Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Heathrow And Stansted Runway Plans Scrapped By BAA  
User currently offlineEI320 From Ireland, joined Dec 2007, 1437 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 10267 times:

Following the election of the new government, BAA has withdrawn it's application for a third runway at LHR and a second runway at STN.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8701433.stm

"We recognise the importance of government policy in a matter as significant and controversial as runway capacity," said BAA's chief executive Colin Matthews.



If there's any airport in need of extra runway capacity, it's Heathrow. A disappointing (but not unexpected) development for both the airports and the local economy which is likely to result in passenger numbers through CDG and FRA surpass those of LHR in the coming years.

63 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8412 posts, RR: 10
Reply 1, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 9972 times:

LHR 2020: 1 In 10 Flights Could Be A380s (by N14AZ Mar 3 2010 in Civil Aviation)
Sounds like some people will be eating crow in a few years  


User currently offlineGlom From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2818 posts, RR: 10
Reply 2, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 9844 times:

If BAA own loads of houses in Sipson, any idea what they're going to do with them? To just sell that back on the open market might be a bit short termist. How about, knock them down and build grass or segments of taxiway on them. Then when the political wind changes, they're already half way done.

User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21534 posts, RR: 59
Reply 3, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 9735 times:

Quoting Glom (Reply 2):
If BAA own loads of houses in Sipson, any idea what they're going to do with them? To just sell that back on the open market might be a bit short termist. How about, knock them down and build grass or segments of taxiway on them. Then when the political wind changes, they're already half way done.

The smart move is to knock them down and then leave them as barren as possible, lest anyone claim them as "park land" in the future and block runway construction at a later date.

Also, by leaving unmaintained vacant lots around, it makes the other hangers on want to live in their current homes less and less.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineTalaier From Spain, joined May 2008, 490 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 9299 times:

Well, no surprise here I guess. As to what BA will do, the government has already said it wants to raise landing fees and BA has answered back they have a friend down in Spain with a huge airport that has working at 70% capacity.


We'll see where all this ends, but if the government wants then LHR's role as a hub is bound to decrease over forthcoming years. No doubt about that.


User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 27033 posts, RR: 58
Reply 5, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 9234 times:

Quoting EI320 (Thread starter):
Following the election of the new government, BAA has withdrawn it's application for a third runway at LHR and a second runway at STN.

I am happy with the election of the new government but there were always going to be points that I didnt like and this along with scrapping ID cards is just one of them . Its a shame really but Im sure in future it will be on the radar again.


User currently offlineRJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 9223 times:

Disappointing really - the airport clearly needs the additional capacity. Is it really too much to ask that one of the few true world cities gets a semi-decent primary airport?

[Edited 2010-05-24 14:51:24]

User currently offlinerobffm2 From Germany, joined Dec 2006, 1117 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 9206 times:

Quoting EI320 (Thread starter):
A disappointing (but not unexpected) development for both the airports and the local economy which is likely to result in passenger numbers through CDG and FRA surpass those of LHR in the coming years.

Don't forget MAD. If it becomes to difficult in LHR flights (existing or new ones) might move south.


User currently onlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4762 posts, RR: 39
Reply 8, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 9104 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting robffm2 (Reply 7):
Don't forget MAD. If it becomes to difficult in LHR flights (existing or new ones) might move south.

Madrid has been growing quite fast over the years, but it remains to be seen if the growth continues, especially with the crisis hitting Spain pretty hard.

Then again, LHR has a market which will not move away, so the logical alternative is to make more use of larger (and quieter) airplanes like the of course the King of Silence, the A380, and of course the upcoming B787's and A350-XWB's. This will keep the business at LHR good, or could even improve it, and will also make the people in the greater LHR area happier due to less noise pollution.  .


User currently offlineplanesarecool From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 4124 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 9056 times:

Quoting Talaier (Reply 4):
BA has answered back they have a friend down in Spain with a huge airport that has working at 70% capacity.

They have an established base 40 miles around the M25 which isn't running at full capacity either.


User currently offlinetimboflier215 From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 1336 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 9012 times:

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 9):
They have an established base 40 miles around the M25 which isn't running at full capacity either.

Agreed. BA really need to leverage LGW to a greater extent. A significant proportion of the SE find LGW easier to get to than LHR (me included!). And it is not difficult to get the Gatwick Express from Victoria. It is simply a myth that LGW is all leisure traffic and no business. If BA started routing business pax through LGW to a greater extent, it would certainly relieve pressure on LHR.

Sadly, the scrapping of the third runway was inevitable. Now that the merger with IB is, nearly, complete, at least BA have a chance to route pax through a modern and much less congested airport (MAD). I would not be surprised to see this happen tbh. They cannot grow any further at LHR without either cutting existing flights or spending a fortune getting slots.


User currently offlineTalaier From Spain, joined May 2008, 490 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 8864 times:

Quoting timboflier215 (Reply 10):
Agreed. BA really need to leverage LGW to a greater extent. A significant proportion of the SE find LGW easier to get to than LHR (me included!). And it is not difficult to get the Gatwick Express from Victoria. It is simply a myth that LGW is all leisure traffic and no business. If BA started routing business pax through LGW to a greater extent, it would certainly relieve pressure on LHR.

But LGW is constrained by having only one runway in any case. As a matter of fact BA has shrinked its Gatwick base to a considerable extent over the last two years (correct me if I'm wrong), which is normal in any case since having a full base is expensive and even more so in the times we are running. As an example, when IB re-starts it's long-haul flights to GRU and MIA from BCN, they will rotate the planes with the ones flying in from MAD to avoid having to base crew there. BA could probably do the same with routes other than those solely aimed at leisure travel (eg. Male), but then again setting up a whole new Galleries loung up to standard with T5 plus all the ground crew etc. is something that I don't think BA is willing nor able to do.

However I do agree in that Gatwick is very convenient. I live in Waterloo and I always tend to fly out of Gatwick rather than Heathrow, unless the latter provides a better schedule (which isn't usually the case). The Gatwick express is expensive (though I get a student discount  ) but it's much better than taking the tube (or a cab) to Paddington and then the H.Express. For almost every area of Central London, save for Oxford Street-Marylebone-Russel Square, Victoria is much more convenient than Paddington.


User currently offlinea340jamaica From Jamaica, joined Nov 2008, 431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 8819 times:

Quoting timboflier215 (Reply 10):

Sadly, the scrapping of the third runway was inevitable. Now that the merger with IB is, nearly, complete, at least BA have a chance to route pax through a modern and much less congested airport (MAD). I would not be surprised to see this happen tbh. They cannot grow any further at LHR without either cutting existing flights or spending a fortune getting slots.

I will do my occasional chip in and state that there is no need for any additional runways at LHR, LGW etc. Aviation will not be growing over the medium term unless a miracle happens where liquid fuel (read kerosene) availability is concerned. Spend your infrastructure money on railway electrification like on the line to Bristol. Much wiser investment!!!


User currently offlineGlom From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2818 posts, RR: 10
Reply 13, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 8523 times:

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 8):
This will keep the business at LHR good, or could even improve it, and will also make the people in the greater LHR area happier due to less noise pollution.

These are NIMBY's. Nothing makes them happy except for the creaky groans of stagnation.

Quoting Talaier (Reply 11):
I live in Waterloo and I always tend to fly out of Gatwick rather than Heathrow, unless the latter provides a better schedule (which isn't usually the case).

When Heathrow Airtrack starts, things might be different.


User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 14, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 8483 times:

Another nail in the coffin for "great" Britain. The NIMBYs win and their victory will give others hope. We'll all be back in mud huts before long.

We've seen the advent of a new creature - we dont have NIMBYS anymore, we have BANANAs - Build Absolutely Nothing Absolutely Anywhere.

These are the same people remember, moaning that Ryanair are charging £1 to use the lav.

Typical Britain. Everyone wants everything but is prepared to pay for nothing.



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 offlineGlom From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2818 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 8443 times:

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 14):
We've seen the advent of a new creature - we dont have NIMBYS anymore, we have BANANAs - Build Absolutely Nothing Absolutely Anywhere.

Don't be silly! We don't have a culture of Build Absolutely Nothing Absolutely Anywhere.

It's Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone.


User currently offlineEDICHC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 8435 times:

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 14):
Quoting Glom (Reply 15):

Good ones there guys!  

Makes me miss the UK even less!


User currently offlinegkirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24938 posts, RR: 56
Reply 17, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 8436 times:

Ach, just get airlines to fly to the likes of MAN,BHX,GLA,BRS,EMA,NCL,LBA,EDI,GLA and ABZ instead  

Plenty of capacity at those airports



When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineEDICHC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 8419 times:

Quoting gkirk (Reply 17):
Ach, just get airlines to fly to the likes of MAN,BHX,GLA,BRS,EMA,NCL,LBA,EDI,GLA and ABZ instead  

Plenty of capacity at those airports

Can't have that...I'd have nothing to complain about!  


User currently offlinecv990coronado From South Africa, joined Nov 2007, 343 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 8255 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The value of BA's and other airlines LHR slots must have increased considerably. I wonder what percentage of BA's assets the LHR slots are, these days with so many aircraft being leased and not owned I would think they could be quite considerable.


SSC-707B727 737-741234SP757/762/3/772/WA300/10/319/2/1-342/3/6-880-DAM-VC10 TRD 111 Ju52-DC8/9/10/11-YS11-748-VCV DH4B L
User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2013 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 8042 times:

How much aviation growth will there be in Europe anyway? Massive economic problems, an ageing population, crowded land and a strong awareness of environmental issues...is low margin transfer business something that European hubs should be trying to compete over, when middle eastern carriers have empty desert to build over?

If London needs anothe runway, then LGW to me makes more sense, there is more space there, far fewer people affected, and the flightpath doesn't cross central London! I suspect IF avaition continues to grow (a big IF too), this may be a more attractive option nearer 2020.



it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlinehuaiwei From Singapore, joined Oct 2008, 1114 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7920 times:

Quoting EI320 (Thread starter):
Following the election of the new government, BAA has withdrawn it's application for a third runway at LHR and a second runway at STN.

Airbus's A380 programme would cheer this news.  



It's huaiwei...not huawei. I have nothing to do with the PRC! :)
User currently offlineshankly From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 1544 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7886 times:

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 3):
Also, by leaving unmaintained vacant lots around, it makes the other hangers on want to live in their current homes less and less


Ikra, surprised this came from you as your posts are normally a beacon of common sense. Those "hangers on" are a community. It would be a nonsense to create a barren urban zone in an already over crowded Thames valley

Fact is Londons long term airport strategy remains coastal. The fixation on LHR continues to baffle me, but is truly representative of the UK's national psyche, which fears change



L1011 - P F M
User currently offlinetimboflier215 From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 1336 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7886 times:

Quoting a340jamaica (Reply 12):
will do my occasional chip in and state that there is no need for any additional runways at LHR, LGW etc. Aviation will not be growing over the medium term unless a miracle happens where liquid fuel (read kerosene) availability is concerned.

But even if a 3rd runway was approved TODAY by this govt, it wouldn't start construction for another decade or so because of public enquiries, legals challenges etc. It's not the medium terms these runways are for, it's the long term....


User currently offlineUAL777UK From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3356 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7743 times:

Quoting OA260 (Reply 5):
I am happy with the election of the new government but there were always going to be points that I didnt like and this along with scrapping ID cards is just one of them . Its a shame really but Im sure in future it will be on the radar again.

I agree, this issue whilst put to bed now will come back again at some stage. I am convinced that at some stage we will see a third runway, maybe not for many years but it will happen. Sticking a high speed railway up to the north from london is not the answer to capacity issues that LHR now has.


25 huaiwei : By the time that happens, we probably will not need it.
26 Flyingfox27 : The one at MAN should have been at LHR because MAN hardly uses it now, i was saying to a friend when i was up there, oh lets hope no one tells Swampy
27 Candid76 : Fine by me, hop it off to Spain then. We have a big airport here in Manchester with two runways running at less than 70% capacity which is (whisper i
28 RJ111 : Or YMX? We did the same thing too, it's called LGW and it probably wasn't as successful as would have been liked. It's mostly the Airlines actually.
29 EI564 : LGW was very congested before the recession. I imagine it will get very busy again on the up-side. Maybe not so much for long haul but so be it. The
30 web500sjc : can we look at how well Osaka is doing. it cost $20 billion, it looses $560 million in intrest alone, and to top it off, it is subsidized by the gove
31 indolikaa : I've always wondered about "moving" LHR much closer to the coast and connecting it with high-speed rail. I know the country is heavily built-up, but
32 DavidByrne : Yes, it must come as a shock to some A-netters that there are greater interests involved in the building of new airport infrastructure than just avia
33 planesarecool : Because not only is Germany around 50% larger than the UK in terms of area, it also has around 20 million more residents and is more conveniently loc
34 Jacobin777 : The vast majority purchased a house near an airport...what were they expecting?
35 Talaier : Exactly. However, they do have a case when a new runway is being built AFTER they bought their homes. There, they have a legitimate claim.
36 ikramerica : Not really. There is a reasonable expectation that an airport like LHR would expand its operations and footprint in the future. Thus, when purchasing
37 Talaier : I've seen this same case in MAD and I must disagree with you. One thing is to buy a house next to an airport or under an airport landing route, in wh
38 VinnieWinnie : Don't forget that what matters is capacity during the peak: That's why infrastructure is generally oversized: Look at Motorways, Railways, Electricit
39 Glom : So that's what we've been doing wrong.
40 EDICHC : While I agree with you 100%, Indeed I have been a vociferous critic of BA's withdrawal away from UK airports outside London, I await the backlash fro
41 Jacobin777 : While I have to respectfully disagree with you (Govt's right of eminent domain trumps IMHO-of course the Govt. must to everything in its power to hel
42 planesarecool : Why, because its true? Germany is much better suited as a transit hub than the UK thanks to its location in central Europe, so, while I don't have an
43 Post contains images gilesdavies : Ahhhh Bless! You have to admire my countries make do attitude! What's the point in planning for the future when our current facilities are already str
44 Glom : Your rant displeases me. Because it's true. This is about more than just a runway, which I was always ambivalent on. This is about our resolve as a c
45 LGWGate49 : Sorry guys, but this talk about NIMBYs is nonsense. I live next to London Bridge, and whilst on a sunny night there is nothing finer than sitting in m
46 cornish : That's a lovely idea but who do you propose should pay for it? A broke government, whicvh mean that the tax payer will face an unsustainable burden,
47 RJ111 : Nonsense, i live right under the flight path in Clerkenwell and i've never noticed an aircraft from within my flat. Only if you go to a quiet park ar
48 Post contains links and images Jacobin777 : That's doesn't cut it....my parents live off ORD arrivals (evident from these photos) and there is practically no aircraft sound-or its so negligible
49 SSTsomeday : Usually vital projects of this magnitude are underwritten by a consortium of government and private participants. Actually an airport pays for itself
50 r2rho : I have no problem with scrapping the 3rd runway - LHR is a hopeless case and it makes no sense to pour more money into the most expensive strip of con
51 david_itl : And hopefully the next 5 years will see the demographics of GB alter so that we will no longer all go sheep-like into the overccooked southeast. Perh
52 AirNZ : Is it so black and white then? Care to explain of the majority who lived in the area before LHR expanded into what it is today? What about medieval v
53 PITrules : I for one do not understand how LHR is not allowed to expand while at the same time a brand new commercial airport can be built in the heart of a thri
54 fcogafa : Ironic phrase! But surely Heathrow cannot stagnate. What possibilities are there to increase useage? - Mixed mode, although there would be nimby oppo
55 Post contains images cornish : Ah yes those route planing departments with experienced airline staff who have far less understanding of airline economics and markets than the avera
56 RJ111 : You could argue that MAN might have been developed as a reliever connections hub for BA and maybe it could have worked to some degree but it's hard t
57 Candid76 : Today, yes. But greater economic prosperity, more inbound tourism and a new generation of much more efficient aircraft (such as the 787) should chang
58 cornish : Indeed and that's precisely the more intelligent view to the future and the regions I would always expect from you and would have preferred to have s
59 PanHAM : Germany is polycentric and always was, even before the partition. That plus the ideal geographic location (FRA is very close to the geographic as wel
60 r2rho : Everybody is focusing on the cancellation of LHR's 3d runway, but for me the most worrying news is the cancellation of STN's 2nd runway, which is the
61 Post contains images EPA001 : I would not call LHR hopeless, but it is not the best airport for sure. But with a changed strategy to more wide bodies (who need more spacing in the
62 RJ111 : I really find STN a poor airport for London. It's too far out and the train to get there isn't quick - the bus even less so - or cheap in addition it
63 Jacobin777 : I'm extremely skeptical the "majority" have been living there since LHR was built. I'm sure a number of houses have been passed down to the next gene
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...
BBC On Heathrow's New Runway Plans. posted Wed Dec 7 2005 19:39:18 by Shamrock350
KUL Expands - New Terminal And 3rd Runway posted Wed Jan 13 2010 03:10:18 by MAS777
Committee 'unsure About Stansted Runway' posted Mon Dec 7 2009 04:14:12 by CV580Freak
Heathrow 'HAD' A Third Runway - 23/05 posted Tue Jun 24 2008 02:51:19 by Hypersonic
A Man On The Runway Was Hit By An Airplane posted Mon Apr 14 2008 18:18:01 by RvA340
BMI's Bishop - Opinion On Heathrow And Competition posted Sun Aug 5 2007 17:43:50 by Wolverhampton
LTN New Runway Plans Shelved posted Fri Jul 6 2007 11:38:22 by LHRjc
QR Carries 8m. And On Track For 12m By 2009 posted Mon May 28 2007 10:05:19 by QatarA340
Alitalia And AF Group - Not Favored By Politicians posted Mon Dec 11 2006 11:34:34 by Breiz
Red And Green Light In Customs By Pressing Button! posted Tue Oct 31 2006 18:27:15 by RootsAir