LHR 3rd runway - news just in...

[portlock seagull]

Does anyone believe the government will get this right and pledges will actually be met? Or like a long list of other 'projects' this one will also run massively over budget, deliver far short of benefits case, poor *******s forced to move will get a raw deal etc. that's if LHR was the the right decision to start with? Which I personally don't believe it is.

Maybe West Ham will get a free runway as part of the deal!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33340565

 

[yxee]

They've got to approve it first. Ask for comprehensive report from experts, then continuously second-guess findings... this is the useless side of democracy.

Meanwhile in china...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beijing_Daxing_International_Airport

"A second airport for Beijing was proposed in 2008... Construction of the airport began on Friday, December 26, 2014... Early media reports during September 2011 suggested that there could be up to 9 runways... the projected completion date for the new airport is October 2018"

How on EARTH are we ever going to compete with that? A country without NIMBYism is a country that gets things done for the greater good of its people.

 

[surrey jim]

I am sure David Cameron stated that there would be no expansion of Heathrow. That and the fact that many of his cabinet, and even Mayor of London Borris Johnson are all against expansion.

 

[Diablo]

Suprised that the traffic situation around M25 M4 Heathrow did not kill idea....what is awfull now will become much worse..Gatwick on the other hand has much less other traffic and could cope more easily..

 

[Tricky Dicky]

It's only a recommendation, not a done deal. Personally, I'd prefer the jobs at Gatwick, but I don't fly, so it matters little to me.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Any sane person knows Heathrow is the best option. But it needs a third runway just to cope properly with current volume not more.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Definitely wouldn't happen in Germany

http://www.usatoday.com/story/today...rt-it-now-wont-open-until-late-2017/20434317/

 

[Garage_Doors]

Any sane person knows Heathrow is the best option. But it needs a third runway just to cope properly with current volume not more.

Why is the Heathrow the best option?
More room at Gatwick, and as stated above, less traffic?
Why is it only sane people share your opinion.

 

[portlock seagull]

The thing about 'economic' arguments as the primary decision making influence is that they're usually fabricated lies in hindsight, someone somewhere just gets richer. Social and environmental arguments are secondary, if that, thank god the Victorians had vision to look beyond money. Still, when we're all dying from respiratory illnesses, the sea has swamped most of Sussex and our kids ask what a Lion looked like we can at least say we can fly faster to the Maldives...presuming they still exist

 

[yxee]

Why is the Heathrow the best option?
More room at Gatwick, and as stated above, less traffic?
Why is it only sane people share your opinion.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I suspect you haven't spend years working full-time on a report for this exact purpose.

Heathrow appears to be the best option because the report says so.

I don't think the report writers forgot to consider the "room at Gatwick".

 

[Rugrat]

Suprised that the traffic situation around M25 M4 Heathrow did not kill idea....what is awfull now will become much worse..Gatwick on the other hand has much less other traffic and could cope more easily..

Not sure it could ... all traffic will be coming from the M25 it will simply increase the pressure on the Kent/Surrey stretches without any reduction in the A3-M40 mess. I'd actually imagine that would increase too as more capacity is put through the airports with more traffic trying to get to either

There's no good answer that I've ever seen

 

[wellquickwoody]

Not a done deal but.......

Has the phrase 'eggs in one basket' ever been more appropriate?

If this 3rd runway at LHR comes to fruition, along with either more or expanded terminals, then UK plc would become very reliant on just one main hub airport. Close that down, terrorist attack on the airport itself, or substatantial damage done to the motorway links outside of the airport or the rail links destroyed and you have just taken at LEAST half of our international connections out of action. Our economy would take a massive hit, but with 2 hubs the medium term damage would be far, far less.


But by the time this is built I won't be here so, c'est la vie!

 

[yxee]

Not sure it could ... all traffic will be coming from the M25 it will simply increase the pressure on the Kent/Surrey stretches without any reduction in the A3-M40 mess. I'd actually imagine that would increase too as more capacity is put through the airports with more traffic trying to get to either

There's no good answer that I've ever seen

What about the answer in the report?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Why is the Heathrow the best option?
More room at Gatwick, and as stated above, less traffic?
Why is it only sane people share your opinion.

Every major report into expansion has concluded Heathrow is the most viable. It's not my view, it's the view of experts. This latest report just cements this opinion.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

What about the answer in the report?

Quite. Amusing that everyone on here is now an expert on airports, and know more than the people who have spent the past 2-3 years researching this.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

You're entitled to your opinion, but I suspect you haven't spend years working full-time on a report for this exact purpose.

Heathrow appears to be the best option because the report says so.

I don't think the report writers forgot to consider the "room at Gatwick".

Gatwick, Gatwick? Oooooh shit

 

[Garage_Doors]

You're entitled to your opinion, but I suspect you haven't spend years working full-time on a report for this exact purpose.

Heathrow appears to be the best option because the report says so.

I don't think the report writers forgot to consider the "room at Gatwick".

Your absolutely right , you got me i haven't spend years working full-time on a report for this exact purpose

But i think we would be naive to think the writers have not had direction or influence on what's contained in the proposal.

 

[The Merry Prankster]

Do both. You know that by the time they're halfway through building Heathrow it will be declared inadequate. Get ahead of the curve instead of always playing catch up.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

Personally pleased with this, as I don't want to see Sussex turned into one blob of concrete - yes tens of thousands of new jobs, but we'd simply be importing more people into the area, and where would they live?

We can't build enough homes to satisfy our own youngsters. The transport links from Gatwick into central London aren't good enough either.

I think there's a long way to go on this though, as Johnson, Goldsmith, Greening and others within the cabinet are all anti a Third runway at Heathrow.

 

[goldstone]

Any sane person knows Heathrow is the best option. But it needs a third runway just to cope properly with current volume not more.

This is correct. Heathrow is the only option that makes sense.