Paralytic

For those that didn't catch it, Question Time last night had a short discussion about whether a 3rd runway at Heathrow was a good idea. It was on in the background, so I didn't really catch the gist of the comments, other than they obviously had 2 people one with polarized views.

I was surprised it was being discussed again, though not for that long. I'm sure they also talked about the possibly of another runway at other airports too, with one joker in the audience suggesting they build it in Birmingham.

It's on the iPlayer for those in the UK:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...me_19_01_2012/

That discussion wasn't as heated as the one about whether the Falklands should remain British or not

OPebble

Actually Birmingham isn't such a bad idea as the HS2 will go right past the door!

origin

I tried to type that and FT failed.

But also with the staff who live close to the airport and the universities.

I would support Birmingham runway more than any new Boris airport.

dnajockey

The BHX runway is being extended shortly .... at the moment it is 1hr 10 mins from Euston ... Ryanair have a lot of activity there, BA used too

Littlegirl

Not building a third runway at LHR is one of the most short sighted decissions ever made in my personal opinion and has actually shocked me that the conservatives could have decided that this would be good for the UK.

I agree with my boss that this leaves the UK at a disadvantage.

Here is what he thinks about Boris's idea!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...is-Island.html

origin

I think its all the environmental issues and nothing else. We will keep playing the games until the govt decides that we cant live without it. Then they will blame us and build it. Until such time, we will have different schemes for much more money, been given an airing in public. Its all Politics at the end of the flight.

GRALISTAIR

Totally agree - AMS and CDG will be gloating. If LHR wants to remain a key hub airport in the world - crazy, crazy, crazy and typically British.

Kgmm77

Wirelessly posted (iPhone 3G: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

I find the 3rd runway argument puzzling. We were told last winters disastrophy was exacerbated by a lack of parking stands, the convoluted design (up-down-ad infinitum etc.) of T5 is apparently due to a lack of footprint, yet a third runway and adding slots is the solution to Heathrows problems?

BOH

I reckon RW3 at LHR is dead and buried and instead expansion will be at LTN, LGW, SEN and STN instead.

Is a great shame SOU is so constrained with such a short runway because that is right on the M3 / M27 junction and has a 1 hour fast train service every 30 mins to London with the platform being only some 70 metres away from Departures and Arrivals. Also has X-country connections to the Midlands and North. And it is only 17 miles away from me

I firmly believe it will take a major accident over London for Boris Island to get the go-ahead. Sadly that's how this country seems to work now....everyone will wake up to the fact that normally all approaches to LHR are straight over the city of London and I bet there will be a clamour to have it closed then. Only if that happens will everyone realise LHR has had it's day and it is quite ridiculous to be sending planes loads of people over huge areas of pupulation every 2 minutes, 18 hours a day..

Environemtally so many people also will benefit if London's main airport moves East. Many areas of huge population will no longer have both noise and aviation fumes polluting their everyday lives some 18 hours a day ^

Littlegirl

What about the thousands and thousands of people that work at LHR and all the businesses and business men that are located in the Thames Valley!

What about all the motorways and railway lines that will have to be built to link this airport in the Thames Estuary to London and the rest of the country!

What about all the birds that live in the Thames Estuary! You can't have aircraft flying through migrating birds!

Anyway, it just shows how differently people see things. I can't think of anything worse than having to travel accross London to get on a plane but I live in the Thames Valley area. I think most people, who live in the Thames Valley are more than happy having Heathrow in this area. That's just my view of course.

Stez

I can't remember the operational specifics, but I recall that a 3rd runway would help more in snow clearing operations. I could be wrong, but it may have something to do with being free to close one runway entirely to do snow clearing much quicker than it is currently.

BOH

What about everyone whose houses the airplanes currently fly over to land? They would benefit of course.

Already thought of - ANY new airport would have the transport links considered from the start.

Yes, funnily enough that keeps cropping up. But the mere fact that the new Boris island has not been killed dead in in it's tracks suggests the risk can be lived with. If birdstrike was a risk considered severe enough to tip the balance, the new airport WOULD have been killed long ago and never been resurrected. But it still there....despite reports on migrating birds @:-)

Yes, but you are entirely viewing this from your own perspective. As anyone would in the Thames Valley....because you are only considering one thing....the convenience of LHR to you. Have you considered the views of many people to the East of LHR whose days are blighted every 2 minutes for 18 hours every day? I bet a good many of those people hold a view 180 degrees away from yours. Locating an airport with the main approach and departures being away from residential housing must surely be better?

And to everyone who doesn't think a major airport can be moved without it being disastrous.....HKG, MUC, OSL, DEN just in the last 20 years. And BER to happen this year. All of these new ones were further out (many considerably) than the old airport.....but good and frequent transport links is the key ^

Littlegirl

Well naturally, I am looking at it from my own personal view point. I used to live in Fulham and personally I did not find the aircraft a problem.

Anyway, as I said, I think everyone will have their own views on this, mine just happen to be exactly the same as Willie Walsh's which I dont often own up to!! However in this situation, I think he is spot on!

gally

Not sure DEN is a good example of a successful airport move.

Land-of-Miles

Surely BA has a sizeable vested interest in forcing all other carriers apart from a small part of the BA operation to use antiquated facilities better suited for the 1960's than 50 years later? Against that backdrop I am not in the least bit surprised that WW is opposed to a new airport, BA's major advantage ex LHR disappears if everyone moves into a spanking new location.

Also a move to a new location with multiple runways would massively expand capacity over which BA currently enjoys a stranglehold, it would be a much tougher competitive environment for BA if the new airport doubled capacity at the same time that the BA balance sheet took a massive hit from the write down of slot values at LHR.

Whilst these positions are entirely understandable from a BA/IAG company perspective the Government needs to consider a wider perspective including quality of life of those near the airport and the inescapable fact that with the benefit of 20:20 hindsight LHR is a shocking location for a major international airport.

Many airports have relocated to similarly distant locations from their predecessors without major issues, HKG, DEN and BKK immediately spring to mind.