LHR27C
Topic Author
Posts: 846
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 3:49 am

LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 4:19 pm

Just came across this: http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/transport/article3179638.ece

"Ministers will signal the go-ahead today for a third runway at Heathrow, announcing a public consultation on the project in spite of a commitment by Gordon Brown to curb CO2 emissions to reduce climate change."

Not much information in the article and not much about it elsewhere, but good news if true.
Once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned forever skyward
 
commavia
Posts: 9623
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 4:29 pm



Quoting LHR27C (Thread starter):
Ministers will signal the go-ahead today for a third runway at Heathrow

Well, I ordinarily would be very excited at this. Heathrow should have had a third runway twenty years ago.

But, of course, this is, after all, Heathrow. So even if somebody gives the "tentative," "conditional," "possible," "basic," "in-principle" go ahead, we all know that still means this will probably be 20 years before anything happens. We have to hear from the entire peanut gallery of tree-huggers, NIMBYs, Ugandan refugees, disabled children, feline AIDS activists, and every other aggrieved group, it seems.

We'll have to have the obligatory period of public comment, which usually lasts until at least one generation dies out, and then the debating period to discuss the comment and postulate potential alternatives, and then the rumination period to mull over the alternatives that were produced from the postulation of the discussion of the comment.

Blah, blah, blah.

Let me know when the stupid thing is built.
 
CHRISBA777ER
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 12:12 pm

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 4:30 pm

Please God let this be true.

Of course the NIMBY's will take this to the Court of human rights and threaten not to vote labour and so get it repealed but hey ho - encouraging noises.

There wont be any actualy runway until about 2016 I dont think.
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
 
express1
Posts: 847
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 2:08 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 4:43 pm

I protest about people moaning about Heathrow expansion,there is nothing anyone can do about stopping it, what BAA wants, BAA will get. I thought i put my pound in, just in case anyone comes in and complains about the expansion.

dave
David.S cavanagh since 1961,if you can do better,then show me.
 
incitatus
Posts: 2691
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:49 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 4:44 pm

Come on Brits, instead of building a little itty bitty runway, go and build a real airport!
Stop pop up ads
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11730
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 4:48 pm



Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 2):
There wont be any actualy runway until about 2016 I dont think.

Sadly true. One could hope to have it by the London Olympics (new terminal too). That would be a great event to tie the expansion into. (It also gives the crews a great deadline to force the pace.) e.g., Like Beijing and ICN working to complete their latest expansions before July 2008 (so that some shakeout occurs before 8/8/8).

Think of the hub LHR could be... one stop shopping to get anywhere to anywhere. Personally, I believe some of the success of other hubs is due to the high cost of slots at LHR. (Its only worth buying a slot at LHR if you can fill a very large airframe at good yeild.)

Is it 2020 when LGW is allowed to add another terminal and runway? I guess that until then, only STN will see huge growth.

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
B747forever
Posts: 12855
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:50 pm

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 4:48 pm



Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 2):
There wont be any actualy runway until about 2016 I dont think.

Wow, so loooong time it will take.
Work Hard, Fly Right
 
commavia
Posts: 9623
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 4:50 pm



Quoting Express1 (Reply 3):
there is nothing anyone can do about stopping it, what BAA wants, BAA will get.

This isn't even about BAA anymore, though, and what they "want" and will "get." This goes way beyond those morons. They have proven themselves perfectly effective at running large shopping malls, not airports, anyway.

This is about what passengers, and people want: namely, they want more flights to the premier airport for one of the world's premier cities. They also don't want delays, endless lines, horrific customer service, hit-and-miss baggage delivery, etc.
 
express1
Posts: 847
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 2:08 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 4:59 pm



Quoting Commavia (Reply 7):
This isn't even about BAA anymore, though, and what they "want" and will "get." This goes way beyond those morons. They have proven themselves perfectly effective at running large shopping malls, not airports, anyway.

This is about what passengers, and people want: namely, they want more flights to the premier airport for one of the world's premier cities. They also don't want delays, endless lines, horrific customer service, hit-and-miss baggage delivery, etc.

umm who owns Heathrow?

dave
David.S cavanagh since 1961,if you can do better,then show me.
 
commavia
Posts: 9623
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 5:03 pm



Quoting Express1 (Reply 8):
umm who owns Heathrow?

BAA, obviously.

The point I was making is that as much as some hate to give an inch to BAA - I'm one of them - as they obviously don't deserve it and have proven themselves completely incapable of effectively running Heathrow, something must be done.

Like I said, whether Heathrow is government-owned or now in private hands, it should have had at least three runways two decades ago. And, sadly, it will probably be two decades longer before it does get runway #3, if ever.

I'd like to be optimistic, but given recent history, I just can't be. I hope I'll be pleasantly surprised, and we'll get another runway before the next ice age.
 
CHRISBA777ER
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 12:12 pm

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 5:15 pm

This will go to appeal, and then to the House of Lords and then to the EU High Court for Human Rights. It will cost the British taxpayer billions before anyone lays a square foot of concrete.

In fact - I would say that the runway will probably cost the same as a Gold-plated one on private land. Certainly the most expensive bit of concrete per square foot anywhere on the planet.
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
 
express1
Posts: 847
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 2:08 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 5:15 pm



Quoting Commavia (Reply 9):

well im all for airport expantion,yes a few years late but hey this is England with a shit Government.

dave
David.S cavanagh since 1961,if you can do better,then show me.
 
r2rho
Posts: 2439
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:13 pm

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 5:29 pm

Third runway at LHR? HA ! I'll believe it when I see it!  laughing 

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 5):

Is it 2020 when LGW is allowed to add another terminal and runway?

Actually 2019, thanks to a decision taken in 1979.  banghead 

Quoting Commavia (Reply 9):
Like I said, whether Heathrow is government-owned or now in private hands, it should have had at least three runways two decades ago. And, sadly, it will probably be two decades longer before it does get runway #3, if ever.

Whether it's BAA, ABA or AAB running the airport, it doesn't matter. Running a 70 million passenger airport with outdated terminals made for 45 million and only two miserable runways is an impossible task no matter who manages it.
 
User avatar
Qatara340
Posts: 1519
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 2:07 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 5:38 pm

Its such a shame that a country that used to rule the world cant get a third runway to serve the over-populated airport. It is lagging behind other countries in term of infrastructure.

Cant Queen Elizabeth make an order to force the people to construct the airport--or VETO the ban by the green activists?
لا اله الا الله محمد رسول الله
 
express1
Posts: 847
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 2:08 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 5:54 pm

If you think on how many European airports had expantions to extra runways and terminals without problems,then why is this country any diffrent.

dave
David.S cavanagh since 1961,if you can do better,then show me.
 
AirbusA6
Posts: 1484
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 5:53 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:10 pm



Quoting QatarA340 (Reply 13):
Its such a shame that a country that used to rule the world cant get a third runway to serve the over-populated airport. It is lagging behind other countries in term of infrastructure.

To be fair, it's a lot easier to expand an airport when all around it is either desert or empty countryside. SE England is one of the most densely built up areas of the world, so any development will be lot more expensive and affect more people on the ground....

We also have a a very democratic planning system, and while I agree it's far too slow (the T5 planning process was a joke) I wouldn't like the other extreme either, of governments being able to build anything they like, irrespective of the thoughts of the people affected.
it's the bus to stansted (now renamed National Express a6 to ruin my username)
 
kl911
Posts: 3979
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 1:10 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:18 pm



Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 15):
SE England is one of the most densely built up areas of the world, so any development will be lot more expensive and affect more people on the ground....

Well, the western part of The Netherlands has the highest amount of people per square km. in the world. So how can AMS just have build a 5th runway, and planning up to 9 runways in the future, while Heathrow can't even have a 3rd one?

I guess someone in the past made a very stupid descision to allow houses build too close to the airport on all sides, thus blocking any expansion.

KL911
 
cornish
Posts: 7651
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 8:05 pm

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:26 pm



Quoting KL911 (Reply 16):
Well, the western part of The Netherlands has the highest amount of people per square km. in the world. So how can AMS just have build a 5th runway

Well do remember that as part of the agreement for a 5th runway, AMS had to cut its maximum declared capacity per hour. The 5th runway gives it more operational flexibility but in terms of overall capacity it is now less with 5 runways than it was with 4. with LHR at its absolute limit, that simply wouldn't be an option with the 3rd runway.
Just when I thought I could see light at the end of the tunnel, it was some B*****d with a torch bringing me more work
 
kl911
Posts: 3979
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 1:10 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:38 pm



Quoting Cornish (Reply 17):
Well do remember that as part of the agreement for a 5th runway, AMS had to cut its maximum declared capacity per hour. The 5th runway gives it more operational flexibility but in terms of overall capacity it is now less with 5 runways than it was with 4. with LHR at its absolute limit, that simply wouldn't be an option with the 3rd runway.

Well... That's true. Dutch nimby's should just buy their own island far away. ( Not one of those Dubai islands though, soon you get 70 A380's per hour over your house..  Smile )

Even relieve airports as Lelystad and Groningen are trying for 15 years already to get just an extansion of the runway to accomodate holiday charters and LCC's which could give AMS some breathingspace.
 
Tristarsteve
Posts: 3359
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:04 pm

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:44 pm



Quoting KL911 (Reply 16):
guess someone in the past made a very stupid descision to allow houses build too close to the airport on all sides, thus blocking any expansion.

Trouble is most of the houses on the North and South sides of the airport were built in the 1930's, London AirPort was not opened until 1946.
 
kl911
Posts: 3979
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 1:10 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:50 pm



Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 19):
Trouble is most of the houses on the North and South sides of the airport were built in the 1930's,

Well, that's old enough to be demolished and new houses being build somewhere else. They can't object since they complain about the noise all the time..... Good for them and good for LHR.....or not?
 
Arsenal@LHR
Posts: 7510
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 2:55 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:53 pm

A lot of us will be middle-aged by the time the asphalt on a new runway is dry, i wouldn't bother counting down the months and years. There are too many political, environmental and ethical obstructions in the way, it will happen but not soon enough. Meetings, public consultations, public inquiries, reports, feasability studies, you name it, all in the way of a runway.
In Arsene we trust!!
 
express1
Posts: 847
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 2:08 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:53 pm



Quoting KL911 (Reply 20):
Well, that's old enough to be demolished and new houses being build somewhere else. They can't object since they complain about the noise all the time..... Good for them and good for LHR.....or not?

If the 3rd runway gets built,i'm sure BAA will have to pay for new homes that get demolished.

dave
David.S cavanagh since 1961,if you can do better,then show me.
 
kaitak
Posts: 8933
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 7:54 pm



Quoting Arsenal@LHR (Reply 21):
There are too many political, environmental and ethical obstructions in the way, it will happen but not soon enough. Meetings, public consultations, public inquiries, reports, feasability studies, you name it, all in the way of a runway.

Those opposed to it will certainly try to slow it up as much as possible, but I understand that the govt will try to short circuit some of this by using the new streamlined/fast track planning process for major infrastructural projects.

Also, there has been some talk of making the runway "full length", i.e. 11-12,000', rather than the originally proposed 6-7,000'. I think the shorter length would be better for a number of reasons:
(a) it will be easily to prove that it will benefit regions in the UK, not just increasing long haul flights (which will be increased anyway, as short haul flights are moved to the shorter runway); the govt needs to show that this is going to be of benefit to the UK economy as a whole;
(b) if they go for a full length runway, then - following from the above, that just benefits long haul flights and even though more slots will be created and new short haul routes will be opened (and saved), ultimately, we'll be back to a situation where short haul flights are competing with long haul flights - and losing.

Finally, how long will it be, I wonder before a move is made to introduce a new terminal complex; with the new runway and only the current terminal area now in use, acft using the new runway will have to cross 27R/9L to get to/from this, which will cause serious delays and congestion; a new terminal - which has been mooted - could help reduce delays and maximise the use of all three runways.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11730
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 8:29 pm



Quoting R2rho (Reply 12):
Actually 2019, thanks to a decision taken in 1979.

Thanks. Although, do you really think it will get done that year earlier.  Wink

That will be its own dog fight....  banghead 

Quoting KL911 (Reply 18):
Not one of those Dubai islands though, soon you get 70 A380's per hour over your house..

Not even EK is that ambitious.  Wink yet...  hyper 

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 23):

Also, there has been some talk of making the runway "full length", i.e. 11-12,000', rather than the originally proposed 6-7,000'. I think the shorter length would be better for a number of reasons:

Actually, a "Full length" (3500m or so) would allow for the creation of more cargo facilities. While the shorter length is an easier sell (IIRC 2500m, not 6,000').

Quoting Arsenal@LHR (Reply 21):
A lot of us will be middle-aged by the time the asphalt on a new runway is dry, i wouldn't bother counting down the months and years.

Sigh... I think I'd count as "middle aged" if it were ready by the 2012 Olympics!  cry 

Quoting R2rho (Reply 12):

Whether it's BAA, ABA or AAB running the airport, it doesn't matter. Running a 70 million passenger airport with outdated terminals made for 45 million and only two miserable runways is an impossible task no matter who manages it.

And that is the big issue. London needs business traffic. It also needs the vacation traffic. Slowly fewer and fewer seats are going to be left for hubbing. This means that the lower yield markets will continue to be dropped in favor of the high yield markets. That means the hubbing gets done somewhere else at the cost of London jobs.  Sad

But I'm not going to hold my breath...

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 23):
Finally, how long will it be, I wonder before a move is made to introduce a new terminal complex;

Long after T5 and the new T1. I'm not seeing enough land being left unused to build a new complex between the new runway and the old.  Sad

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
vv701
Posts: 5773
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Wed Nov 21, 2007 11:51 pm



Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 5):
One could hope to have it by the London Olympics

If we could forget all of the planning issues and delays it is almost impossible for a third runway to be ready before the 2012 Olympics.

We can all be critical of BAA and with justification. However BAA has managed the construction of T5 at LHR - currently Europe's largest construction project - itself. At the end of the planning process it was announced that the planned opening date for T5 was 28 March 2008. And today the planned opening date for T5 is still 28 March 2008. So it is almost certain that, without a major, unforeseen disruption, T5 will not only come in on the originally planned date but will also come in at or under budget.

Now I do not know what happens in other countries on major construction projects. But here in the UK, even when the project is foreign managed (as was the case with the New Wembley Stadium) it almost always is both late and over budget. In the case of the New Wembley Stadium it was one year late and, at £796 million, £41 million over budget. Very much worse the Scottish Parliament Building was due to take 2 years to build at a cost of between £10 and £40 million - an absurd cost range in itself. It actually took 5 years and three months to build at the extraordinary inflated cost of £414 million or more than ten times the upper end of the originally estimated cost.

So while BAA need a kick in the backside for a lot of things, they deserve our plaudits for their management and implementation of the T5 project.

What has all of this to do with a third LHR runway? Well what is in the current BAA development plans is to build and complete Heathrow East to replace and expand T1 and T2 before the 2012 Olympics - a significantly testing objective in itself. If BAA were given permission to build a third runway (which would also require the construction of T6) tomorrow it would be very unwise for BAA to even contemplate starting construction before completing the construction of Heathrow East and the associated demolition of T2 and the Queen's Building.

So it is my view that even totally discounting any planning difficulties a third LHR runway cannot materialise before 2015 at the very earliest.

One good thing to come out of the T5 planning fiasco is that a similar fiasco is unlikely to occur again. The 1947 Town and Country Planning Act has been modified in an effort so ensure that no future planning inquiry can take so long or cost as much as did the T5 inquiry. But it has to be noted that the amendments to the 1946 Act have yet to be tested in practice.
 
ABpositive
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:36 pm

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Thu Nov 22, 2007 12:31 am



Quoting LHR27C (Thread starter):
in spite of a commitment by Gordon Brown to curb CO2 emissions to reduce climate change

But wouldn't the 3rd runaway in fact work in favour of reducing CO2 emissions as it would reduce the time aircrafts need to spend wasting fuel while circling around during congestion periods?!
 
LHR27C
Topic Author
Posts: 846
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 3:49 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Thu Nov 22, 2007 2:10 am



Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 5):
I guess that until then, only STN will see huge growth.

Even STN has problems, the runway is capped at 25m pax/annum at the moment, which it's rapidly approaching, and BAA's plans to overturn that were (surprise surprise) just rejected by the local council. For sure there's a lot of land around STN that could quite easily be used for a second runway without disrupting many people, unlike LHR, but I just don't think there's the need or economic justification for it right now. Having said that, look at MAN, which got a second runway where perhaps by UK standards it didn't need one, and now handles less traffic on its two runways than STN on one.

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 23):
Also, there has been some talk of making the runway "full length", i.e. 11-12,000', rather than the originally proposed 6-7,000'

The idea was there was going to be such a huge fight getting one at all that BAA might as well go all out for a full length rather than having to fight for an extension later.

I do feel though that LHR stands a much higher chance of getting a 3rd runway if it is short length - considerably less land required in a highly populated area, smaller aircraft less pollution argument, etc.

At the end of the day I think a 3rd runway will ultimately be built but with some severe restrictions, such as even more stringent emissions targets, caps on numbers of flights/pax throughput, etc. Maybe even a promise that there will be no further major expansion. Looking to the long term, I think there is an argument that domestic flights such as LHR-MAN, LHR-NCL, possibly even LHR-GLA/EDI could be completely replaced with faster train links (something the Conservatives seem very keen on), the same going for PAR/BRU/AMS maybe via Eurostar, freeing up slots and utilising the 3rd runway mainly for landings (which require less tarmac length) and takeoffs to European destinations. This would leave available a considerable number of slots for longhaul expansion on the full lengths which, combined with more efficient use of aircraft such as the A380, could provide a medium term solution to LHR's congestion. Not ideal by any means but the "awareness" of climate change, global warming etc is just crazy in the UK at the moment and any expansion beyond adding one extra runway and terminal is extremely unrealistic.

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 23):
Finally, how long will it be, I wonder before a move is made to introduce a new terminal complex; with the new runway and only the current terminal area now in use, acft using the new runway will have to cross 27R/9L to get to/from this, which will cause serious delays and congestion; a new terminal - which has been mooted - could help reduce delays and maximise the use of all three runways.

I think you'd be bound to see a short haul terminal 6 near the new runway, so north of 27R/09L.

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 24):
Actually, a "Full length" (3500m or so) would allow for the creation of more cargo facilities. While the shorter length is an easier sell (IIRC 2500m, not 6,000').

LHR has never been a huge cargo operation by any means and I think increasing cargo facilities/cargo flights would just add fuel to the fire for the environmentalists who are already in uproar at the idea of BA operating a few ghost flights without passengers. The shorter length was going to be c. 2000 - 2200 m.

Quoting ABpositive (Reply 26):
But wouldn't the 3rd runaway in fact work in favour of reducing CO2 emissions as it would reduce the time aircrafts need to spend wasting fuel while circling around during congestion periods?!

There's a big argument for that but not one HACAN et al want to hear.
Once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned forever skyward
 
cornish
Posts: 7651
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 8:05 pm

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Thu Nov 22, 2007 9:39 am



Quoting LHR27C (Reply 27):
There's a big argument for that but not one HACAN et al want to hear.

Oh yes HACAN - the same HACAN whose spokesman recently presented a paper at a conference in Istanbul. One assumed he drove there from London or took the train otherwise he could be labelled a hypocrite for taking an unneccessary flight out of and into LHR and disturbing the people in the flightpath.....  Yeah sure
Just when I thought I could see light at the end of the tunnel, it was some B*****d with a torch bringing me more work
 
GCT64
Posts: 1256
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 6:34 pm

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Thu Nov 22, 2007 10:09 am



Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 19):


Quoting KL911 (Reply 16):
guess someone in the past made a very stupid descision to allow houses build too close to the airport on all sides, thus blocking any expansion.

Trouble is most of the houses on the North and South sides of the airport were built in the 1930's, London AirPort was not opened until 1946.

And the communities of Harmondsworth, Sipson & Harlington go back far further than that.
For example, Harmondsworth was first recorded back in 1082 (substantially before the Wright Brothers!).
The villages contain old churches (that in Harlington goes back to the 11th century), old pubs (the White Hart's current building goes back to 1815) and some very picturesque houses (going back to the 16th century).

While I believe that LHR needs a 3rd runway (and this affects me as it will lead to increased air traffic over my house), I think it is reasonable to allow the inhabitants of those villages to have their say as it is their historic houses, churchs and pubs that are going to be demolished.
Flown in: A30B,A306,A310,A319,A320,A321,A332,A333,A343,A346,A388,BA11,BU31,B190, B461,(..53 more types..),VC10,WESX
 
Glom
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Thu Nov 22, 2007 10:17 am



Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 2):
Of course the NIMBY's will take this to the Court of human rights and threaten not to vote labour and so get it repealed but hey ho - encouraging noises.

It's okay. We've got their names and addresses.

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 4):
Come on Brits, instead of building a little itty bitty runway, go and build a real airport!

Damn right. Whatever happened to the Thames Estuary airport?
 
LHR777
Posts: 645
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 6:14 pm

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Thu Nov 22, 2007 10:52 am



Quoting R2rho (Reply 12):
Third runway at LHR? HA ! I'll believe it when I see it!

People have short memories. Does nobody remember that LHR had 3 runways until very recently?

The cross-wind runway 23? Now operating as taxiway-Alpha, but it's still there.

So, bascially, the government is proposing a second 3rd runway at LHR.
 
User avatar
Qatara340
Posts: 1519
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 2:07 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Thu Nov 22, 2007 11:01 am

If those environmentalists just SHUT UP, they can help their planet from emitting those harmful CO2 gas more than a runway would. People all over the world are moving forward in the fields of aviation, and unfortunately these environmentalists are just blocking any progression....

And another thing about noise... The English (no offense meant) are one of the worst complainers and whiners I have ever seen.. I wanted to put an airconditioner in my apartment in Central London, and I was told it was against the law since it produces too much noise. Come one it can get up to 38 degrees in the Summer! Air Travel is essential, and people should give up their homes for expansion. For God's sake, homes in that area are hundreds of years old--they should welcome the move!

If only.....
لا اله الا الله محمد رسول الله
 
LHR27C
Topic Author
Posts: 846
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 3:49 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Thu Nov 22, 2007 12:16 pm

Once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned forever skyward
 
UAL777UK
Posts: 2106
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Thu Nov 22, 2007 12:29 pm



Quoting LHR777 (Reply 31):
People have short memories. Does nobody remember that LHR had 3 runways until very recently?

The cross-wind runway 23? Now operating as taxiway-Alpha, but it's still there.

So, bascially, the government is proposing a second 3rd runway at LHR.

Just on that point, didn't LHR have in fact four runways in the past, the 4th was shut down years ago and was parallel to runway 23,on the West side of the central area.? So in fact LHR is arguably getting a 5th Runway, in god knows how many years time? Maybe I am wrong and imagined it???
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 1528
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Thu Nov 22, 2007 12:33 pm



Quoting QatarA340 (Reply 32):
For God's sake, homes in that area are hundreds of years old--they should welcome the move!

Think you missed the point on that one, in england we often don't tend to see houses like cars. Old is good! Imagine if someone offered you a piper tomahawk to replace your lovely old sopworth camel, you'd just laugh at them.

Fred
Image
 
SInGAPORE_AIR
Posts: 11619
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2000 4:06 am

RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

Thu Nov 22, 2007 12:44 pm

As a comment, I watched a few hours ago a debate on BBC NEWS 24 between Susan Kramer, Liberal Democrat MP for some area around LHR and the CEO of BAA.

Susan Kramer argues:

  • A lot of trips, (European) are not necessarily and should be done by other means

  • A third of passengers are transit passengers

  • BAA shouldn't be encouraging air traffic which pollutes. Air travel should be limited (the jist of what she said)


  • I used to like Susan Kramer but that has flown out the proverbial window considering my views on LHR.

    1) She did not mention that there is simply no infrastructure for this (assuming she implies rail).

    2) All airports have transit passengers. I can't think of a rebuttal to this at this point without reverting to profanities.

    3) Air traffic is needed for business. Her premise that air traffic should not be allowed to grow leads to only one thing in the world market economy - higher prices. Higher prices leads to more expensive costs of doing business internationally, leads to decreased tourism as people either can't afford it or can't get a seat etc.. etc... etc...

    Even if we are in favour of the third runway, we have to deal with the real problem of relocation. Unfortunately for whatever reason, there are residents around LHR and it is an obligatory factor in the decision of whether the third runway should be built.

    It would be costly and while ignoring the economics of doing so, the best thing would be to go the whole hog and just buy these people out at a reasonable price and move them somewhere else, preferably in the country so they can just bitch about the sheep making noise.
    Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
     
    LHRBlueSkies
    Posts: 321
    Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 4:23 am

    RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

    Thu Nov 22, 2007 1:03 pm



    Quoting QatarA340 (Reply 32):
    For God's sake, homes in that area are hundreds of years old--they should welcome the move!

    And it's because of their historical value that there will be so many planning problems. New isn't always best! Simply kicking people out of their homes isn't the solution - if it happened to you, how would you feel? Not exactly gleeful I'd wager...

    Quoting GCT64 (Reply 29):
    While I believe that LHR needs a 3rd runway (and this affects me as it will lead to increased air traffic over my house), I think it is reasonable to allow the inhabitants of those villages to have their say as it is their historic houses, churchs and pubs that are going to be demolished.

    Exactly!

    Whilst I am in favour of keeping LHR moving forward, there needs to be a fair and consistant approach to planning, but there also needs to be a concerted effort at moving the whole of the UK's air travel forward, and not just 1 or 2 select airports. It will take a brave and forward-thinking individual/government to announce a plan that develops LHR, LGW & STN, and a high-speed rail (mono-rail) system in place linking all 3.
    flying is the safest form of transport - until humans get involved!
     
    vv701
    Posts: 5773
    Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

    RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

    Thu Nov 22, 2007 2:47 pm



    Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 34):
    Just on that point, didn't LHR have in fact four runways in the past, the

    Back in 1946 the plans were for LHR to have three pairs of parallel runways. There were the East-West pair (today's 27L/09R and 27R/09L) the NW-SE pair (today's Taxiway A plus a parallel runway to the west and a NW-SE pair. Of these I believe only the current two operational runways and what is now Taxiway A were ever built and put into service as runways.

    However it is important to note that since these runway pairs all intersect each other it is unlikely that the air movement capacity of an LHR with the six originally planned runways would be as high as the proposed three parallel runways LHR.
     
    PlymSpotter
    Posts: 9986
    Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

    RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

    Thu Nov 22, 2007 3:43 pm



    Quoting VV701 (Reply 38):
    Back in 1946 the plans were for LHR to have three pairs of parallel runways. There were the East-West pair (today's 27L/09R and 27R/09L) the NW-SE pair (today's Taxiway A plus a parallel runway to the west and a NW-SE pair. Of these I believe only the current two operational runways and what is now Taxiway A were ever built and put into service as runways.

    I think they were all used as runways actually, but gradually as aircraft advanced and the terminal expansion was required they became obsolete.

    The main issue for local residents will be noise, however the increase in noise and it's reach will only be a slight increase from current figures. This could perhaps be appeased by restricting the use of the third runway after say 21:00 and until 07:30, which wouldn't impact greatly on short haul flights as most which arrive very early are the long hauls which would continue to operate on the two existing runways.

    http://www.heathrowairport.com/asset...20Files/LHRmasterplan_Drawing6.pdf


    Dan Smile
    ...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
     
    LHR27C
    Topic Author
    Posts: 846
    Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 3:49 am

    RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

    Thu Nov 22, 2007 3:52 pm



    Quoting VV701 (Reply 38):
    Of these I believe only the current two operational runways and what is now Taxiway A were ever built and put into service as runways.

    Actually 5L/23R (as well as 5R/23L) and 15R/33L both certainly had movements in the 60s.

    The "Star of David" pattern was from the era when aircraft were more vulnerable to crosswinds than they are now. The three pairs of parallel runways meant a pair every 60 degrees so a crosswind could never be at more than 30 degrees to one pair of runways, an idea from the RAF I believe. Over the years aircraft have become much better at handling crosswinds and LHR has needed more ground space so the shorter runways simply became absorbed into the tarmac.
    Once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned forever skyward
     
    Glom
    Posts: 2051
    Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

    RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

    Thu Nov 22, 2007 4:16 pm



    Quoting LHRBlueSkies (Reply 37):
    And it's because of their historical value that there will be so many planning problems. New isn't always best! Simply kicking people out of their homes isn't the solution - if it happened to you, how would you feel? Not exactly gleeful I'd wager...

    I will hear many things against NIMBYs but you're right. The T5 debacle was pathetic. The terminal was to be built on an old sewage works with access coming from the M25 and the perimeter road. The NIMBYs should have shut their faces. But when it comes to paving over their houses, they have the right to raise holy hell.
     
    Farnborough24
    Posts: 33
    Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2007 11:26 am

    RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

    Thu Nov 22, 2007 4:46 pm

    It's a valid point to make that this cannot really be fairly compared to the T5 planning debate. As Glom rightly points out, that wasn't exactly life changing for the local residents, but I would call having your house bulldozed a pretty objectionable thing. However, I am all in favour of a third runway at Heathrow, but only because it's apparent that we probably won't see a new airport for London until I'm retired (I'm currently 18...). Ideally we'd see a brand new airport built to serve London, with plenty of space around it for expansion, but this debate seems to have quietened down a bit seeing as nobody could find a suitable place to put it. Essentially Heathrow's problem is that back when it was built, it would have had plenty of space around it, but the expansion of London has put paid to that. The point was raised early on comparing Schipol to Heathrow, and how Schipol managed to plan and build 17 runways in 6 hours or something  Wink , but I would invite that poster to look on google earth at the two airports. Around Schipol? Nothing. Around Heathrow? Urbanisation. Seems a pretty simple difference when it comes to why one has been able to build runways and why another hasnt. I also agree with the point about BAA not doing that bad a job. I don't see another airport in the world operating at Heathrow levels of passenger throughput with the same operational challenges (2 runways, night curfew, large predominance of long haul flying etc) apart from perhaps Narita, but the Japanese manage to get their trains running on time to the second so...anyway basically I think the shorter runway should be built, but expansion at STN and possibly LGW can't take up the slack forever, and I think any futher Heathrow expansion will be more effort than it is worth. Beyond this third runway and the new Heathrow East complex, I think the government need to start talking about a brand new airport, or Heathrow will be well and truly left behind by CDG, AMS and FRA.
    My Saab 9000-the chav eater!
     
    SInGAPORE_AIR
    Posts: 11619
    Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2000 4:06 am

    RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

    Thu Nov 22, 2007 5:42 pm

    Greenpeace on BBC NEWS 24:

  • If the UK Government backs the third runway, it can say goodbye to its environmental credentials.

  • There is no need for a third runway as CDG and BRU are acccessible by train.

  • We can't allow aviation to expand if we are going to meet long term climate targets


  • Jim Fitzpatrick, Aviation Minister on BBC NEWS 24:

  • LHR is critical to the UK economy running at 98.5% capacity

  • Meets stringent EU standards with respect to noise and pollution

  • Could inject at least £5 into the economy

  • If we don't give LHR the capcaity, the flights won't stop, they'll just go to AMS, FRA, CDG

  • UK Government has published the evidence and economic modelling with regards to noise, pollution and the economy
  • Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
     
    LHRBlueSkies
    Posts: 321
    Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 4:23 am

    RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

    Thu Nov 22, 2007 6:00 pm



    Quoting Farnborough24 (Reply 42):
    I think the government need to start talking about a brand new airport, or Heathrow will be well and truly left behind

    Not going to happen, as it's just not needed, and there is nowhere that can take such a massive commitment, without having more towns levelled, etc.

    It is far better to develop what we have as much as possible, but to do so in a cohesive way, linking all 3 major London airports together, and developing high speed rail links to the regions, as well as developing those regional airports (term used loosely!) such as EDI, MAN, etc etc. Spread the pain, and let the whole country enjoy the benefits that should come with it. But do it with a major eye to the environmental impact it will have.

    The question to be asked is, what will the T6 handle? Domestic flights? European? Long-haul? LCC? An alliance? Non-aligned? Everything & anything?

    Maybe the opportunity should be taken to develop T6 into a pure Business terminal, for the likes of Silverjet and the proposed BA model? Thoughts?...
    flying is the safest form of transport - until humans get involved!
     
    User avatar
    lightsaber
    Crew
    Posts: 11730
    Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

    RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

    Thu Nov 22, 2007 6:32 pm



    Quoting Singapore_Air (Reply 36):
    A third of passengers are transit passengers

    Don't you love how anti-airport people point out these facts. So they would rather have them hub elsewhere? e.g, CDG, BRU, or DXB? I know this is a pro-aviation group, but LHR should 'tax' the world by offering hub services.

    Its almost like they don't see why high salary business needs air travel. Its not for the government to determine if a business or leisure trip is required, its for the individual... sigh.

    Quoting Singapore_Air (Reply 43):
    There is no need for a third runway as CDG and BRU are acccessible by train.

    Oh good... while I'm a chunnel fan (except for the fact its business case... is poor), that doesn't help people going London to India...

    Quoting Singapore_Air (Reply 43):

    # We can't allow aviation to expand if we are going to meet long term climate targets

    2% of CO2 is aviation! We could cut that from cars in a year (assuming some brutal legislation). Funny how I hear this argument from the same people who take multiple overseas vacations every year...


    There will be a hub somewhere. India and China will grow. London can be part of the growth, or on the sidelines. I'd love to see what should be the eminent hub of the world grow.

    Lightsaber
    "They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
     
    r2rho
    Posts: 2439
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:13 pm

    RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

    Thu Nov 22, 2007 6:40 pm

    Ok, so according to the BBC article (and others), the runway could start operating in... 2020!!!!!!!  banghead 

    If I were BAA, I would take this to be a very bad joke. A 3rd runway is what Heathrow needed yesterday, not 13 years from now!

    By 2020, who cares about a third runway? LHR will have lost so much market share to other competing airports, that it will no longer be the "world-class" airport it is today, and it won't matter much anymore.

    Oh yeah, and in 2019, LGW will be allowed to get a second runway. Hooray.

    Quoting LHRBlueSkies (Reply 37):
    It will take a brave and forward-thinking individual/government to announce a plan that develops LHR, LGW & STN, and a high-speed rail (mono-rail) system in place linking all 3.

    That idea is so good... that it will never get done.

    Quoting Farnborough24 (Reply 42):
    anyway basically I think the shorter runway should be built, but expansion at STN and possibly LGW can't take up the slack forever, and I think any futher Heathrow expansion will be more effort than it is worth. Beyond this third runway and the new Heathrow East complex, I think the government need to start talking about a brand new airport, or Heathrow will be well and truly left behind by CDG, AMS and FRA.

     checkmark 

    Forget LHR. It's a hopeless case.

    STN offers the greatest potential. It can and should be expanded to 4 runways, to become London's main international gateway in the mid-term. It's the only chance left for London, and it should not enter the list of missed opportunities. Yes, that would mean that the great LHR would no longer be London's main airport. So what?
     
    kaitak
    Posts: 8933
    Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

    RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

    Thu Nov 22, 2007 7:11 pm

    Glad to see that HMG is taking a stand on this and pushing the development forward, but as said above, 2020 is far too late. Interesting, too, to see the silence from the Tories; what the LDs say isn't terribly relevant, but I doubt if the Tories will go against the third runway or T6; indeed, the stance against R3 was dropped among other policies seen as "barmy", so really, the road was well and truly begun.

    I'm sure environmentalists are baying for the blood of the Transport secretary and trying to get her sacked, but really, if she is replaced, won't the govt's air transport policy become ruthless?  Wink
     
    Glom
    Posts: 2051
    Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

    RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

    Thu Nov 22, 2007 9:24 pm



    Quoting Kaitak (Reply 47):
    I'm sure environmentalists are baying for the blood of the Transport secretary and trying to get her sacked, but really, if she is replaced, won't the govt's air transport policy become ruthless?

    These days, who in the government isn't about to lose their job?
     
    Leezyjet
    Posts: 3540
    Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 7:26 am

    RE: LHR 3rd Runway Progress?

    Thu Nov 22, 2007 9:41 pm



    Quoting VV701 (Reply 25):
    it would be very unwise for BAA to even contemplate starting construction before completing the construction of Heathrow East and the associated demolition of T2 and the Queen's Building.

    Don't see why myself. They are in completely seperate areas and could be managed by seperate teams so I can't really see any reason to delay the building just because of T2/HE. It would also mean the construction traffic would be around for less time for both projects to run at the same time, and could also save costs in that area too. The hard core from the building demolishion could also be used in the construction of the new runway which would also have less of an impact on the environment.

    Quoting Singapore_Air (Reply 43):
    Could inject at least £5 into the economy

    WOW a whole £5 !!!. Just enough to buy a Big Mac Meal and go large !!.

     Smile
    "She Rolls, 45 knots, 90, 135, nose comes up to 20 degrees, she's airborne - She flies, Concorde Flies"

    Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: aflyingkiwi, Alexa [Bot], AngMoh, aviatorcraig, axio, BlueF9A320, Dasa, flyingclrs727, Google Adsense [Bot], ikolkyo, milemaster, nikeson13, PerfectGriffin, SQfan1, Viscount724, yeogeo and 201 guests