Heathrow Expansion
Discussion
Halb said:
Blib said:
One problem. In the whole scheme of things, few want to go to those places. They want to come to London and the South East. It has little to do with us Brits. wanting easier access to airports.
It's easier (less hassle) for me to get to London from Manchester than Heathrow to London. Getting from Euston to Heathrow is such a massive ballache.
Euston to Heathrow by tube takes less than an hour and involves only one change. 40 minutes by cab.
Blib said:
Euston to Heathrow by tube takes less than an hour and involves only one change. 40 minutes by cab.
Blib said:
I suppose the downside is that one has to set off from Manchester. 
Rather that than suffering London, frankly. I don't get why the cities inhabitants seem to feel the need to constantly big it up - what is it with those people, are they hoping that if they repeat themselves enough time people from elsewhere will start believing them?
Blib said:
I suppose it's because that London is the greatest city on the planet. No one city can match her when it comes to what that London offers in terms of homeless, smell, pickpockets, rude that Londoners, American tourists, Yardie gangsters, overpriced tat, parking fines, congestion charge, stinky tube, etc. etc.
Yes, that must be it.
EFA. Yes, that must be it.
Collectingbrass said:
They* are, there's no call on taxation. It's provately owned and funded and has been for donkeys years.
http://www.heathrowairport.com/static/Heathrow/Downloads/PDF/a-new-approach_LHR.pdf- We - I work there.
[quote]
Financing additional capacity at Heathrow entirely
from the private sector will need an appropriate
investment framework. The third runway options
which have the least impact on local communities
are more expensive but do not provide any
additional benefit to the passengers who will
ultimately pay. In developing its final recommendations
to Government [b]we encourage the Airports
Commission to consult on whether the existing
model for financing airport development is
appropriate for such a major investment and
what role public funding or government
guarantees should play[/b]
A third runway at Heathrow is the fastest, most
cost effective and most practical route to meeting
the UK’s international connectivity needs. [b]A third
runway can be delivered at less cost to the taxpayer
than building a new hub airport. [/b]
JagLover said:
Heathrow is actually well placed for the rest of the country. Yes it can be a pain getting there from parts of London by car, but coming from the West it is fairly clear and from Midlands etc it is only a few junctions of the M25.
That would be fine, but for the fact the HS2-heathrow extension/link was binned.Thankyou4calling said:
Time has even been wasted on ridiculous Boris island plans and expansion proposals at Kent airports.
We need to get on this urgently.
Build a new runway or two and add some terminals, it would take six months at most to do and I'm afraid i'd ignore the NIMBYs, native newt population and cries from others.
Given the trends in air travel and UK large and complex infrastructure construction, by the time a runway or two + terminals are finished at Gatwick/Heathrow we'll need another at least. There are considerable capacity, safety and environmental reasons for building Boris Island, but it would need tying to the rest of the UK with maglev or something equally whizzo. There's a need for Thames Barrier 2 anyway, so adding on some runways will be a doddle. We need to get on this urgently.
Build a new runway or two and add some terminals, it would take six months at most to do and I'm afraid i'd ignore the NIMBYs, native newt population and cries from others.
6 months? Behave yourself, even the Chinese can't knock out a functioning runway and terminal in that time.
Gatwick's (snake) oil find won't affect the airport at all.
onyx39 said:
Sorry, but Boris island was a ridiculous idea. What do you think would have happened to the local economy which has grown up around Heathrow?
Several hundred thousand jobs lost, and didn't they intend to build a massive housing estate on the site?
Who would be able to afford to buy them when the local area had sunk into a "localised recession"
There is also the issue of the SS Richard Montgomery
Heathrow would be kept as a freight only/domestic/whatever airport, so substantial employment would remain; the objective is expanding capacity, not treading water.Several hundred thousand jobs lost, and didn't they intend to build a massive housing estate on the site?
Who would be able to afford to buy them when the local area had sunk into a "localised recession"
There is also the issue of the SS Richard Montgomery
The Montgomery would need to be dealt with by the bomb squad; if we're lucky the detonation will cause millions of pounds worth of improvements to Gravesend.
truck71 said:
Trouble is no-one inbound wants to go to any of the places suggested, London and the SE are where it's at- tourists or business.
How arrogant.How does that match up with the Northern Powerhouse claims from the Chancellor ?
truck71 said:
If the economic activity can spread North over time (I hope it does) then maybe that traffic will increase but we're a long way off that. As for Scotland, will it ever get off it's ar$e and become economically significant?
Improved chances of Scottish being richer if they don't have to keep going toHeathrow whenever they want to travel any significant distance.
Same for the North. A lot fewer journeys up and down the M1 / M6 if you
can travel to an international airport less than 100 miles from your home.
Halb said:
Blib said:
I suppose it's because that London is the greatest city on the planet. No one city can match her when it comes to what that London offers in terms of homeless, smell, pickpockets, rude that Londoners, American tourists, Yardie gangsters, overpriced tat, parking fines, congestion charge, stinky tube, etc. etc.
Yes, that must be it.
EFA. Yes, that must be it.
A subject close to my heart, of which I could write page upon page upon page, but I won't. So here are a few headlines.
AQ. Most emissions OUTSIDE of LHR are from roads. Some of that is caused by traffic coming to Heathrow, so the airport can be held responsible for part of the AQ issue, but not all of it.
Airspace. Boris Island would involve a redesign of UK and Dutch/Belgium airspace. That would require political cooperation, therefore years, and public consultations in three countries. Which would also take years. Then the building could start. If you could appease the RSPB, and other environmental groups about the destruction of the wetlands and migratory bird habitats that would be destroyed. And once this has happened most of LHR 's long haul traffic has gone to FRA, AMS and MAD. So what's the point?
Noise. As has been said earlier, DC8 and 707 compared to 380 and 787? No contest I'm afraid. You may know that LHR can fine airlines when their aircraft break the noise limits set down by the Government. In 2003 they issued around 300 fines. Last year it was 36. The limits haven't changed so the aircraft are getting quieter.
Heathrow's airlines want to come to the airport, but can't as it is full. The airport has a waiting list of 30+ airlines wanting to come but has no slots free for them. Those airlines would being competition, new routes, jobs and additional passengers. Why do you think Vietnam Airlines recently left LGW to come to LHR? It's because the airport is a hub and the airlines will make more money there.
Runway capacity is scheduled at 99.2%, so any blip causes delay and disruption with no headroom to recover. An additional runway, with some capacity cap, would allow for disruption and a better operation. That provides some predictability to passengers and the local community who wouldn't see so many flights running late at night. The airport has also suggested with another runway night flights, arrivals between 0430-0600, could be banned. You could end up with an airport that only operates between 0600-2330 pretty much everyday.
It's time for our glorious leaders to make a decision one way or the other. But a decision must be made.
AQ. Most emissions OUTSIDE of LHR are from roads. Some of that is caused by traffic coming to Heathrow, so the airport can be held responsible for part of the AQ issue, but not all of it.
Airspace. Boris Island would involve a redesign of UK and Dutch/Belgium airspace. That would require political cooperation, therefore years, and public consultations in three countries. Which would also take years. Then the building could start. If you could appease the RSPB, and other environmental groups about the destruction of the wetlands and migratory bird habitats that would be destroyed. And once this has happened most of LHR 's long haul traffic has gone to FRA, AMS and MAD. So what's the point?
Noise. As has been said earlier, DC8 and 707 compared to 380 and 787? No contest I'm afraid. You may know that LHR can fine airlines when their aircraft break the noise limits set down by the Government. In 2003 they issued around 300 fines. Last year it was 36. The limits haven't changed so the aircraft are getting quieter.
Heathrow's airlines want to come to the airport, but can't as it is full. The airport has a waiting list of 30+ airlines wanting to come but has no slots free for them. Those airlines would being competition, new routes, jobs and additional passengers. Why do you think Vietnam Airlines recently left LGW to come to LHR? It's because the airport is a hub and the airlines will make more money there.
Runway capacity is scheduled at 99.2%, so any blip causes delay and disruption with no headroom to recover. An additional runway, with some capacity cap, would allow for disruption and a better operation. That provides some predictability to passengers and the local community who wouldn't see so many flights running late at night. The airport has also suggested with another runway night flights, arrivals between 0430-0600, could be banned. You could end up with an airport that only operates between 0600-2330 pretty much everyday.
It's time for our glorious leaders to make a decision one way or the other. But a decision must be made.
LHRFlightman said:
It's time for our glorious leaders to make a decision one way or the other. But a decision must be made.
Amen to that; we have had 20 years of fiddling, let's get on with it. Even in the unlikely event Boris Island won support another runway at heathrow or gatwick would be needed to cope with current traffic for the 15+ years it would take to build. Planning grief aside I'd have thought either could be laid well within 5 years.dcb said:
Really ?
Tens of millions of folks live in the UK, yet are more than 100 miles from Heathrow.
Both Birmingham and Manchester are more central.
More Heathrow or Gatwick expansion would only make a bad situation worse
for London & SE England dominating the UK.
For a lot less money, one of the Scottish airports could be expanded, a
Northern Airport (Manchester ?) could be expanded *AND* somewhere in the
Midlands could be expanded too.
It would load balance air traffic nicely across the country and
save millions of journeys of folks from Scotland, the North and the
Midlands downto pesky Heathrow for international journeys.
Manchester doesn't need expanding. It only uses 50% of it's capacity currently.Tens of millions of folks live in the UK, yet are more than 100 miles from Heathrow.
Both Birmingham and Manchester are more central.
More Heathrow or Gatwick expansion would only make a bad situation worse
for London & SE England dominating the UK.
For a lot less money, one of the Scottish airports could be expanded, a
Northern Airport (Manchester ?) could be expanded *AND* somewhere in the
Midlands could be expanded too.
It would load balance air traffic nicely across the country and
save millions of journeys of folks from Scotland, the North and the
Midlands downto pesky Heathrow for international journeys.
Leeds could do so much more if the powers that be would get off their arses and give it proper transport links.
It's ridiculous that I can hop on a train and get to Manchester from home with virtually no hassle and a direct journey from LS25 but it would take hours and lots of changes and pissing about to get to LBA by public transport.
The funny thing is, this has been the case all my adult life and I have lived in pretty much most areas of Leeds.
It's ridiculous that I can hop on a train and get to Manchester from home with virtually no hassle and a direct journey from LS25 but it would take hours and lots of changes and pissing about to get to LBA by public transport.
The funny thing is, this has been the case all my adult life and I have lived in pretty much most areas of Leeds.
dcb said:
truck71 said:
Trouble is no-one inbound wants to go to any of the places suggested, London and the SE are where it's at- tourists or business.
How arrogant.How does that match up with the Northern Powerhouse claims from the Chancellor ?
truck71 said:
If the economic activity can spread North over time (I hope it does) then maybe that traffic will increase but we're a long way off that. As for Scotland, will it ever get off it's ar$e and become economically significant?
Improved chances of Scottish being richer if they don't have to keep going toHeathrow whenever they want to travel any significant distance.
Same for the North. A lot fewer journeys up and down the M1 / M6 if you
can travel to an international airport less than 100 miles from your home.
I imagine the airports you allude to are not at capacity, if there was a business case for airlines to use that capacity they would already be doing so.
Edited by truck71 on Friday 15th May 14:01
Thankyou4calling said:
Here is my take on the matter.
I was born in Chiswick, lived in Hounslow until I was 27 and my family are still in Twickenham, I've a brother who is a BA engineer at Heathrow so the airport has been an intrinsic part of my life.
Noise has never been an issue to me, I love seeing planes coming in to land on their final approach even though I'm no plane spotter.
I can't think many are realistically bothered by the noise, certainly not enough to move or not move into the area.
For this part of West London (and i'd go as far as Reading) Heathrow is and has been the driving force behind the economy and it's the strongest economy in the country.
The number of huge firms whop have headquarters or regional offices in the area is huge, drive along the Great West Road and you can see it. Without the airport thousands of business wouldn't be there and i mean every type of business.
There will be few who live or work in the Heathrow corridor who aren't connected to the airport in some way.
House prices in the area are the highest in Europe i'd say and the airport is a driving force for this, far from aircraft noise stopping people wanting to live there it seems to make no difference.
Ever since i can remember there has been talk about heathrow expansion, extra runways etc.
There have been countless proposals and hearings and we now have recently had Heathrow lose it's crown as the busiest International airport.
Successive governments have pondered, considered and sat around while other countries have just got on with it.
Time has even been wasted on ridiculous Boris island plans and expansion proposals at Kent airports.
We need to get on this urgently.
Build a new runway or two and add some terminals, it would take six months at most to do and I'm afraid i'd ignore the NIMBYs, native newt population and cries from others.
Get it done and get the UK back to the forefront of international air transport.
We are making this so much harder and more complicated than needed as is the normal way.
What an excellent post.I was born in Chiswick, lived in Hounslow until I was 27 and my family are still in Twickenham, I've a brother who is a BA engineer at Heathrow so the airport has been an intrinsic part of my life.
Noise has never been an issue to me, I love seeing planes coming in to land on their final approach even though I'm no plane spotter.
I can't think many are realistically bothered by the noise, certainly not enough to move or not move into the area.
For this part of West London (and i'd go as far as Reading) Heathrow is and has been the driving force behind the economy and it's the strongest economy in the country.
The number of huge firms whop have headquarters or regional offices in the area is huge, drive along the Great West Road and you can see it. Without the airport thousands of business wouldn't be there and i mean every type of business.
There will be few who live or work in the Heathrow corridor who aren't connected to the airport in some way.
House prices in the area are the highest in Europe i'd say and the airport is a driving force for this, far from aircraft noise stopping people wanting to live there it seems to make no difference.
Ever since i can remember there has been talk about heathrow expansion, extra runways etc.
There have been countless proposals and hearings and we now have recently had Heathrow lose it's crown as the busiest International airport.
Successive governments have pondered, considered and sat around while other countries have just got on with it.
Time has even been wasted on ridiculous Boris island plans and expansion proposals at Kent airports.
We need to get on this urgently.
Build a new runway or two and add some terminals, it would take six months at most to do and I'm afraid i'd ignore the NIMBYs, native newt population and cries from others.
Get it done and get the UK back to the forefront of international air transport.
We are making this so much harder and more complicated than needed as is the normal way.
You have hit the nail on the head.
Axionknight said:
Rather that than suffering London, frankly. I don't get why the cities inhabitants seem to feel the need to constantly big it up - what is it with those people, are they hoping that if they repeat themselves enough time people from elsewhere will start believing them?
I don't know - but I do wonder why people spend so much time telling us all how much they hate it. What is it with these people, are they hoping that if they repeat themselves enough times people from London will believe them?TroubledSoul said:
Leeds could do so much more if the powers that be would get off their arses and give it proper transport links.
It's ridiculous that I can hop on a train and get to Manchester from home with virtually no hassle and a direct journey from LS25 but it would take hours and lots of changes and pissing about to get to LBA by public transport.
The funny thing is, this has been the case all my adult life and I have lived in pretty much most areas of Leeds.
Yeah, I used to live in Huddersfield and avoided flying from LBA if I could, getting there is crap, Manchester was a doddle - one train that takes 45 minutes, madness.It's ridiculous that I can hop on a train and get to Manchester from home with virtually no hassle and a direct journey from LS25 but it would take hours and lots of changes and pissing about to get to LBA by public transport.
The funny thing is, this has been the case all my adult life and I have lived in pretty much most areas of Leeds.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff