If you think about it they could just expand gatwick, give it anothor runway and let heathrow be. They also could have shortened their old third runway so the only thing crossing will be approach, ATC can handle that. They also could expand stanstead. BTW gatwick al reddy has to runways right?

This topic is potentially a can of worms! And, could easily become quite emotive.

 

Gatwick does have a second rwy in a certain sense. But, it's really a converted taxiway. Thus, being so close to the main rwy it is rarely if ever used and cannot be upgraded to full rwy specs. In other words they cannot be used together.

 

Heathrow's original third rwy was in effect just to avoid strong cross winds. The space was needed for massive ongoing expansion and so the rwy was decommissioned.

 

Both airports need extra rwys!!!

 

Both Luton and Stanstead are a long way from London and would need high speed rail connections. Stanstead is nearer Scotland than London!!!! It's a pain to get to if you live west of London.

 

The so called "Boris Island" has massive enviromental impacts on wild life whereas people "choose" to live next to or under the flight paths of Heathrow.

Heathrow absolutely needs a third, and probably fourth runway. It's a joke that it's taking this long for it to be built.

 

Regards,

Ró.

YES. BIIIIG TIME. I think i'm right in saying that business travellers like Heathrow. It's closeish to the city, has good transport links (taxi, bus, tube) and I guess that's pretty much it....Maybe more reasons? They don't want to go to an airport way out that's relatively unknown to them. As a result, Heathrow must expand, and, its already running at 98% capacity (one of the highest in the world), so they need to free up some time and space issues (that goes for arrival as well as on the ground!)

They need to improve customs clearance wait times, usually 45 minutes to get through it and it's a zoo as you approach the agent booths  I felt like I walked 2 miles just to get there too.  They gotta axe the entry taxes too.  I'm trying to figure out how to avoid them, is it going to Edinburgh or Ireland next time?

 

When I was there in July, Boris announced his new airport east of London to replace Heathrow.  I sure hope it doesn't happen as we always stay in Kensington, which is close to Heathrow.

The big problem is that it's operating at 99% capacity, that means whenever there's fog, or CBs or an incident, that things get messed up for days. Now there are other airports that do this too, but the thing with Heathrow is that they've space to expand and add a further 2 runways easily, yet they don't. It's not because there's a mountain in the way, or skyscrapers all around, there simply isn't the political will to say no to 3000 people living next to the airport. In my view, unless those people lived there since before 1929, then they've no excuse, they knew before they bought their house of the giant great airport next to it.

 

@Bic, going through Edinburgh won't save you having the ADP charged, going through Ireland or any other European country will avoid them, or at least they'll avoid the massive long haul one, you'll still be charged for the shorthaul tax, but it's only a couple of euros.

 

Regards,

Ró.

The big problem is that it's operating at 99% capacity

Does being 1% off give me a brownie point (I don't mind just having the brownie for all its worth  )

 

 they knew before they bought their house of the giant great airport next to it.

 

 

Hoorah! Don't forget it "distresses children at the local school" and "They can't learn"

 

Hoorah! Don't forget it "distresses children at the local school" and "They can't learn"

 

 

The whole argument about noisy neighbours gets under my skin... Ró and Andy are absolutely right, the settler attitude should be ignored. We have a similar problem in rural areas: people move in expecting the countryside to be quiet because the estate agent told them it's peaceful, then campaign to have children banned from playgrounds, church bells silenced and a curfew on the use of agricultural machinery. Don't get me started on cows & sheep, birds, trees in the wind (trees are dangerous anyway right?), wind in the trees, farmers shouting at their dogs, dogs barking at their farmers, motor cross, stage rallies, forest operations... Oh how I could go on.

 

Besides, I rather like the noise aeroplanes make. They usually make me stick my head out of the door to see who's going by. I'd live there only there's no joy living with people who complain about their locale but won't actually go to live anywhere else... Take the whingers and put them on a desert island. They'll have all the peace they want then. And I can live by a busy airport.

 

D

 

(don't treat this as a flaming-- I'm grinning while typing. My personal preference, were it not so expensive, is for an artificial island like the suggestion floated (ha ha) by Marinair et al. I can't imagine it making traffic any more complex than it already is)

Heathrow needs a third runways to continue to be a major hub, and to keep in line with FRA, CDG, AMS, MUC, etc. Otherwise the other major hubs are going to take over the market, leaving Heathrow to O and D traffic, and nothing else. It is a joke to politics today that it takes this long to get something built that would help create jobs, help the economy, and have minimal impact. Gatwick also could use a second runway, even with Heathrow's third.

The whole argument about noisy neighbours gets under my skin... Ró and Andy are absolutely right, the settler attitude should be ignored. We have a similar problem in rural areas: people move in expecting the countryside to be quiet because the estate agent told them it's peaceful, then campaign to have children banned from playgrounds, church bells silenced and a curfew on the use of agricultural machinery. Don't get me started on cows & sheep, birds, trees in the wind (trees are dangerous anyway right?), wind in the trees, farmers shouting at their dogs, dogs barking at their farmers, motor cross, stage rallies, forest operations... Oh how I could go on.

 

Besides, I rather like the noise aeroplanes make. They usually make me stick my head out of the door to see who's going by. I'd live there only there's no joy living with people who complain about their locale but won't actually go to live anywhere else... Take the whingers and put them on a desert island. They'll have all the peace they want then. And I can live by a busy airport.

 

D

 

(don't treat this as a flaming-- I'm grinning while typing. My personal preference, were it not so expensive, is for an artificial island like the suggestion floated (ha ha) by Marinair et al. I can't imagine it making traffic any more complex than it already is)

Completely agree!

 

 

Stanstead is nearer Scotland than London

 

You need a new map.

 

Stansted's 40 miles from London; the Scottish border is 340 miles

 

 

In my view, unless those people lived there since before 1929, then they've no excuse, they knew before they bought their house of the giant great airport next to it.

 

That's totally misleading. The site was only bought in 1930 by Fairey as a private airfield to assemble and test aircraft. when it had a single grass runway and a handful of buildings. The site was requisitioned during World War 2 for an RAF airfield but the end of the war made it unnecessary and it was handed over to be London's new airport in 1946.

 

By the end of its first year of operation it handled 63,000 passengers with about 2,000 movements Those figures are  now about 70 million passengers and 470,000 movements.  Terminal 4 was opened in 1986 and Terminal 5 in 2008. All those are a lot more recent than 1929.

You need a new map.

 

Stansted's 40 miles from London; the Scottish border is 340 miles

I'm quite aware of my geography!! If you are travelling from west of London it might as well be in Scotland!!

I'm quite aware of my geography!! If you are travelling from west of London it might as well be in Scotland!!

No - Stansted is not nearer Scotland than London wherever you start.

OK GUYS THIS TOPIC HEATED UP IN A DAY wow. ok, lets get defensive (lol) stanstead airport is called LONDON stanstead so it should be near london and gatwick is not very busy so they could redirect unwanted heathrow airlines their...right?