

It will be a 24 hr traffic jam.

Mind you building at Gatwick would require an Eastern Motorway to join M25 at M26 and a Western to join M3/M4.

[ZOOKER]

That's an interesting comment about The concavity of Compass Centre and the A-SMGCS, Gonzo.
When we still had the fluoride tubes on Manch' Approach, if The Lovell Telescope was aimed at the horizon, in the direction of EGCC, if you removed the MTI it produced a 'return' about 4 miles across!

[Fairdealfrank]

Plenty of empty office space in Slough. Would make a good TV series Ha ha very good!


As an aside, anyone willing to take on bets as to which project will be completed first, Heathrow's or Hong Kong's third runway (http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/health-environment/article/2046982/new-focus-needed-big-issues-facing-third-hong-kong)? No brainer: tragically for the UK, HKG, SIN, DUB (and many others) will have additional rwys before LHR


Mind you building at Gatwick would require an Eastern Motorway to join M25 at M26 and a Western to join M3/M4. There was a plan for a relief motorway (the M31) to link the A4 at Reading East, the M4 at Woodley (junc 10), the M3 at Lightwater (junc 3), and the M25 at Ockham (junc 10). Only the section from Reading to Wokingham was built and designated the A329(M).

It was recently downgraded form motorway status (who knows why, a pointless a waste of public money) and renumbered as the A3290.

It would have enabled traffic between the west country and/or south Wales and the southern section of the M25 to avoid the busiest sections of the the M4/M3/M25 and save several miles on the journey.

Regretably, it was never completed.

[DaveReidUK]

Only the section from Reading to Wokingham was built and designated the A329(M).

It was recently downgraded form motorway status (who knows why, a pointless a waste of public money) and renumbered as the A3290.

Not quite true, nor pointless

Only a couple of miles of it was downgraded to A road status, and that was to allow a bus lane on the hard shoulder (which isn't allowed on a motorway).

The rest of the A329(M) remains a motorway.

[racedo]

There was a plan for a relief motorway (the M31) to link the A4 at Reading East, the M4 at Woodley (junc 10), the M3 at Lightwater (junc 3), and the M25 at Ockham (junc 10). Only the section from Reading to Wokingham was built and designated the A329(M).

It was recently downgraded form motorway status (who knows why, a pointless a waste of public money) and renumbered as the A3290.

It would have enabled traffic between the west country and/or south Wales and the southern section of the M25 to avoid the busiest sections of the the M4/M3/M25 and save several miles on the journey.

Connecting at M26/M25 would be a much better idea.

[Fairdealfrank]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fairdealfrank http://www.pprune.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.pprune.org/airlines-airports-routes/587354-ba-boss-shocked-third-lhr-runway-will-raze-his-hq-2.html#post9591493)
Only the section from Reading to Wokingham was built and designated the A329(M).

It was recently downgraded form motorway status (who knows why, a pointless a waste of public money) and renumbered as the A3290.

Not quite true, nor pointless

Only a couple of miles of it was downgraded to A road status, and that was to allow a bus lane on the hard shoulder (which isn't allowed on a motorway).

The rest of the A329(M) remains a motorway. Bus lanes shouldn't be allowed on motorways, but they are, Prescott saw to that.

The M4 had a bus lane from Hounslow (junc 3) to the start of the elevated section on the eastbound carriageway. It was later removed. This section of the M4 was not downgraded during this time.

It would appear that all motorway bus lanes are equal.........but some are more equal than others.

[DaveReidUK]

Bus lanes shouldn't be allowed on motorways, but they are

Not on the hard shoulder, they aren't (as I said in my post).

The M4 had a bus lane from Hounslow (junc 3) to the start of the elevated section on the eastbound carriageway. It was later removed. This section of the M4 was not downgraded during this time.That's the point - the M4 bus lane was on the offside, not on the hard shoulder.

The A329(M) is only two lanes from start to finish, so an offside bus lane was never an option.

Hence the downgrade. :ugh: