Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
News Reports That LHR Heathrow Will Get 3rd Runway  
User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 26495 posts, RR: 58
Posted (5 years 6 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 8939 times:

Being reported on the news this morning that the 3rd Runway at LHR will be approved very soon and now its a matter of when and not if despite over 70,000 objections to it. Fingers crossed it will finally go ahead.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...ctors/transport/article4806137.ece

Third runway at Heathrow ‘is a done deal’ - even though public consultation goes on
Ministers are pressing ahead with plans for a highly controversial third runway at Heathrow and intend to approve the expansion before Christmas, The Times has learnt. Although the Government is still sifting through tens of thousands of public submissions on the airport’s proposed expansion, it is understood that senior figures have already decided to sanction it.

Transport sources told The Times that the Government was determined to make the third runway happen, despite widespread opposition from the environmental lobby and the possibility of an independent review delaying the project.

The Department of Transport is still sifting through 70,000 responses from individuals, pressure groups and other interested parties in response to its consultation on the project, which was released last year.

When ministers have finished reviewing the responses, each needs to be independently reviewed and verified before a decision is made.

[Edited 2008-09-23 00:41:54]


AEGEAN-OLYMPIC AIR - ΟΛΥΜΠΙΑΚΗ " μέλος στη Star Alliance
61 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLHR27C From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 1279 posts, RR: 17
Reply 1, posted (5 years 6 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 8838 times:

Well, as with anything in the media, take it with a pinch of salt, but I sincerely hope this is true and that the runway will get approval very soon (as my a.net username might suggest  Smile ).

LHR desperately needs a 3rd runway - in fact I would argue that this is the most urgently needed expansion of any airport in the world. It won't be easy, but it makes more sense than trying to expand STN, or hanging around till 2019 when the LGW agreement expires, or investigating some new super-airport in the Thames Estuary.

Roll on runway 3  Smile.



Once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned forever skyward
User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 26495 posts, RR: 58
Reply 2, posted (5 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 8526 times:



Quoting LHR27C (Reply 1):
Roll on runway 3  .

Yes totally agree , there is far too much red tape to get these things through.



AEGEAN-OLYMPIC AIR - ΟΛΥΜΠΙΑΚΗ " μέλος στη Star Alliance
User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (5 years 6 months 4 weeks ago) and read 8487 times:

One of our a.netters here - who I think must be a disguised member of Monty Python - wrote one of the most brilliant pieces of satire based on the planned tear down of Terminal Two at Heathrow.

It included a paragraph about "British recording artists banding together for a song about 'Saving The Dust Mite' that is found ONLY at T2", and was viciously clever in the portrayal of how easy it is to vilify Heathrow airport.

I bow down in the presence of greatness such as that, and I think it deserves to be re-printed here, as it is completely appropriate for any reader that thinks a third runway at Heathrow will ever happen - at least in this century, if not millenium.



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 4, posted (5 years 6 months 4 weeks ago) and read 8439 times:



Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 3):
One of our a.netters here - who I think must be a disguised member of Monty Python - wrote one of the most brilliant pieces of satire based on the planned tear down of Terminal Two at Heathrow.

It included a paragraph about "British recording artists banding together for a song about 'Saving The Dust Mite' that is found ONLY at T2", and was viciously clever in the portrayal of how easy it is to vilify Heathrow airport.

I bow down in the presence of greatness such as that, and I think it deserves to be re-printed here, as it is completely appropriate for any reader that thinks a third runway at Heathrow will ever happen - at least in this century, if not millenium.

Guilty m'Lord  Smile

I wrote the piece I believe you are referring to - it concerned the demolition and rebuild of T2.

Here it is:

My predicted timeframe:

Oct 2008 - stop using T2.

June 2009 - Submit public tenders for various designs for its replacement.

July 2009 - All designs rejected by local residents.

August 2009 - A rare and previously thought to be extinct breed of dust mite is discovered in T2.

Late-August 2009 - A charity single entitled "Save the mites = Save our future (and our Children's future)" is released by two ex-Pop Idol nobodies. It goes straight in at number one.

September 2009 - Local residents set up an action group called T.W.A.T.S - (Team Worried and Against Terminal Success) which pickets Parliament to demand that the area is left for animals to graze on, as anything other than this course of action represents what basically amounts to Planetary Homicide. They lodge their formal complaints to the planning commission, which rules that in light of the new complaints against the massive expansion of Heathrow airport and the obvious and irrefutable damage replacing the terminal building will do to London’s green belt, that all previous planning permissions and tenders are null and void. A new planning process is started.

October 2009 – T.W.A.T.S chain themselves to a chainlink fence on the airport perimeter and are forcibly removed by police.

November 2009 – T.W.A.T.S climb in the roof of T5 and splash red paint all over the place to illustrate the murder of the green belt. One tries to break a window and falls to his death. “stinky” as he is known, of no fixed address, is immediately Martyred. The local Government releases a statement expressing their sincere sorrow at his death. His wife/partner “Crusty” also of no fixed address, sues BAA for having lax enough security to let them in in the first place, and is awarded three million quid in damages. She cuts her hair, has a bath, moves to Kensington, sets up an advertising firm and buys a Range Rover.

December 2009 – Local residents not affiliated to T.W.A.T.S pre-emptively sue the Government for millions because of the emotional hardship so brutally inflicted on their lives by the grim edifice of the new terminal, in whatever form it may take. A Government investigation board is appointed to appoint a committee to do a study of the plans.

June 2010 – Committee appointed.

October 2010 – Committee convened for half an hour.

April 2011 - Committee convened for an hour and ten mins.

November 2011 - Committee convened for a seventeen minutes.

December 2011 – Preliminary findings are released. They say – “It is the opinion of this Committee that a public enquiry should be convened to assess the lawsuit brought by local residents. Once this is complete planning process may begin on the new terminal”

June 2012 – New committee convened which meets for three mins in a bar in Whitehall before taking a treasury credit card to Spearmint Rhino. Signs are put up all round the now derelict and crumbling T2 site that say that BAA is ‘Caring for your future’

November 2012 – T2 blows down in a moderately strong wind. A national day of mourning is held for the dust mites which it is presumed all perished. A charity single rework of Elton John’s ‘Candle in the Wind’ is released, sung by Jason Donovan and a class of primary school kids from Bromsgrove, entitled “You weren’t just a dust mite to me (Give peace a chance)” – its rockets straight to number one.

December 2012 – Work begins on clearing the site. Local residents complain about the noise of the drills and diggers (over the noise of the planes) which are causing emotional problems and successfully get an injunction to prevent the contractors from using any mechanical tools at all. The rubble is moved by hand. Local residents win more millions in compensation, because BAA should never have allowed the building to collapse in the first place.

December 2013 – the site is cleared. The fourth appeal of the planning permission is in the process of being dealt with in the High Courts.


April 2014 – The local residents take their case to the European Court of Human Rights in The Hague.

June 2014 – Final design, an award winning masterpiece of modern design and technical genius from Sir Norman Foster is dismissed on costs grounds. A rival bid from Botchitt & Scarper Ltd is accepted. The commission expresses ‘concerns’ that the design does not have any gates, and that the water feature and timber decking in and around the hard stands are unnecessary.

November 2015 – Work begins.

December 2016 – Work finishes. BAA make a massive glitzy launch and much is made of the fact that it came in with no work overruns and actually early. Rather less is made of the fact that the work is 395% over budget.

March 2017 – Structural engineers state that the building is unsafe. It transpires that the contractors had just poured tar over the ground and stuck beams into the tar. The site foreman, a Paddy O’Murphy, went on record as stating that “It was fine mate, its fine for people’s drives, and its fine for de terminal tingy dat we’re doing for ya’s. Do ya like Dags?”

April 2017 – Botchitt & Scarper Ltd is found to be a fake company. Nobody at the planning commission bothered to do any due diligence because they all had their drives done as a bonus. The new T2 falls down in a light breeze. An Al-Qaida carbomb is blamed.

May 2017 – Local residents sue again for emotional distress caused by the length of the planning process.

July 2021 – A new terminal design is approved.

May 2027 – The new T2 is opened. It was fifteen years late and cost more than nine-billion pounds all told, or 30% more than an entire brand new airport in the Thames Estuary.



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 5, posted (5 years 6 months 4 weeks ago) and read 8368 times:

June 2027 - The new terminal is declared as the worst in British history as no fewer than thirteen pieces of luggage are lost on the first day of operation. News crews camp out the front of the terminal and jump on any morose looking urk, whether they are passengers or not, to go on camera and say how awful it is and how much they hate traveling through it. The Aircon breaks down mid-morning one day in June and the terminal is closed for nine days as someone said to SkyNews that it might be unsafe, and BAA are worried about being sued by fainting passengers. Questions are asked in the House of Commons about how such a horrific debacle can be allowed to happen. Nineteen senior management members are fired on the spot, and pictures of them being escorted from BAA headquarters, cardboard boxes in hand, are plastered across the papers. The media consider it a moral victory after what was known as the T2 Super-Debacle. The terminal is the butt of comedian and broadcaster jokes well into 2028, by which time the total of lost numbers of bags rises to a completely unacceptable 30.

July 2027 - In light of the lost bags, and the furore in the press, tenders are invited for a new terminal to replace T2...



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlineBSU747 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2004, 172 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 8268 times:



Quoting LHR27C (Reply 1):



Quoting LHR27C (Reply 1):
LHR desperately needs a 3rd runway - in fact I would argue that this is the most urgently needed expansion of any airport in the world. It won't be easy, but it makes more sense than trying to expand STN, or hanging around till 2019 when the LGW agreement expires, or investigating some new super-airport in the Thames Estuary.

Hope you don't mind me asking, but what is the 2019 LGW agreement? Is this when LGW is allowed to have another runway?
Regards
BSU747



Flying may not be all plain sailing, but the fun of it is worth the price.
User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8189 times:

Thank you Chris!! Brilliant beyond my mere mind to comprehend...

If I may add my own portion...

2028: After one fiasco following another, BAA decides to drop its "Airport" division and concentrate on what it does best - running a mall.

The airports that were LHR, LGW, LUT, LCY, and STN (as well as all others in the U.K.) are turned into the country's busiest shopping districts. BAA records record profits. Civilian aircraft, with the exception of her Majesty's planes, are not permitted over British airspace under any circumstances.

2029: T.W.A.T.S. call on the British public to a massive spontaneous celebration of the great victory of the British over air travel. The "Citizens Removing Air Pollution", or C.R.A.P., that is co-sponsoring the event, is forced to cancel the event when every line in The Tube spontaneously collapses and car drivers are caught in total gridlock.



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12322 posts, RR: 35
Reply 8, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8157 times:



Quoting BSU747 (Reply 6):
Hope you don't mind me asking, but what is the 2019 LGW agreement? Is this when LGW is allowed to have another runway?

There is an agreement with the local council in the LGW area that a new runway will not be built/open (not sure which) until 2019. Not sure how legally watertight this is and with LGW likely to pass into new ownership, the new owners will almost definitely want to expand it.

I agree that the building of R3 will be a long drawn out affair (or more accurately, the inquiry and associated legal challenges) but it has to happen; I'm a little disappointe to see David Cameron take a politically opportunist stance on this, although no doubt the business community will force him to come around (whatever Zac Goldsmith says).

What I'm wondering is, when will Mixed Mode operation finally come into operation?


User currently offlineBennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7204 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8077 times:

I see no prospect of a 2nd runway being built, let alone opened by 2019.

User currently offlineDaufuskieGuy From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 44 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8019 times:

I've never understood the expansion of terminal facilities at LHR if there was not going to be a corresponding increase in runway capacity. Why park more and more planes if there is insufficient capacity to operate them? So I hope, for everyone's sake, this rumor is true.....

User currently offlineSpeedbirdA380 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2008, 539 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8004 times:

Indeed brilliant CHRISBA77ER- You had me laughing all the way through.

Whilst I enjoyed your piece as a comedy the sad thing is it is probably not far from reality....  crazy 

As I think someone said in another post- The Japanese will probably have their space elevator project up and running before Heathrow get's it third runway..If it get's it at all.


User currently offline1peter From Netherlands, joined Jul 2005, 149 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 7869 times:



Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 4):

Simply excellent, but as some have commented already I'm sure (although I hope not) not far from what could become reality.



Airlines flown; AA, AC, AY, BA, BD, BY, CX, DA, DP, IB, KL, LH, LA, LP, MA & MH
User currently offlineDanfearn77 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2008, 1807 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 7760 times:



Quoting OA260 (Reply 2):


Quoting LHR27C (Reply 1):
Roll on runway 3 .

Yes totally agree , there is far too much red tape to get these things through.

Totally agree. Its the pathetic residents and environmentalists. Firstly, if you buy a house near LHR, or any other airport, dont complain about aircraft noise because no one will give you sympathy. Secondly, these tossers who have nothing better to do than stand around with banners trying to protect this and that. For christ sake, go out and get a job.

Not to mention this is the UK, where nothing can ever happen without enquiry after enquiry. You cant have a simple accident in this country anymore, like tripping up, without someone being held accountable. So this will take a while. There will be people tied to trees who we cant move incase it is against their human rights.



Eagles may soar high, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines!
User currently offlineAirbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 7873 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 7554 times:



Quoting DaufuskieGuy (Reply 10):
I've never understood the expansion of terminal facilities at LHR if there was not going to be a corresponding increase in runway capacity. Why park more and more planes if there is insufficient capacity to operate them? So I hope, for everyone's sake, this rumor is true.....

Have you had the mis-fortune of traveling through LHR other than T5, in the last 20 years? Terminal improvements, even without a 3rd runway are long overdue.


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7256 posts, RR: 17
Reply 15, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 7403 times:



Quoting DaufuskieGuy (Reply 10):
I've never understood the expansion of terminal facilities at LHR if there was not going to be a corresponding increase in runway capacity.

The reason why the terminal facilities were expanded without a corresponding expansion of the runway capacity was that it was catch-up time. The pre-Terminal 5 terminal facilities at LHR were designed to handle a maximum of 50 million passengers. The number using LHR in 2007 was 68 million.

The shortfall in Terminal capacity and facilities of significantly more than one third explains why things like the baggage handling systems were totally inadequate. They were simply not designed to handle the luggage of the number of passengers using the terminals at peak times. Overloaded virtually every day they simply broke down with monotonous regularity.

Now LHR has the terminal facilities to handle up to 80 million passengers with just 68 million using the airport and a further expansion of terminal facilities in the form of Heathrow East in the pipeline. So bring on the third runway.

Of course the danger for any airline using Heathrow is that it has included the perceived value of its LHR slots as a valuable asset in its financial statement. When (hopefully) the third runway is built the number of slots will increase overnight from 480,000 to 702,000 and with 222,000 unused slots spread right across the time spectrum when the airport is open the value of a slot pair will certainly be nowhere near £20 million


User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 7226 times:



Quoting Danfearn77 (Reply 13):
Its the pathetic residents

The what??

Quoting Danfearn77 (Reply 13):
Firstly, if you buy a house near LHR, or any other airport, dont complain about aircraft noise because no one will give you sympathy.

So please, with your obvious years of wisdom, explain to me the procedure of someone purchasing a house in the vicinity say, 30 odd years ago or more and way before LHR was anything like it is today. But, these are your "pathetic residents", right?

Quoting Danfearn77 (Reply 13):
For christ sake, go out and get a job.

As a matter of interest, maybe you should indeed, before making 'informed schoolboy comments' of which you know absolutely nothing.


User currently offlineDanfearn77 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2008, 1807 posts, RR: 9
Reply 17, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 7109 times:



Quoting AirNZ (Reply 16):
So please, with your obvious years of wisdom, explain to me the procedure of someone purchasing a house in the vicinity say, 30 odd years ago or more and way before LHR was anything like it is today. But, these are your "pathetic residents", right?

Im sorry, but if you buy a house next to an airport, you should not be complaining about a/c noise, its the same as buying a house next to a motorway etc. 30 years ago aircraft were much louder than today (obviously im aware of huge increase in traffic). What your saying is you move next to an airport and not expect it to expand.



Eagles may soar high, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines!
User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7256 posts, RR: 17
Reply 18, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 6844 times:



Quoting AirNZ (Reply 16):
So please, with your obvious years of wisdom, explain to me the procedure of someone purchasing a house in the vicinity say, 30 odd years ago or more and way before LHR was anything like it is today.

I lived just a couple of miles from LHR between 1965 and 1971. Then there were not nearly as many aircraft movements as there are today. But nearly every aircraft made considerably more noise than any aircraft does today.

My personal experience then was that the worst regular offenders were the Skyways Avro York freighters whose piston engines at full throtle helped the fullen laden aircraft claw their way into the sky on most late evenings making my house literally rattle. But the individual aircraft that, from a noise perspective, made the biggest impression on me was an AC DC-8 on final approach. It came in too low and the pilot significantly increased the throttle setting just as it passed over my house. The noise was phenomenal.

As a frequent visitor to Heathrow I can assure you that today's aircraft are, by comparison, all whispering giants.

Back then, 40 years ago, anybody contemplating moving to a house anywhere near Heathrow who spent more than ten minutes viewing their potential new home would have been exposed to aircraft noise at a decibel level that no person living near Heathrow today is ever exposed to.

And back in the early 50s (when I first visited Heathrow) when the central area had not been built and the long haul terminal was a large tent on the north side of the airport, the noise that a fully laden Stratocruiser made as it clawed its way into the air on a flight to New York was also more than memorable. A few years later the contrast was the Bristol Britannia. I was on the Heathrow Queens Building roof gardens when the first BOAC 300 series aircraft, G-AOVB, was delivered. It was as quiet if not quieter than most of today's aircraft.

In summary only those local residents whose family home in 1946 was near Heathrow demand total sympathy. Anyone moving there since the airport opened has benefitted from the local economic impact of the airport and should certainly have been very well aware of the noise pollution before they moved. Nevertheless those relatively few local residents (probably around 1,000 households) who will be significantly impacted by the construction of the third runway do require our sympathy and suitable compensation covering the total cost of moving including the cost of things like curtains and carpeting for their new homes. The government should also excuse them from paying stamp duty on their new homes or pay it for them.

Others will benefit economically from the expansion of the airport.


User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6264 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 6804 times:

What are the ICAO runway spacing standards for simultaneous CAT IIIB approaches? Will they try for full simultaneous certification at LHR? Can LHR conduct simultaneous approaches now? IIRC, doesn't LHR try to always use one runway for takeoffs and the adjacent runway for landings?


Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlineNicholaschee From Australia, joined Oct 2005, 661 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 6645 times:

Assuming the 3rd runway gets approved, will it be ready in time to handle traffic for the 2012 Summer Olympics?

User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12419 posts, RR: 100
Reply 21, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 6493 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Nicholaschee (Reply 20):
Assuming the 3rd runway gets approved, will it be ready in time to handle traffic for the 2012 Summer Olympics?

One could only wish. I really doubt it...

But kudos to the design team if they can get it done by then!

Quoting OA260 (Thread starter):
Being reported on the news this morning that the 3rd Runway at LHR will be approved very soon and now its a matter of when and not if despite over 70,000 objections to it. Fingers crossed it will finally go ahead.

I'm afraid it will be the Monte Python skit.  Sad

I'm convinced DXB and other hubs are growing at the expense of LHR/FRA due to their lack of expansion to accomodate international air travel growth. Look at how many cities have entered the World's economic arena since LHR last added a runway! There is a need for better connections to London and why not tax the rest of the world when they transfer through LHR? As posters have already noted, aircraft are far quieter today.

Quoting DaufuskieGuy (Reply 10):
I've never understood the expansion of terminal facilities at LHR if there was not going to be a corresponding increase in runway capacity. Why park more and more planes if there is insufficient capacity to operate them? So I hope, for everyone's sake, this rumor is true.....

From the original link: - Heathrow was designed for 50 million passengers a year, but numbers now approach 70 million

Heathrow can move quite a few more people if larger terminals are built. Yea... it makes more sense with runway #3... Airside capacity is more efficient if there are more parking spots to hold the plans during rushes.

Lightsaber



I've posted how many times?!?
User currently offlineSSTsomeday From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 1276 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 5949 times:



Quoting VV701 (Reply 18):
Nevertheless those relatively few local residents (probably around 1,000 households) who will be significantly impacted by the construction of the third runway do require our sympathy and suitable compensation covering the total cost of moving including the cost of things like curtains and carpeting for their new homes. The government should also excuse them from paying stamp duty on their new homes or pay it for them.

I find your post to be very informative and fair, and even though we are enthusiasts, very compassionate to the households directly effected by the expansion.

I think, for the greater good, that the runway does need to be built. I can only imagine how London and England's economy is adversely effected by way of Heathrow not functioning properly. I understand that these types of things are actually measurable by economists. When Los Angeles lost a major freeway bridge during the last big earthquake, the adverse effect on the area's economy was measured in terms of millions of dollars a day. In fact, the new bridge contractor was compensated hundreds of thousands of dollars extra (as I recall) by the city for every day ahead of schedule that the bridge was brought back on line. I would think an inefficient Heathrow has similarly huge, negative economic impact on the island. (For example (a small example), I know more than a few people who avoid Heathrow as a transfer airport into Europe if they can.)

However - I also agree that the residents who are truly, adversely effected should be properly compensated, and part of the expense of the expansion project should definately be earmarked specifically to make this transition actually beneficial to them, I dare say.



I come in peace
User currently offlineLHR27C From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 1279 posts, RR: 17
Reply 23, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 5674 times:



Quoting Kaitak (Reply 8):
What I'm wondering is, when will Mixed Mode operation finally come into operation?

Who knows! Another thing for the Government to decide. If for whatever reason runway 3 didn't get approval, they would not have a leg to stand on if they did not approve mixed mode.

If runway 3 is approved, it is hoped that it will be run in mixed mode while the two others are fixed, one for departure the other for arrivals (can't remember which way round it is), this is what NATS have concluded would be the most efficient operation.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 15):
When (hopefully) the third runway is built the number of slots will increase overnight from 480,000 to 702,000 and with 222,000 unused slots spread right across the time spectrum when the airport is open the value of a slot pair will certainly be nowhere near £20 million

This is an excellent point and one worth considering the impact of. Firstly I think you'd see most of the remaining non-leisure transatlantic services moving over from LGW and with them probably all the US airlines, also VS might try to consolidate all their leisure services at LHR to be under one roof, although BA would not have the space in T5 to do this. Then hopefully services to a lot more of the UK domestic destinations that have had to be neglected.

The only other thing I wonder is whether some artificial cap slightly lower than the maximum movement rate might be imposed to give breathing space when delays occur (or maybe the 702,000 has that factored?) given current experiences at LHR with it running so close to capacity, Either way even if the number of slots available jumps overnight from 480,000 to 702,000, the number of slots used will not and it should be many years before the airport is once again nearing capacity.

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 16):
So please, with your obvious years of wisdom, explain to me the procedure of someone purchasing a house in the vicinity say, 30 odd years ago or more and way before LHR was anything like it is today. But, these are your "pathetic residents", right?

I think VV701's post said it all. Aircraft have been getting quieter at LHR, not louder.

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 19):
Will they try for full simultaneous certification at LHR? Can LHR conduct simultaneous approaches now? IIRC, doesn't LHR try to always use one runway for takeoffs and the adjacent runway for landings?

The runways support staggered simultaneous approaches but not full parallel simultaneous approaches. The new 3rd runway would definitely support that for approaches on 27L/09R.

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 19):
Assuming the 3rd runway gets approved, will it be ready in time to handle traffic for the 2012 Summer Olympics?

No chance. This would be an enormous constructon project. Looks like Heathrow East won't even be ready for the Olympics now.



Once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned forever skyward
User currently offlineDanfearn77 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2008, 1807 posts, RR: 9
Reply 24, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5587 times:



Quoting Nicholaschee (Reply 20):
Assuming the 3rd runway gets approved, will it be ready in time to handle traffic for the 2012 Summer Olympics?

I would be very surprised if it had been started by then.



Eagles may soar high, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines!
25 SKAirbus : I must admit that i am extremely shocked and appauled by people's lack of scruples here.. Ok Heathrow needs a 3rd runway and yes it is a bit silly to
26 SKAirbus : Unfortunately BAA hasn't thought any of this through... they want multiple huge building projects at the same time.. not realistic.. I mean Terminal
27 Post contains links Mbm3 : There is an interesting article IHT regarding the Mayor and his thoughts of building an airport in the Thames estuary in effort to ease congestion at
28 Par13del : Now you see the problem with a democracy, the silent majority. 70,000 responses is what they are looking through from person's with concerns about th
29 Rivet42 : It's far too simplistic and even pompous to cast scorn on those who have 'chosen' to move to the areas around Heathrow. I can assure you that with pro
30 SKAirbus : I concur!! I just with people would think a little about the residents who live near the airport and think a little about reasons they might be livin
31 UAL777UK : The building of the third runway is not a matter of if it will be built but when. As was shown by T5, just to get past all the planning and consultati
32 EI564 : That's a rather negative spin. As far as I am aware, the overall feeling amongst business leaders in London is that a 3rd LHR runway is required. The
33 Shankly : Some Scandinavian sense amongst some thoroughly embarassing comments of my English a.netters companions. I live far enough away from LHR for the traf
34 EI564 : I don't think you are going to find a "right" solution. (People have already outlined the huge problems with a coastal solution). You are merely going
35 PanAm747 : Okay, I'm certain I will get as a nit-picker, but Britain is not a "democracy". It is a "republic". In a democracy, everyone gets to vote on every sin
36 GustyOrange : Very thoughtful post PA747. Not to nit pick but The United Kingdon of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is actually a constitutional monarchy. Next t
37 LHR27C : Really? Why? T5C is being built in a fairly small and separated part of the airport. BAA are quite used to running multiple construction projects: th
38 Danfearn77 : But what im commenting on is people who live next to any airport and feel the need to complain about noise. Like i said it was a while back now, but
39 Shankly : LHR you provided the answer in your own draft. You do indeed have to look at the bigger picture and the expansion of a 1940's airfield on some of the
40 Post contains images VV701 : There is always an exception to prove the rule. In this case it happened during the last week of supersonic commercial aviation in 2003. On 22 Octobe
41 Post contains links AirbusA6 : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7641094.stm The Tories have now confirmed that they're against the 3rd runway, and instead want a high speed ra
42 LHR27C : I think that very much was an exception! In general for independent parallel approaches I believe you need just over 1500m between runways which LHR
43 Aircellist : With Eurostar, you will soon have London CDG to use.
44 Argonaut : More than a second runway at LGW?
45 Lightsaber : There is the crux of the issue. LHR is where the market is. Britain can expand it... or watch as aviation grows. (Recall, recessions are the best tim
46 LHR27C : Yes. Definitely. Even putting the 2019 agreement to one side, LGW is not as congested as LHR and is not so vulnerable to delays when a runway shuts,
47 VV701 : I am not sure about this. My understanding is that the back-up runway has no ILS so I doubt that it could operate at the same traffic density as the
48 PanAm747 : And they'll run into the same exact NIMBY problem as you have around Heathrow now. "A high-speed train is certainly a good idea - as long as it doesn
49 LHR27C : This is true - but the point is the backup runway provides some room for leeway when things go wrong on the main runway, which there is none of at LH
50 Kaitak : And how much land will have to be ploughed through to create this line (and any other necessary lines)? The Tories seem to have been infiltrated by t
51 SKAirbus : The purpose of highspeed train lines (a la France) will be that customers can travel between cities at the same time (or even less time) as flying...
52 Post contains links LHR27C : It will have absolutely zero impact. The line the Tories propose would cut 3% of flights (MAN and LBA). It's a totally inadequate proposal. LHR is an
53 Glom : I think he was referring to republic in the broader sense, ie a state where the government is determined by the people, rather than the more specific
54 Planesarecool : With respect, it's not a case of 08R/26L going down, fire up 08L/26R and there we go. For a start, when this runway is in operation, you cannot use t
55 Charlem : What make me sad about Heathrow is that even with a third runway, I'm not sure about what this will change in the long term. Heathrow, will always be
56 FlyingClrs727 : As if it would be easier to deal with the problem after 2019?
57 AirbusA6 : But then London isn't a one airport city. London currently has 6 runways (including LHR, LGW, STN, LTN and LCY and ignoring the likes of Biggin Hill
58 LHR27C : I think it is of more use than 23/05. There's obviously a reason that 26R/08L is kept as a licensed runway, when 23/05 was decommissioned some years
59 Glom : LHR really is in dire straights. Aircraft are having to share the runway. When we taxiied out onto it this morning, I'm sure we were joined by an A320
60 Planesarecool : This is the only reason it's kept open. As Gatwick is a 24 hour airport, it is necessary for when there is overnight maintenance on 26L/08R, and even
61 Glom : Is it? When I returned from HKG last year, our midnight flight was delayed because favourable winds would cause us to arrive at LGW too early to land
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Heathrow's Proposed New 3rd Runway posted Thu Jul 25 2002 23:28:12 by Thomasphoto60
Will LHR Get Another Runway? posted Fri Dec 19 2003 22:24:20 by Sjoerd
LHR 3rd Runway Protestor Glues Himself To P.M! posted Tue Jul 22 2008 13:25:17 by Cumulus
LHR 3rd Runway Progress? posted Wed Nov 21 2007 08:19:41 by LHR27C
Air Transat Get 3rd Weekly LHR Slot For 2008 posted Tue Jun 12 2007 18:13:54 by Humberside
LHR 3rd Runway: They Had Owned The Land posted Sun Oct 22 2006 08:20:11 by Kaitak744
CNN Reports That 3 Missiles Damage Beirut Runway! posted Thu Jul 13 2006 06:05:59 by Petazulu
BA: LHR 3rd Runway Sooner Than Later posted Thu Jun 8 2006 00:26:25 by Scotron11
Will PHX Ever Get A 4th Runway? posted Sun Jun 19 2005 01:24:27 by Midex461
LHR: Would 3rd Runway Mean More Domestic Routes? posted Sun Feb 29 2004 17:54:16 by Capital146
Will PHX Ever Get A 4th Runway? posted Sun Jun 19 2005 01:24:27 by Midex461
LHR: Would 3rd Runway Mean More Domestic Routes? posted Sun Feb 29 2004 17:54:16 by Capital146
BA: LHR 3rd Runway Sooner Than Later posted Thu Jun 8 2006 00:26:25 by Scotron11
Will PHX Ever Get A 4th Runway? posted Sun Jun 19 2005 01:24:27 by Midex461
LHR: Would 3rd Runway Mean More Domestic Routes? posted Sun Feb 29 2004 17:54:16 by Capital146