UK airport expansion: third runway at Heathrow receives government approval.

Build a feck off massive super hub by northampton way with high speed rail links to Leeds Manchester Birmingham and London in an hour... but the cost would be astronomical... so fek it... new runways at Heathrow, Gatwick, Manchester and Birmingham
 
Jippy said:
Sounds like it could easily drag on for another 12 years. Living in west London I certainly don't want Heathrow expanded.
Click to expand...

I live there too and wouldn't be too fussed at all really (and actually work directly under the flight path). What's your opinion on it Jips?
 
Waldner said:
I live there too and wouldn't be too fussed at all really (and actually work directly under the flight path). What's your opinion on it Jips?
Click to expand...
Gatwick seems the better option emissions-wise from what I gather. Plus I don't want hundreds of planes routed over Brook Green!
 
sun_tzu said:
Build a feck off massive super hub by northampton way with high speed rail links to Leeds Manchester Birmingham and London in an hour... but the cost would be astronomical... so fek it... new runways at Heathrow, Gatwick, Manchester and Birmingham
Click to expand...
Manchester already has 2 runways... Technically, so does Gatwick but they can't be used at the same time.
 
sun_tzu said:
Depends if you live closer to one or the other I think... both are not good for the environment.
I wouldn't be surprised to see both given the go ahead
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, total nimbyism on my part. Both could be a compromise of sorts and ramp up the infrastructure spend I guess.
 
Jippy said:
Oh yeah, total nimbyism on my part. Both could be a compromise of sorts and ramp up the infrastructure spend I guess.
Click to expand...
Yeah if they do both it ends the well it should have been at Gatwick/Heathrow (because it does not effect me) plus as you say it becomes another big infra project (not that I'm sure we in big infra have the capacity with cp5/6 amp6/7 hinkley (wyfla, etc etc) ha programme and hs2... we are going to need a he'll of a lot of European labour / expertise which I'm sure won't go down well with the brexiteers)
 
Last edited:
sun_tzu said:
Yeah if they do both it ends the well it should have been at Gatwick/Heathrow (because it does not effect me) plus as you say it becomes another big infra project (not that I'm sure we in big infra have the capacity with cp5/6 amp6/7 hinkley (wyfla, etc etc) ha programme and hs2... we are going to need a he'll of a lot of European labour / expertise which I'm sure won't go down well with the brexiteers)
Click to expand...
Maybe the juicy build contracts could be used as Brexit bargaining chips.
 
Jippy said:
Maybe the juicy build contracts could be used as Brexit bargaining chips.
Click to expand...
Nah... laing will get Heathrow (I'd imagine after the t5 job)
Gatwick already appointed people should they get it
Hinkley has been tendered
All hs2 jvs have been decided (there is a European company in all of them to bring hs rail experience)
Ha has appointed it's contractor banks and pretty much all amp / cp contracts will roll over I think
 
rednev said:
Just build the runway!

Residents of West London have no right to expect special protection from increased levels of noise pollution. They are living in a mega city FFS....what do they expect?
Click to expand...


Sweet
 
sun_tzu said:
Nah... laing will get Heathrow (I'd imagine after the t5 job)
Gatwick already appointed people should they get it
Hinkley has been tendered
All hs2 jvs have been decided (there is a European company in all of them to bring hs rail experience)
Ha has appointed it's contractor banks and pretty much all amp / cp contracts will roll over I think
Click to expand...
That Laing infrastructure investment trust is always on a mental premium to NAV. I need to look into this more.
Cina said:
Waiting to take off at Heathrow is usually a long and frustrating process.
Click to expand...
T5 is normally ok tbf. No airports are great experiences. The smoking cellar in Schiphol is something else. Instantaneous lung cancer when you walk in through the fog.
 
Jippy said:
That Laing infrastructure investment trust is always on a mental premium to NAV. I need to look into this more.

T5 is normally ok tbf. No airports are great experiences. The smoking cellar in Schiphol is something else. Instantaneous lung cancer when you walk in through the fog.
Click to expand...
No I meant waiting on the plane itself. The runway queue is nuts. No other airport like it.

Heathrow itself is ok. T2 and T5 are pretty nice.
 
Cina said:
No I meant waiting on the plane itself. The runway queue is nuts. No other airport like it.

Heathrow itself is ok. T2 and T5 are pretty nice.
Click to expand...
Ah yeah. I used to have to go to Edinburgh regularly with work. Massive fog problems and that was even worse.
Anything but Stanstead/Luton tbh.
 
Gatwick would probably be the easier of the two to complete, as there would be far less houses to flatten to make room for it. The down side is getting tourists and business travellers into London. Southern Rail are tosh and the M/A23 into London isn't great once you hit Croydon. I think Heathrow will be awarded, but with Gatwick also receiving major investment as a sweetener.
 
Relfy said:
Gatwick would probably be the easier of the two to complete, as there would be far less houses to flatten to make room for it. The down side is getting tourists and business travellers into London. Southern Rail are tosh and the M/A23 into London isn't great once you hit Croydon. I think Heathrow will be awarded, but with Gatwick also receiving major investment as a sweetener.
Click to expand...
Still think it should be Gatwick + a high speed rail link between Gatwick and Heathrow + improved links between Gatwick and London.
 
Adebesi said:
And also look at either a new airport North of London, or massive investment in Birmingham Airport.
Click to expand...

Amen to that. But let's repeat the Wembley mistakes all over again. Why make something so useful in the centre of the country and closer to everyone hey? Not like there's going to be high speed rail to London from there... oh wait.
 
Relfy said:
Gatwick would probably be the easier of the two to complete, as there would be far less houses to flatten to make room for it. The down side is getting tourists and business travellers into London. Southern Rail are tosh and the M/A23 into London isn't great once you hit Croydon. I think Heathrow will be awarded, but with Gatwick also receiving major investment as a sweetener.
Click to expand...

Right. Is that the only link from Gatwick into Central London?
 
Im probably missing something rather obvious but i find the claims around Heathrow expansion to be quite extraordinary. How exactly is it going to open new opportunities for our exporters and significantly increase business investment?

Also feck the added traffic on the M25, thats going to be dreadful
 
adexkola said:
Right. Is that the only link from Gatwick into Central London?
Click to expand...
bus / taxi / car - over an hour
gatwick express victoria (30 mins - train every 15 mins)
Southern trains Victoria (35 mins - four trains an hour)
Thameslink to st Pancrs (about an hour and four trains an hour)

so its not great - especially as people often then have to get from victoria to somewhere else - which at the end of a long flight is just a total ballache - and of course at the wrong time of day a taxi can easily be a couple of hours etc etc
 
Smores said:
Im probably missing something rather obvious but i find the claims around Heathrow expansion to be quite extraordinary. How exactly is it going to open new opportunities for our exporters and significantly increase business investment?

Also feck the added traffic on the M25, thats going to be dreadful
Click to expand...

Well I guess if you have more runways that means you can start/land more plains per hour which will improve the amount of traffic the airport can handle and thus will also improve the amount of goods they can fly around the world.

Quite honestly 2 runways seems a really low number for the biggest airport in Europe, Frankfurt isn't small but certainly smaller than Heathrow and we have 4 runways here.
 
sun_tzu said:
bus / taxi / car - over an hour
gatwick express victoria (30 mins - train every 15 mins)
Southern trains Victoria (35 mins - four trains an hour)
Thameslink to st Pancrs (about an hour and four trains an hour)

so its not great - especially as people often then have to get from victoria to somewhere else - which at the end of a long flight is just a total ballache - and of course at the wrong time of day a taxi can easily be a couple of hours etc etc
Click to expand...

Thanks!
 
NoLogo said:
Well I guess if you have more runways that means you can start/land more plains per hour which will improve the amount of traffic the airport can handle and thus will also improve the amount of goods they can fly around the world.

Quite honestly 2 runways seems a really low number for the biggest airport in Europe, Frankfurt isn't small but certainly smaller than Heathrow and we have 4 runways here.
Click to expand...

Is there actually a situation whereby people who want to get to London cancel their trip because they're currently unable to?

If the focus is on goods rather than tourism then id have thought birmingham would have been far more beneficial.

Frankfurt is a brilliant airport and i guess perhaps the attached offices (Allianz or Deloite is it?) are feasible because of the runways. However there's 5/6 airports serving London so it isnt just Heathrow.

Anyway waded into a discussion i know little about but it all seems a little overplayed to me.
 
Smores said:
Is there actually a situation whereby people who want to get to London cancel their trip because they're currently unable to?

If the focus is on goods rather than tourism then id have thought birmingham would have been far more beneficial.

Frankfurt is a brilliant airport and i guess perhaps the attached offices (Allianz or Deloite is it?) are feasible because of the runways. However there's 5/6 airports serving London so it isnt just Heathrow.

Anyway waded into a discussion i know little about but it all seems a little overplayed to me.
Click to expand...

I don't think the point is that people had to cancel their flights but if you can start and land 450 instead of 300 airplanes every day it seems like the potential for growth in flight traffic might be beneficial, at least to your economy. Of course like I said I haven't seen any studies of supply and demand when it comes to your air traffic so I can't really tell if demand is there or if they are just trying to go for supply and hope the demand will follow.

And yeah it might certainly be overplayed because there are people who will probably earn a lot of money by building this new runaway and a lot of companies who probably hope they might indeed raise their export so they of course try to sell it to the public now.
 
Gatwick with a high-speed spur connecting with the Channel Tunnel would have been something worth considering i'd have thought.

Using T5 i've gone from aircraft to a taxi in 20-25mins, which as very impressive (particularly with baggage reclaim as well). But Stansted used to offer the most hassle-free and enjoyable travelling experience, at least compared to anywhere else i'd been
 
sun_tzu said:
bus / taxi / car - over an hour
gatwick express victoria (30 mins - train every 15 mins)
Southern trains Victoria (35 mins - four trains an hour)
Thameslink to st Pancrs (about an hour and four trains an hour)

so its not great - especially as people often then have to get from victoria to somewhere else - which at the end of a long flight is just a total ballache - and of course at the wrong time of day a taxi can easily be a couple of hours etc etc
Click to expand...
Hate Gatwick, even the little train thing between the terminals is a ballache.
 
High speed 24 hour train direct link between Gatwick and Heathrow is the future proof solution. It's 25 miles as the crow flies, so at an average speed of only 50 mph, thats a 30 minute journey on a train. At an average speed of 100 mph, that's a 15 minute journey.

Instead of looking at the Gatwick options as a negative, look at it as a positive.

Three Runways at Heathrow

Benefits: Three Runways at Heathrow, increasing capacity as a transport hub by presumably 50%

Drawbacks: 1) The runway would cross the fecking M25, so that's a massive cost. 2) Probably increase the chance of a major accident due to high traffic in the skies, and closeness to M25, M4 and London in general.

Heathrow- Expanded Gatwick Train Connection

Benefits: Two runways at Heathrow and two runways at Gatwick increase capacit as a transport hub by presumably 100%

Drawbacks: You need to build another expensive underground train line. And then give away tickets on those trains for free.
 
Last edited:
Smores said:
Im probably missing something rather obvious but i find the claims around Heathrow expansion to be quite extraordinary. How exactly is it going to open new opportunities for our exporters and significantly increase business investment?

Also feck the added traffic on the M25, thats going to be dreadful
Click to expand...

More runways = more flights and more destinations = easier for foreign companies to base themselves near Heathrow.

Gatwick is not an option as the airlines just don't want to go there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.