View Full Version : New runway now an Olympian struggle?
akerosid
16th May 2003, 03:55
The government has today announced its support for London's bid for the 2012 Olympics, which means that over the coming years, there will be ever increasing discussion of London's transport, not just to the new site, but generally.
It just occurred to me that in this context, the government's efforts to host the games in the UK would be seriously undermined if they went against R3?
After all, LHR will take the brunt of the increased traffic?
Thoughts?
chiglet
16th May 2003, 04:26
After Beeb2s prog 'tother night, I[just] wonder if the rest of the World would trust Mr Blur and Co:confused:
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy
I'd have thought they would want to avoid loading up LHR with extra traffic. With the proposed Stadium being in the East of London then STN seems more practical - particulalry as it's train link goes directly through NE London. I don't know if the Stadium will include infrastructure such as hotels etc but if it does then the airport just 25 miles to the north seems favourable.
Mind you building an additional runway on the basis that there might be a big sporting event, lasting a couple of weeks, in 9 years time is not the best business plan I've heard.
My personal opinion is that LHR will get a "short" runway. STN will get one or, if LGW residents kick up enough about the local agreement that no developement will take place untill 2019, it will get two. With the modifications that have been made to the M11/ A120 over the last 18 months, it seems inconceivable that STN is not going to be developed further.
The local press are all up in arms with some, quite frankly, very poor reporting. Just sensationalist tripe to stir up a hornets nest.
Quote " ....which would result from creating the world's largest airport at Stansted if two new runways were constructed." :rolleyes:
World's largest? Dallas? Denver? Please!!!!!
It is this type of rubbish which makes me mad because it is ill informed but people take it as gospel and so it perpetuates.
The local area is also "littered" (some of it is tantamount to vandalism...but hey it's a free country...) with posters stating that "89% SAY NO".............that would be 89% of the 50% that ACTUALLY BOTHERED to return their ballot papers. So IN FACT only 44.5% "SAY NO", the rest are either in favour of expansion at STN or not bothered. Don't you love statistics!!
A4 := (Retiring to a safe distance)
Buster the Bear
16th May 2003, 05:15
If the Governments 'Golden share' in the BAA which has allowed NATS to continue, following BAA's input of cash, means that the BAA will gain via nations Olympic bid.......No way, any hint is shocking! If the BAA gain !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No way No way No way!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If the Smiler Blair is bidding for the Olympics, this means that the bailer out of NATS wins. BAA?
BAA have invested in NATS, why?
"We will see that you are compensated via our Olympic bid"?????????????????????????
****NIG SHOCKING
If Council tax, lottery money and goodness knows what else is involved, together with BAA, then this stinks of a cover up?
Sad thing is, I voted this CNUT in!
Red Four
16th May 2003, 06:26
Theres an existing airport east of London with excellent rail links to Stratford, with untouched runway capacity to offer European and UK passenger flights. Just needs a church moved and a weeny extension.
;)
unwiseowl
16th May 2003, 06:59
nothing wrong with the church - it's the planes that are the problem - I mean, the CARVAIR coped OK!
Well there was an ideal site a few miles west - Greenham Common. Trouble is it's been dug up now.
chrisleeds2003
16th May 2003, 23:03
Hi,
Where would R3 be built? Is there even enough room around Heathrow to construct it? Where is terminal 5 being built?
Any ideas? :rolleyes:
Groundbased
17th May 2003, 00:14
The Government is only supporting the bid because there is
little chance that it will succeed. This way they get to
say they are supportive of sport in this country and that the Olympics
would provide inward investment for transport (amongst other things)
in the South East.
If (when) the bid is not won they will be able to blame that for
continued under investment in the transport infrastructure (and sport in general).
In the unlikely event that it was won it won't be this crop of politicians that
have to pick up the pieces, raise the money and make it work.
Look at the precedents, Manchester bid, Pincents Lock, the new Wembley......