Yes but they would have no other option. They would just have to deal with it.
They could always use LGW and fly to places via AMS, FRA, ZRH etc if they hate the prospect of flying from STN so much.

I would think a modern, purpose-built hub airport with 3+ runways, high speed rail links, 24-hour operations, and plenty of room for expansion would be far more convenient than Heathrow ever could be.

Well, ManInKent... It seems to me that it's always non-Londoners who think LHR expansion is a good idea! Overwhelmingly, Londoners are against it. The third runway was already buried once by protests. If it were to be revived again, there's no reason to believe that opposition will be any less vehement this time around.

NIMBYs? Perhaps. But it's hard to see any government forcing this through when the NIMBYs comprise a sizeable chunk of the population of your largest city.

If Crossrail 2 were built it would include services to Stansted, so there'd be no need to change at Tottenham.

Also, I think any major expansion of STN would not make sense without a new, high speed and more direct rail service - probably along the M11 corridor and connecting with HS1 near Stratford. An STN hub could have direct services on both Crossrail 1 & 2, an express service from St Pancras via HS1, and even high speed intercity services from HS2 via Central London and Stratford.

^


Yes as a non Londoner myself and having heard on today's news that the Teeside Chambers Commerce have endorsed a new Heathrow runway whilst residents of West London have voted against it in some petty little referendum I think its high time Heathrow closes. The morons in West London said whilst they didnt support a 3rd runway they were also against Boris Island due to the jobs LHR brings the area. They deserve for LHR to close and a shiny new airport be built at STN or Boris Island.

Heathrow obsessors are too short sighted. AMS, FRA, CDG, DXB these are the competition and they are all expanding massively and already have 4 plus runways (exception being DXB although Dubai is building a 5 runway airport down the road) and a 3rd runway at a badly located airport (wrong wind direction, built up area, selfish local residents) is not going to be a serious competitor.
If we just continue to umm and arr over LHR and do not build a major new airport at STN/Boris Island we might as well accept that AMS is going to be the UK's hub. In fact AMS already claims to be 'The UK's Favourite Airport', 'London's third airport' and 'Scotland's Hub' whilst KLM claims to be 'Scotland's national carrier'.

I lived in London for over 11 years until January this year. :rolleyes: I was already very much in favour of LHR expansion then and in fact I know not a single Londoner personally that was against. It's only a small but vocal nimby brigade that's against it.

And what makes you think there will be less protests for expansion anywhere else? Exactly the same is going to happen at STN or any other proposed location. The problem is that governments don't have the courage to push this sort of thing through and politicians are only interested in short term electoral gain instead of the long term good. Unless you prefer that the French take over the UK's hub role and all the economic benefit that comes with it.

That is exactly why we need a 4 runway airport at STN or Boris Island to STOP the French, Dutch, Germans and Arabs from stealing Britain's status as a global aviation hub.
A third runway at LHR and a second runway at LGW although good are just sticking plaster solutions. Britain deserves better.
All we need now is for Boris Johnson to become leader of the Conservative Party, get Labour to change its aviation policy, make sure the Liberal Democrats are destroyed at the next election and the UK will finally have pro aviation governments.

The ever-increasing APD is not doing Britain any favors either...:rolleyes:

It will be reformed. Like petrol duty and the extra North Sea and and gas taxes the Government will do a U turn eventually as increased publicity cause increased public anger.
In 2010 apparently under 30% of travellers knew APD even existed and those that did thought it was much lower than it was. Now people are becoming more aware and a recent campaign by some right to travel organization managed to get 100,000 people to email their MPs over the issue. The Transport Select Committee is putting pressure on Osborne to cut or scrap the tax and the Welsh and Scottish governments are also adding the pressure.

Of course it would - if you were starting from a blank sheet of paper.

But unless you are willing to move a significant part of the economy from the west of London and the Thames Valley to wherever the new airport is going to be then it isn't going to happen.

I suppose you could create Maidenhead International or Wokingham International Hub but I suspect the locals would be peeved

Neither a STN hub nor Boris Island will happen, ever. It's cloud cuckoo land. While this day dreaming goes on, business drains away. LHR can get 4 runways fairly quickly for a fraction of the cost, it has transport links, it doesn't screw businesses who have positioned themselved for LHR etc.

The only thing needed for an LHR expansion is a little bit of political courage and long term thinking. Instead, people prefer to have wet dreams about the Boris Island fantasy or other bonkers proposal, while the business disappears abroad...

Well, if you compare the density of population around LHR and around STN, you can see that the impact on neighbouring populations is not going to be the same.

There undoubtedly are issues with STN but I am not sure that it is quite as unthinkable as you think it is. Not that I'd welcome it but I can see some kind of case for it. The problem with LHR is that, whichever way you look at it, you are always going to be faced with expansion problems, unless you go for relocation programmes on a Ceaușescu scale. I do think that we need some expansion at LHR in the short to medium term as any other solutions will take far too long to be implemented. But all that this will do is buy us a few more years. And then what? STN, OTOH, has much more space in which to develop and, to that extent, has more long-term potential.

Yes, it is problematic given the economic slant towards the West of the London area. But that is not something which is necessarily unsurmountable in the longer term.

So, IMO, it is not a case of either/or with LHR expansion. We need LHR expansion. But we also need to look for more long-term solutions too.

With all due respect, but people protesting against these things always find reasons to protest. If it's not lots of people living nearby (almost all of them having moved to live there after the airport was built...), then it will be that it violates the country side or affects some local wildlife etc.

STN expansion would be hit with layers of protests: there would be those against the new runways, those against the new transport infrastructure needed to serve it, some against both, others against yet another aspect of it and finally (more rightfully so) businesses currently located for LHR that would be stuffed and would be justified in making a noise about it.

There are reasonable engineering solution to get LHR to 4 or 5 runways without unreasonable effects on people. It's weighing that relatively small downside against the massive economic case.

BBC: Heathrow 'would need to close' under airport plans
 

BBC: Heathrow 'would need to close' under airport plans

We know these issues are ongoing...it seems like 2015 is still pretty far off for a "final" report...

:rolleyes:

Heathrow Airport "may close"
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-22694466

In short, the Independent Transport Commission (non-gov't funded) said that if the UK wanted to build a new hub airport (Thames Estuary) or expand Stansted to make a new hub, Heathrow would need to close.

While I haven't yet read the actual report myself, I think that based on their conclusions, I think they are clearly missing something:

-Heathrow only recently got a very expensive new terminal, T5
-Heathrow is well linked to the motorway, with coach connections to the SE, SW, and W of England.
-Heathrow is connected by an Underground line into the centre of London, as well as a faster rail link, as well as the soon-to-be-finished Crossrail project - and may even be connected by the planned "HS2" rail project.
-Heathrow has a direct fuel pipeline running to it all the way from Southampton.
-Oh, and the UK is broke

In my mind, anyone suggesting that we close Heathrow, and build a new airport, is crazy. They have surely missed the cost that would be involved in building new transport infrastructure to support it (I really do have to read the report). While Heathrow is currently at capacity, I think that there must be other ways to sort out the problem, even without building a 3rd runway...

Per http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trave...elsewhere.html I will move this to the appropriate destination forum while leaving a 30-day re-direct in Travel News.

cblaisd
Moderator, Travel News