London's New Runway - Zac Goldsmith loses seat to Liberals

Why aren't we considering a new airport somewhere further north?

[MovedGoalPosts]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Why aren't we considering a new airport somewhere further north?

Perhaps because the ones that are elsewhere - Midlands, Manchester, etc have spare capacity and not enough demand? You'd need both airlines, passengers, and cargo hauliers to want to use other areas. With the high density of population in the South East, airports in demand will be those close to this location.

A major part of the problem is the need for interconnectivity between airlines. The smaller regional airports don't have the passenger flow to fill sufficient planes for the long haul stuff, excluding the once a week charters which obviously don't suit business. The regional airports thus have small feeder routes into the larger airports. Heathrow provides the hub connectivity and due to the capacity of Heathrow, Gatwick also has some hub offerings. We either allow that hub capacity to grow, by expansion, or we see our own airlines like BA start to falter as the regular traveller moves to Emirates or whoever.

[techguyone]

Bit of a necro post but as the results due today...

This also made interesting reading.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33285659

[denphone]

No doubt Boris will be the hypocrite he usually is..

Originally Posted by denphone

No doubt Boris will be the hypocrite he usually is..

Yes, let's just have a prejudiced rant, so much easier than reading what's actually going on.

Boris Johnson is today expected to open a Cabinet rift by opposing plans to expand Heathrow within hours of it being announced as the Government's preferred option.

...

Mr Johnson and Ms Greening will be able to voice the opposition to a third runway at Heathrow without resigning because Mrs May will give them the freedom to speak out.

Downing Street said that the "special derogation" from collective responsibility, which will allow ministers to argue against the Government position, is a "mature" way to approach the debate.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...xpected-to-gi/

So are they:

- Going to build it at Heathrow?
- Going to build it at Gatwick?
- Build one at both!
- Kick the decision further into the long grass?

I am going with the last option. I am hoping for the third option.

[techguyone]

The bbc link has shown that historically it's being endlessly kicked around. The obvious and sensible solution is one at both, we'll have to wait and see.

[Derek]

Build one at Heathrow with a fudge about moving flights to Gatwick that will eventually be quietly shelved.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Chris

Yes, let's just have a prejudiced rant, so much easier than reading what's actually going on.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...xpected-to-gi/

Nothing prejudiced or political as he talks about making a success of Brexit and yes he opposes something that would help this country in the long run as Heathrow currently is bulging at the seams and needs extra capacity badly.

And it is not the first time he has been hypocritical as when he was mayor of London he was contradicting himself and there have been many other things as well.

http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/news/...after-10604771

Looks like it's Heathrow according to the BBC.

[thenry]

Shocking

Originally Posted by denphone

Nothing prejudiced or political as he talks about making a success of Brexit and yes he opposes something that would help this country in the long run as Heathrow currently is bulging at the seams and needs extra capacity badly.

And it is not the first time he has been hypocritical as when he was mayor of London he was contradicting himself and there have been many other things as well.

http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/news/...after-10604771

Boris has never opposed extra capacity. In fact he wants more capacity than can be delivered at LHR. He has long favoured an entirely new airport to the east of the city.

I liked the idea of a new airport but we 'decided' on a new runway in 2003 and now it will be another year before a Parliamentary vote at which point the 10 year process of building the runway can begin before being stopped by a million lawsuits. We'll be lucky to see it built by 2030. Can you imagine how long an airport would have taken?

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Chris

Boris has never opposed extra capacity. In fact he wants more capacity than can be delivered at LHR. He has long favoured an entirely new airport to the east of the city.

Obviously Heathrow has now been given the go ahead this morning but as we know there is a awful long way to go sadly as and l am certainly not against building capacity elsewhere either as l think we need it in quite a few places whether its at airports we already have and by building new ones in new areas of London and other big cities.

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by Damien

I liked the idea of a new airport but we 'decided' on a new runway in 2003 and now it will be another year before a Parliamentary vote at which point the 10 year process of building the runway can begin before being stopped by a million lawsuits. We'll be lucky to see it built by 2030. Can you imagine how long an airport would have taken?

I liked the idea as well. Moving all the noise and pollution out of the capital and releasing the land at Heathrow for housing to help finance it. Would have been a win-win in my books. Hong Kong managed it in seven years including building a new island from the tops of three mountains and the connecting services.

The airport has been in commercial operation since 1998, replacing the Kai Tak Airport. It is an important regional trans-shipment centre, passenger hub and gateway for destinations in Mainland China (with 45 destinations) and the rest of Asia. The airport is the world's busiest cargo gateway and one of the world's busiest passenger airports.[3] It is also home to one of the world's largest passenger terminal buildings (the largest when opened in 1998).

Wiki

Shows what can be done if fingers are pulled out.