Heathrow did spring up overnight! Either that or they were forced at gunpoint to move there.

Anyhow a U-turn can be done, they can make up any old tale to justify it 'the current economic outlook thanks to the eurozone crisis means that unemployment levels are higher than anticipated...we have analysed every option and a new airport isn't possible due to labours overspending so our only choice is to expand Heathrow.'

Of course there would be an uproar but the people against the expansion know that they can pressure the government to cave in.

And how on earth are trains an alternative to airports? A train from London to USA or China? Trains are an addition and only an alternative to shorthaul journeys which make up a tiny percentage of capacity at LHR.

This is a very important decision that will have a substantial effect, positive and negative, on the livelihoods of millions of people and once implemented, is irreversible so I am glad it is not being rushed. I just wish everyone would use the time for intelligent debate and careful consideration of all the issues.

Speaking of intelligent debate, it is not helpful or mature to use derogatory adjectives to describe people who do not agree with you. I am sure the PM can see the economic relevance; it's just that unlike you, he can also see the disadvantages. Perhaps you are the one "who doesn't have a clue".

It is extremely easy to say that the solution to lack of capacity is a third runway at Heathrow. It takes a lot more creativity and skill to conceive ideas and develop plans for a viable alternative.

BA can increase capacity easily and quickly by replacing older, smaller aircraft with larger ones and Heathrow can encourage other airlines to do the same by charging the same fees regardless of aircraft size.

For the record, a third runway will benefit me as a passenger and I won't be adversely affected by it at all, other than extra taxes elsewhere to avoid breaching UK's CO2 and pollution limits. I am guessing you don't live under the flight path and so see noise as someone else's problem.

To those who accuse others of being NIMBYs, please post where you live. Obviously you would welcome into your neighbourhoods incinerators and landfill sites, more of which the UK desperately needs.

Not rushed?

How many more decades do you want this debate to go on for? It's not like the discussion started in this century.

Back on the front pages this weekend...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19389094

One has to wonder how much of this drip-drip of pressure that's steadily building is actually being centrally managed by one of the bigger players - or indeed number 10 itself. I'm starting to think the majority - every month there seems to be a "bump" of the issue in the national media. Does this maybe suggest the report due, due, overdue is likely to suggest the 3rd runway goes ahead and the publishing has simply been delayed to allow the media management to go ahead and Greening to be moved next month.

On a related note "The Thick of It" returns next month apparently. Maybe this will shed some light on how coalition government is run and for who...!

i hope you're correct on Thick of It. Certainly no chance of getting any sense out of the underpowered incompetents currently inhabiting the soft and comfy seats of power.

Well when The Girlie get moved on (thank goodness !), it's going to be interesting to see how she views "collective responsibility" of government views should Heathrow 3 finally get anounced, because journalists will instantly ask her for her views, whatever her job is then, and her overly-well-heeled Putney constituents will doubtless be watching closely.

I think this is really an opportunity for Cameron to do what's in the best interests of the country, rather than allow a ragtag bunch of:

eco-twits:carbon is bad, and planes should only be used to fly to eco-junkets, sorry, climate change conferences;

nimby homeowners: where did this airport spring up magically overnight? There are a lot of planes, the airlines must be running them empty over my house just to annoy me!;

and others to derail plans for the future. I'd really like to see a third and fourth runway at LHR, a second runway at Gatwick, followed by a Honkers'like move of building a massive new airport along HS2(perhaps expanding BHX?) which would be used by Londoners and be more convenient to the rest of the country. Or alternatively, connecting HS2 with Heathrow and re-orienting the runways to be north-south.

Well yes however the end result may well be that the market the smaller aircraft served is rendered loss making thereby undermining the approach. Indeed BA have done this in the 90s when it was decided that nothing smaller than the B757 was to be used from LHR and the handy B734s went to Gatters. The balance sheet turned several darker shades of blood red and the decision was reversed with A319s being ordered.
Matching capacity and frequency with profitability is a dark art.

I am beginning to think a new airport is the only way to go; with the state of current political parties there's now way to get a project of the required size done on any existing sites. Heathrow has, i think now, missed the boat.

The only way i can see for the long term future is a Thames Estuary airport. Anywhere on land will be subject to the usual nimby complainers. Strip away all the rubbish reviews and consultations that always accompany major UK projects. HK airport rose out of the sea in 6 years. We need to pull out all the stops and do the same.

And you're aware that there are major obstacles to overcome before we can come close to building "Boris Island", as the media have now christened any airport suggested for the Thames. Yes HKG was built in 6 years etc. but that didn't face the major problems that we have here in the UK. NATS have said they seriously don't like the idea, the truly vast numbers of migratory birds are another major headache (and no you can't just cull them :rolleyes:) and there is also the S.S Montgomery to consider etc. That lot all get sorted out and then you've still got to deal with the NIMBY groups who will oppose it. In this case the councils and the local residents who don't want a large airport built near them.

I'll second that. Birds are going to be a major problem. And 6 years! No way. How long did T5 take? And that was just a terminal.

The birds can easily be shot and made into KFC mini bites.

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/...er-and-007.jpg

I'm very glad Justine knows what is NOT right for the UK. Maybe as transport secretary with a constituency highly reliant on international business for its wealth and employment she might like to have a crack at telling us what IS right.

How one can have a clear opinion one way without a clue on the other is beyond me. A government increasingly of no vision or passion for anything other than grinding their own axes. AKA "don't just do something.....stand there".

Another major obstacle is National Grids Isle of Grain LNG terminal, a UK critial infrastructure site that is very important for the UKs gas requirements. I cant see NG being to happy having to move said terminal when its only just been finished.