Heathrow v Gatwick v Stansted airport expansion

Kudoscycles

Official Trade Member
Apr 15, 2011
5,566
5,048
www.kudoscycles.com
Before starting this thread I should say I am not personally affected by any of these choices.
I understand that the government are today announcing their choice,but after that parliament has to vote,then it has to go through planning applications/appeals,the runway could be many years ahead.
I wonder if Boris Johnson had become PM would the choice have been different.
I am told that Stansted is underused,Gatwick and Heathrow are full.
Most of Gatwick flights are leisure flights.....why not move a lot of leisure flights (Easyjet) to Stansted to throw up long haul space at Gatwick. That could be done quickly and with minimum disruption.
KudosDave
 

trex

Esteemed Pedelecer
May 15, 2011
7,703
2,671
I think the government should authorize in principle all three airports to build their extra runways. Build the capacity for the future and fight pollution with technology.
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,221
30,618
I'm with Trex on this, we need vastly more capacity. Most importantly I want Heathrow to get the third runway which is essential if it is to retain its current status. I say that as someone who is still affected by it and has lived and worked in areas heavily affected by it.

I have two observations about the objectors living in the affected areas:

First is that almost every one moved into that area while the airport was there and the aircraft far more noisy than they are today, so it was their choice.

Second is that many of them are obsessed by the presence of aircraft and the campaign against Heathrow and no longer being remotely rational about the actual noise. A perfect example is John Stewart, chairman of the anti Heathrow organisation HACAN. He's made it his life's work to attack everything about Heathrow and his obsession has clearly detached him from reality.
.
 
Last edited:
  • Useful
Reactions: grldtnr

oldtom

Esteemed Pedelecer
I'm bound to say I find this decision entirely perverse and wholly unnecessary.

While it may be the case that air travel continues to increase and greater airport capacity is required, successive governments have demonstrated the same kind of forward planning in the sphere of air travel as they have done with the M25 and other roads, with expansion....further expansion....abolition of huge stretches of hard shoulder, all with little improvement by the time of completion.

If there were any logic amongst the people who determine such things, how could anyone look at the three major London airports and determine that Heathrow should be the choice? As one who has flown into and from all of those airports frequently over the last 30+ years, it staggers me that Stansted is ignored yet is ripe for expansion in all directions.

Stansted is surrounded by green fields for the most part for miles around and is adjacent to the motorway network. There is also a fast train service into central London. The time difference between all the three contenders and onward travel into London is not appreciably different so it is beyond me why Stansted has never been selected as the most obvious airport for expansion. Is it perhaps, I wonder, because some of the wealthiest and most influential people in the land have large estates in that area and have adopted the NIMBY mindset?

To heap further misery upon the people of west London when Gatwick and Stansted will undoubtedly require to be expanded at some point regardless, is simply shameful.

Previously, the most ridiculous construction job I can remember being foisted upon the taxpayers with little or no benefit to anyone was the colossally expensive Crossrail project. Now, if that were extended to Stansted, maybe I could see some joined up thinking!

Tom
 
  • Like
Reactions: mike killay

Kudoscycles

Official Trade Member
Apr 15, 2011
5,566
5,048
www.kudoscycles.com
Does anyone know why Stansted is ignored,as Tom has said it has so much spare land...actually too much,considering the time it takes to get from the long term car park to the terminal.
My architect friend tells me that the railway out to the stands is forward thinking and easily extended to supply any extensions.
KudosDave
 

D8ve

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jan 30, 2013
2,142
1,294
Bristol
Or perhaps they could scrap the whole idea and move back to trains? Local holidays?
In Cornwall at the mo myself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Artstu

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,221
30,618
Well the decision has been taken, Heathrow get's its third runway and I'm pleased. It will mean even more aircraft over me all the time, but that doesn't worry me since I'm not obsessed with finding it a problem

I have excellent hearing and dislike excessive noise, but don't find today's airliners a problem. Inside behind my double glazing I'm not even aware of them and during my hours in the countryside they don't disturb me. Like the wildlife I just take no notice of them.

I've actually photographed the aircraft from all over the world flying close over me and my adjoining wildlife reserve, adding additional interest to my life. For example, here's a BA Airbus A380, the world's largest airliner, photo taken with a small pocket camera:



And the photo below of the airtrails over my home in the sunset show all the black and red trails of planes crossing all the time:


.
 
Last edited:

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,221
30,618
Does anyone know why Stansted is ignored,as Tom has said it has so much spare land...actually too much,considering the time it takes to get from the long term car park to the terminal.
My architect friend tells me that the railway out to the stands is forward thinking and easily extended to supply any extensions.
KudosDave
It's interchange Dave. Having rail links etc is irrelevant, those changing from one flight to another don't want to have to embark on a train journey, manhandling luggage etc when going from one tiring flight to another. They just won't do it and will transfer their business to Schiphol or Frankfurt for their excellent facilities.

The choice is simple, take part in the modern world and succeed, or turn our backs on the EU, Heathrow expansion, HS rail lines etc. and fail, becoming a backward and poorer little nation.
.
 

Kudoscycles

Official Trade Member
Apr 15, 2011
5,566
5,048
www.kudoscycles.com
It's interchange Dave. Having rail links etc is irrelevant, those changing from one flight to another don't want to have to embark on a train journey, manhandling luggage etc when going from one tiring flight to another. They just won't do it and will transfer their business to Schiphol or Frankfurst for their excellent facilities.

The choice is simple, take part in the modern world and succeed, or turn our backs on the EU, Heathrow expansion, HS rail lines etc. and fail, becoming a backward and poorer little nation.
.
Good point,I had forgotten the onward journey aspect.
KudosDave
 

anotherkiwi

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jan 26, 2015
7,845
5,786
The European Union
For example, here's a BA Airbus A380, the world's largest airliner, photo taken with a small pocket camera:



.
And you got it to fit in such a small camera! :) I only have photos of the bits being trucked through the small town where I used to live in the Gers but have you noticed that because of the size it appears to be moving really slowly compared to smaller planes? Interesting trick of the mind.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: flecc

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,221
30,618
And you got it to fit in such a small camera! :) I only have photos of the bits being trucked through the small town where I used to live in the Gers but have you noticed that because of the size it appears to be moving really slowly compared to smaller planes? Interesting trick of the mind.
Yes, much of the time I only carry a little Canon pocket camera, good enough for web images. Some of those airbus bits you used to see coming in from all over Europe are really huge.

I enjoy capturing the unusual as well as the routine aircraft. Here's one of the world's noisiest aircraft in silhouette, do you know what it is (and which way it's going!)?

ID.jpg
 

oldtom

Esteemed Pedelecer
It's interchange Dave. Having rail links etc is irrelevant, those changing from one flight to another don't want to have to embark on a train journey, manhandling luggage etc when going from one tiring flight to another. They just won't do it and will transfer their business to Schiphol or Frankfurt for their excellent facilities.
I understand the point you make 'flecc' but unless we replicate the kind of facility you mention at an alternative venue, we will continue to hear calls for further Heathrow expansion in exactly the same way as has happened with the M25.

As sure as night follows day, a third runway will bring about the need for a 6th terminal and so it will go on. Flights are then likely to double according to some analyses so we may need to sacrifice even more villages than those at risk currently. This situation is unacceptable when, you may remember, T4 was supposed to be the last expansion that BAA would require at Heathrow. When T5 was mooted, it was almost universally opposed by everyone except the government and BAA at the inquiry all those years ago. The people were ignored.

Now, I know you are a very tolerant fellow but for many people the effect of airport expansion is intolerable. Perhaps even worse is the detrimental, physical and health problems which can be levelled at the more heavily-condensed airspace over Heathrow Heath and the air corridors surrounding it. This is all the more galling when you consider we have the space to extend Stansted into a world-ranking international hub airport, simply by moving a few cows up the road.

I still remember when the main London airport was Croydon aerodrome and when it finally closed due to the expansion of local towns and villages effectively preventing any further development there, Heathrow Heath was selected to become the London airport of the future, relieving Northolt and Blackbushe of the increasing volume of international flights in the south of England.

Unfortunately, the same thinking which was applied in the case of Croydon has not been transferred to Heathrow where politicians seem to have no hesitation in permitting quite possibly the destruction of historically-important villages simply to accommodate more air traffic.

Once again, the people have been ignored and politicians have got their way again. Meanwhile, those same politicians are hell-bent on getting the country some kind of deal from the EU because some want to leave that group of nations. I fear that yet again, the people will be the losers and the rich few will share even greater wealth.

We are committing a national Hari-Kiri thanks to the incompetence and greed of those whose duty it is to represent the views of the people and to ensure the welfare of the nation.

Tom
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,221
30,618
unless we replicate the kind of facility you mention at an alternative venue, we will continue to hear calls for further Heathrow expansion in exactly the same way as has happened with the M25.

As sure as night follows day, a third runway will bring about the need for a 6th terminal and so it will go on.
I agree Tom, but it's the way of the world, life doesn't stand still and progress means older infrastructure goes in favour of the new.

The argument for freezing at a point in time has always existed, but at what point should it operate? Remember the immense noise of horse and cart traffic on cobbled streets between buildings drove city and large town populations mad two hundred years ago. Should we have stopped then?

The whole issue of aircraft noise is being hugely exaggerated by people who moved into the affected area when airliners were also very frequent but had direct thrust non-bypass engines. making them as noisy as miltary jets. And that included the incredibly noisy Concorde flights. At work I was directly under the approach at that time and had to halt my phone conversations when Concorde passed over, and some others also made conversation difficult. By the time I left there there was no problem.

Todays high bypass jet aircraft are whisper quiet by comparison, even the huge Airbus A380 causing little disturbance. I've seen and heard for myself the complainers listening out for each aircraft, having it on their minds all the time and winding themselves up. I just take no notice of it when out and as said, behind double or treble glazing when indoors the noise almost or completely disappears.

It's a sad human characteristic that when people start campaigning about something they all too often become obsessive, exaggerating to the point when they believe their own exaggerations and even become mentally ill as a result. This is true of some of the long term Heathrow campaigners.

Very importantly, the majority of affected residents are in favour of the expansion, huge numbers of them working in Heathrow and dependent on it. That totally changes their mindset so they hear the aircraft noise as it actually is, not a big problem.
.
 
Last edited:

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,221
30,618
That's the one Trex. The one I photographed is owned by Greensill Capital, based in the Isle of Man tax haven, they organise capitalisation for companies around the world. So a happy coincidence with your current tax haven post in the Brexit thread.

Weird company, in some countries they have two managing directors, can't see how that can work.
.
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,221
30,618
I can't wait for Goldsmith, Johnson and Khan, (sounds like a firm of solicitors), to lie down in front of the bulldozers!
They won't. Their bluff has been called so they now have to go through the motions, with only Zac Goldsmith actually doing something by resigning. Suits me, he's undoubtedly a very nice, honest and sincere person, but totally lacking in any real character.
.
 

trex

Esteemed Pedelecer
May 15, 2011
7,703
2,671
he is going to resign. His seat may revert back to the LibDems. Even if it doesn't, the swingometer may be useful to gauge the possibility that the tories are going to get a bloody nose at the next general election.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: flecc

mike killay

Esteemed Pedelecer
Feb 17, 2011
3,012
1,629
It used to be the same with railways, my aunt lived almost next door to the line, but never noticed the trains because she was so used to them.
Similarly, Llandarcy Oil Refinery used to give off a fearful oily pong which drenched the area around. The locals could not smell it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flecc

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,221
30,618
he is going to resign. His seat may revert back to the LibDems. Even if it doesn't, the swingometer may be useful to gauge the possibility that the tories are going to get a bloody nose at the next general election.
The Conservatives have decided not to put up a candidate against Zac Goldsmith who is standing as an independent.

That will keep the Lib-dems out of power there, Zac's huge majority will easily win the day.
.
 
Last edited:

Advertisers