Discussion
We seem to have debating increasing airport capacity for ages while other countries have developed and are leaving us behind. I now read that apart from 'Boris Island' there is another proposal for the Isle of Grain.
Surely the answer is to develop Stansted. There is room to do so and the rail and M11 can be improved to take passengers right into the City. The last time they tried to expand Stansted the authorities were beaten by a loud and very well organised small minority BUT surely the airport has to go somewhere?
Surely the answer is to develop Stansted. There is room to do so and the rail and M11 can be improved to take passengers right into the City. The last time they tried to expand Stansted the authorities were beaten by a loud and very well organised small minority BUT surely the airport has to go somewhere?
Isle of Grain looks like it would be a long, traffic choked way into London, and it's not near HS1 for any link up to be practical.
I would have thought both Gatwick and Stansted could cope with more. I would also think that having more long haul flights from Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow etc might take a bit of the strain off London and also the national transport infrastructure.
I would have thought both Gatwick and Stansted could cope with more. I would also think that having more long haul flights from Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow etc might take a bit of the strain off London and also the national transport infrastructure.
I am reminded of the scenes from an Essex pub when the development of Stansted was approved, in the 1980's. On one side were the 'haves' - residents of quaint Essex villages about to despoiled by avgas breathing monsters, on the others 'havenots' - local unemployed blokes or those looking for something other than tractor derived careers. The 'losers' were bitter about their 'loss', but this was more than compensated by the gains...
As the 'haves' often have access to choice (via money) they can/could/should upsticks and find another bucolic haven. Leaving plenty of work/career/chances for many, many 'havenots'.
I'm madly over-simplyfying this, but really north Kent does need an economic boost, as does east London, and it seems the great masses are choosing air travel for business and pleasure in ever-increasing numbers. So we need extra capacity, and building more runways at Gatters or Heathrow is probably not the long term solution.
It's the green option too - no way will EON be allowed to utilise that big coal burning plant just off the end of the runway.
As the 'haves' often have access to choice (via money) they can/could/should upsticks and find another bucolic haven. Leaving plenty of work/career/chances for many, many 'havenots'.
I'm madly over-simplyfying this, but really north Kent does need an economic boost, as does east London, and it seems the great masses are choosing air travel for business and pleasure in ever-increasing numbers. So we need extra capacity, and building more runways at Gatters or Heathrow is probably not the long term solution.
It's the green option too - no way will EON be allowed to utilise that big coal burning plant just off the end of the runway.
The Don of Croy said:
So we need extra capacity, and building more runways at Gatters or Heathrow is probably not the long term solution.
May be a silly question...but why not?Existing infrastructure is largely there. Skillbase is there. Businesses are located to take advantage of the 2 airports.
GT03ROB said:
The Don of Croy said:
So we need extra capacity, and building more runways at Gatters or Heathrow is probably not the long term solution.
May be a silly question...but why not?Existing infrastructure is largely there. Skillbase is there. Businesses are located to take advantage of the 2 airports.
Engineer1 said:
Why not improve Birmingham Airport and spread some of the load and reduce the whole concentration of big international airports in the south.
It's not about spreading the load, we already have that around London (Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted, Luton, Southend, Manston even Southampton/Bournemouth). It's about creating a super-hub. Heathrow was the original worldwide super-hub, catering for flights from every corner of the globe. The problem is now that as more major airports develop around the world, direct flights cannot be added as the slots are full. Therefore these new airports link to places with capacity, currently being CDG/AMS/FRA.So if you're a new Chinese factory with goods everyone wants in XYZville, and XYZville airport is connected to Frankfurt but not London, where will you build your EMEA headquarters? Even if Brum is connected to XYZville - the HQ will be build in Frankfurt.
Engineer1 said:
Why not improve Birmingham Airport and spread some of the load and reduce the whole concentration of big international airports in the south.
Probably because that gets away from the UK having a hub airport like Amsterdam & Paris. This also strengthens the position of Paris or Amsterdam.What puzzles me on all this is that I do a fair amount on international business and travel quite a bit via the three main London hubs and equally have associates incoming to the UK via the same.
I've never heard them and nor have I ever had cause to mention how difficult it is getting to or from the UK via the air. I've never chosen a region in which to work based upon whether I can get a direct flight or not - though this is of course desirable.
I recognise that that airports are at capacity which can cause issues when there's a delay but is this really as bad as is being made out?
If you throw in Luton Southend and City Airports, London has 6 that can surely be worked more efficiently than they are. Or is this too simplistic?
I've never heard them and nor have I ever had cause to mention how difficult it is getting to or from the UK via the air. I've never chosen a region in which to work based upon whether I can get a direct flight or not - though this is of course desirable.
I recognise that that airports are at capacity which can cause issues when there's a delay but is this really as bad as is being made out?
If you throw in Luton Southend and City Airports, London has 6 that can surely be worked more efficiently than they are. Or is this too simplistic?
Engineer1 said:
Why not improve Birmingham Airport and spread some of the load and reduce the whole concentration of big international airports in the south.
I thought we are doing so- six extra plane parking bays with associated infrastructure, 400m runway extension, that sort of thing. Also improvements to the railway station there.It might not sound too dramatic but bear in mind it's a relatively small site.
As for why Brum & not yet more in London, consider proximity to the NEC & good road/rail links from there.
12v3pot said:
Pfft.
The answer is Southend (the only time Southend has been the correct answer to any question ever posed).
Having spent the money on the new train station HMG could also upgrade the existing and well-used line for a 30-min rail link to central London.
Unfortunately the road infrastructure is dire and already very busy.The answer is Southend (the only time Southend has been the correct answer to any question ever posed).
Having spent the money on the new train station HMG could also upgrade the existing and well-used line for a 30-min rail link to central London.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff