Conservative party admits wrong on Heathrow
#616
Join Date: May 2009
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 769
I never said LHR was in a perfect place. As I said, there will be arguments against many if not most major airports out there.
What I am saying is that the tradeoff isn't nearly as sweet as some make out.
#617
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: LON, ACK, BOS..... (Not necessarily in that order)
Programs: **Mucci Diamond Hairbrush** - compared to that nothing else matters (+BA Bronze)
Posts: 15,129
I wish I could put a bet on Boris Island never happening.
In fact I think it is making him look like a bit of a maverick and doing him a lot of damage as it really does seem that he is obsessed with an idea that looks completely impossible for many different reasons; birds, infrastructure, lack of airline willingness etc.etc.
The latest think tank is suggesting putting 4 new LHR runways near the M25 and putting some of the motorway in a tunnel underneath and moving a reservoir. Although that sounds expensive, it's probably a lot cheaper than Boris Island and in the right place at least!
In fact I think it is making him look like a bit of a maverick and doing him a lot of damage as it really does seem that he is obsessed with an idea that looks completely impossible for many different reasons; birds, infrastructure, lack of airline willingness etc.etc.
The latest think tank is suggesting putting 4 new LHR runways near the M25 and putting some of the motorway in a tunnel underneath and moving a reservoir. Although that sounds expensive, it's probably a lot cheaper than Boris Island and in the right place at least!
So unless Boris becomes PM....... or should that be
#618
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: LON, ACK, BOS..... (Not necessarily in that order)
Programs: **Mucci Diamond Hairbrush** - compared to that nothing else matters (+BA Bronze)
Posts: 15,129
Well relocating the 80,000 LHR peeps Littlegirl mentions to work at Boris Island works out at around £8bn (@£100,000 per person) and that ignores the cost of company relocations.
#619
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: LON, ACK, BOS..... (Not necessarily in that order)
Programs: **Mucci Diamond Hairbrush** - compared to that nothing else matters (+BA Bronze)
Posts: 15,129
LHR would be lovely if it wasn't situated right next to London meaning it bathes the city in pollution, noise and has a mandatory closure from midnight to 6am - which means for every four runways you build at Heathrow, you need only build three to deliver the same capacity at an Estuary Airport, as you effectively lose a full days' slots by building at LHR.
I do think we should at least acknowledge Heathrow's drawbacks openly, and give due consideration to alternatives, even if they may seem "adventurous".
To quote the man:
Originally Posted by Head of NATS - Mr Deakins
"The very worst spot you could put an airport is just about here. We're a little surprised that none of the architects thought it worthwhile to have a little chat"
Last edited by Jimmie76; Oct 10, 2012 at 9:03 am
#620
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 10,709
Watching the tv show on Sunday night, Built in Britian
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...ain_Episode_1/
It would appear that Mr Walsh is slightly changing his tune to the next or the new airport. He still wants runway 3. Well he cant really change his mind on that one. However he was or appears to be willing to be open to a new airport.
As Ryanair is out of purchasing Stansted maybe its time to develop that airport at least for the short term. Include the High speed rail to go past its door, then onto LHR and BHX. Ofcourse back into London as well.
Air travel is increasing, the UK needs to be part of a future world. If we keep going at this rate, farmers in China will be sending us money.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...ain_Episode_1/
It would appear that Mr Walsh is slightly changing his tune to the next or the new airport. He still wants runway 3. Well he cant really change his mind on that one. However he was or appears to be willing to be open to a new airport.
As Ryanair is out of purchasing Stansted maybe its time to develop that airport at least for the short term. Include the High speed rail to go past its door, then onto LHR and BHX. Ofcourse back into London as well.
Air travel is increasing, the UK needs to be part of a future world. If we keep going at this rate, farmers in China will be sending us money.
#621
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 10,709
Mr Moylan accepted his plan would involve billions of pounds of compensation for Heathrow owner BAA, as well as airlines forcibly relocated, with industry experts believing the bill could easily reach £15bn
I was only on here quickly over the weekend. My post didnt include all the comments.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/19451615-post599.html
#622
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: LON, ACK, BOS..... (Not necessarily in that order)
Programs: **Mucci Diamond Hairbrush** - compared to that nothing else matters (+BA Bronze)
Posts: 15,129
I was only on here quickly over the weekend. My post didnt include all the comments.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/19451615-post599.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/19451615-post599.html
#623
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,641
It's not like welfare or that daft Dome; this is a productive asset, which not only will generate income itself, but also will add many multiples of its cost in growth and tax income to the Exchequer. £10bn here or there isn't really the issue.
I'm sure there will still be a few flights over London, but dramatically fewer than is the case currently, and the majority will approach from over the sea, and be able to turn in time to avoid the densest populations in Central London.
#625
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 10,709
If or when the high speed rail is in service, it will go straight to BHX from London. It has all major roads of most of the UK. It is in the middle of the country to help everyone. Has plenty of staff to help run and work in the airport.
#626
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,605
Why? See the comments about the costs of moving everyone and everything associated with London 50 miles to the east. Then you have £15 billion of transport infrastructure build which will exists PURELY to serve the airport. Add to that the further concentration of economic life in the SE (which even the SE locals would moan about) and it rapidly becomes obvious that an estuary airport is a non-starter before you even get to the European wide air traffic changes that would be needed or the embarrassment of having repeated emergency landings (or worse) due to bird strikes.
No-one disagrees with that - but it's there and it's a case of making the best of a bad lot
It would be as easy to reach as an Estuary airport for most of the people who would use it
Can't recall anyone suggesting it - but if the purpose of the Hub airport was just to facilitate connecting passengers then it wouldn't matter where the airport was, it could even be in the Shetlands
No-one disagrees with that - but it's there and it's a case of making the best of a bad lot
It would be as easy to reach as an Estuary airport for most of the people who would use it
Can't recall anyone suggesting it - but if the purpose of the Hub airport was just to facilitate connecting passengers then it wouldn't matter where the airport was, it could even be in the Shetlands
#627
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,797
What is to stop a 3rd/4th runway being built over/just to the West of the M25, lined up North to South? Aircraft would be approaching from the North/taking off towards the North ie well out of the way of the current runways, and there is about 10 miles of green belt up there with noone to complain about noise until the aircraft are already high up out of the way.
Plenty of other airports operate multiple runways facing in different directions, and the biggest obstacle to a 3rd runway right now is the people who live East and West of it.
Plenty of other airports operate multiple runways facing in different directions, and the biggest obstacle to a 3rd runway right now is the people who live East and West of it.
#628
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: LON, ACK, BOS..... (Not necessarily in that order)
Programs: **Mucci Diamond Hairbrush** - compared to that nothing else matters (+BA Bronze)
Posts: 15,129
It doesn't really matter what it costs - within reason.
It's not like welfare or that daft Dome; this is a productive asset, which not only will generate income itself, but also will add many multiples of its cost in growth and tax income to the Exchequer. £10bn here or there isn't really the issue.
It's not like welfare or that daft Dome; this is a productive asset, which not only will generate income itself, but also will add many multiples of its cost in growth and tax income to the Exchequer. £10bn here or there isn't really the issue.
#629
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 10,709
In my article, they said the would keep LHR open for Londoners to use point to point. As many people travel by train from Manchester area and by plane in from local Uk, why would being in Birmingham matter.
#630
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,605
Birmingham is nearer to Manchester than an Estuary airport. And I can't see why LHR would be kept open for Londoners if an Estuary airport opened as many of the point to point destinations are also used by people connecting so you'd split the passenger load thus requiring more aircraft and crew