Discussion
Police State said:
They should have spent the Olympic money on building a proper airport in the Thames estuary.
It sometimes comes as a shock to those who live within the M25 that the majority of the country's population lives outside it.Look at a map. The Thames Estuary is more or less in the bottom right hand corner of the island. Bung a major international airport out there and yes, all those people who live in Hounslow etc will have a bit of a quieter life, but all the people who live in Wales, the south west, the midlands, scouseland/ Manchester/ Leeds etc who want to get to it will spend more time clogging up the already over-used M25. To get round to the "wrong side" of London
A bit of investment in the major regional airports (Brum, Manchester, Leeds/Bradford, Newcastle, Bristol etc) makes a lot more sense, because it would reduce the demand for people to get to one of London's airports. It would even be a "green" solution in that sense.
I don't get why its more environmentally friendly to keep the planes going around in circles waiting for a slot to land, rather than slap a bit of tarmac down and get the things on the ground with the engines off.
Do they really think with how
they have made flying already with the porno scans and liquid bans etc that an extra half hour delay doing laps of surrey will put people off their week in Spain.
Do they really think with how
they have made flying already with the porno scans and liquid bans etc that an extra half hour delay doing laps of surrey will put people off their week in Spain.rs1952 said:
A bit of investment in the major regional airports (Brum, Manchester, Leeds/Bradford, Newcastle, Bristol etc) makes a lot more sense, because it would reduce the demand for people to get to one of London's airports. It would even be a "green" solution in that sense.
This.Oh and with related infrastructure, road and rail, improved.
Quite why successive Governments haven't been able to spread true economic activity around this small island has long been a mystery to me.
Perhaps, in reality, they've all been s
t.rs1952 said:
ViperDave said:
an extra half hour delay doing laps of surrey will put people off their week in Spain.
You've gone Heathrow to Dartford in half an hour? What in - a fking helicopter?!?! 
The real Apache said:
And so it begins, they appear to want their cake and eat it. Repair the economy and pacify the green mentalists. Who is going to benefit from axing the 3rd runway?
we have to sort the economy out long before any 3rd runway could have possibly been commissioned anyway. it's not the driveway pikeys putting down a few hundred yards of 'termik'!i've worked at heathrow recently and there are swathes of offices empty around heathrow's perimeter. i've never heard of any businessman complain of not being able to get a flight into london, so why the need for the increased capacity?
i know plenty of northern folks who end up travelling to london to go on holiday or business. surely this is something to be addressed before we look at bringing any more flight capacity to the south east.
tamore said:
i've worked at heathrow recently and there are swathes of offices empty around heathrow's perimeter. i've never heard of any businessman complain of not being able to get a flight into london, so why the need for the increased capacity?
Heathrow works at capacity in terms of flights. The slightest hiccup creates big delays, as there are no spare landing/takeoff slots to recover missed ones.anonymous said:
[redacted]
You miss my point. I'm not necessarily talking about holiday traffic, although plenty of charter flights go from Gatwick and Luton.Take the example of Continental Airlines, who have recently been flying scheduled flights from Newark New Jersy to a number of UK regional airports. The recession/ slump has meant that they are about to cancel some of them through lack of business, but the economy will come around one day.
So, I reiterate, why should you need to get to Heathrow to get to, for example, Yankee Land when there is a sufficient payload available to fly from regional airports?
rs1952 said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
You miss my point. I'm not necessarily talking about holiday traffic, although plenty of charter flights go from Gatwick and Luton.Take the example of Continental Airlines, who have recently been flying scheduled flights from Newark New Jersy to a number of UK regional airports. The recession/ slump has meant that they are about to cancel some of them through lack of business, but the economy will come around one day.
So, I reiterate, why should you need to get to Heathrow to get to, for example, Yankee Land when there is a sufficient payload available to fly from regional airports?
The money saved from axing the third runway at Heathrow should be used to speed up the high speed train lines being built that this country is crying out for. That will take traffic off the roads and will also free up capacity at the airports.....who is going to fly to Manchester/Edinburgh/Glasgow etc if you can do it on the train without all the security hassles etc of flying.
tamore said:
The real Apache said:
And so it begins, they appear to want their cake and eat it. Repair the economy and pacify the green mentalists. Who is going to benefit from axing the 3rd runway?
we have to sort the economy out long before any 3rd runway could have possibly been commissioned anyway. it's not the driveway pikeys putting down a few hundred yards of 'termik'!i've worked at heathrow recently and there are swathes of offices empty around heathrow's perimeter. i've never heard of any businessman complain of not being able to get a flight into london, so why the need for the increased capacity?
i know plenty of northern folks who end up travelling to london to go on holiday or business. surely this is something to be addressed before we look at bringing any more flight capacity to the south east.
The need for increased capacity is because it is already maxed out, working there doesn't mean you see dozens of airliners stacked in hold patterns burning fuel for half an hour to get a slot over all the estates full of people complaining about noise and pollution. Finally, if there was no need for it there would be no business case, if there was no business case there would be no interest in it from investors.......there is.
A new airport will be government money, ie funded by the tax payer, you and me. So will new train line etc.
A new runway will be paid for by BAA, the private sector, Spaniards at the moment , given current state of the economy, and the deficit, and the importance of heathrow to the nation as a whole.
I'd know what id choose.
I cheap fix to keep things going, call your selves pistonheaders, what happened to bangernomics?
A new runway will be paid for by BAA, the private sector, Spaniards at the moment , given current state of the economy, and the deficit, and the importance of heathrow to the nation as a whole.
I'd know what id choose.
I cheap fix to keep things going, call your selves pistonheaders, what happened to bangernomics?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff