Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Turnhouse1
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Sun Mar 01, 2020 1:07 pm

Implementing a requirement to cap aviation emissions at say 2019 levels would be a start on the environmental front, I'm not sure on the precise relative emissions, but would replacing an A319CEO with an A321NEO perhaps be equal in terms of emissions, 1.5-2 A350s per 747 and so on. If the UK could hold emissions at least level on that basis for 10-20 years, then look to reduce as electric for short haul and possibly hydrogen for long haul become more practical.

On the specific Heathrow issue, I think it's over. They should move to mixed mode and increase operating hours. Though Heathrow Airport must now own some prime development land to the north of the airfield which will bring in plenty money when sold for housing to fund; T5D, the T2 extension and replacement of T3.
 
uta999
Topic Author
Posts: 904
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:10 am

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Sun Mar 01, 2020 5:14 pm

What LHR could do if it were allowed, is use both runways in mix-mode for three hours during the morning and evening peak.

It’s a nonsense that ATC can only use two landing runways for one hour a day. No-one of any importance would even notice if they use both for ultra-quiet a/c like 787/350/220/NEO/MAX etc.

The A380/748/779 should also be prioritised to use both runways, as their passenger capacity is so great. They should not be treated the same as an A320/738 because of the fuel they waste holding.

Heathrow also needs to build at least 75 more stands regardless of what happens with R3.
Your computer just got better
 
Iloveboeing
Posts: 460
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:02 am

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Sun Mar 01, 2020 5:56 pm

jamsco99 wrote:
Armodeen wrote:
A lot of us who don’t live next to Heathrow are pretty exasperated by this whole situation. Just build the damn expansion already.

I can understand those living next door to LHR being against it though.


You mean the people who decided to move next door to an international airport,complaining about noise?


That's the thing; those people should never have been allowed to move there in the first place. London should have done what Denver and Kansas City did and that was to acquire a bunch of land in the beginning and not allow development to get in the way. Kansas City has 10,000 acres of land with their airport and I believe Denver has 34,000 acres with theirs.

I think LHR should get a third runway; if not, they should close LHR, LGW, LCY, LUT and STN simultaneously and build a gigantic airport on an artificial island out at sea. HKG did it, so why can't London?
 
Gangurru
Posts: 100
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2019 7:30 pm

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Sun Mar 01, 2020 6:35 pm

Planetalk wrote:
I'm an aviation enthusiast. I'm also a democracy enthusiast.


Me too. I’m also an environment enthusiast. The UK has laws around decarbonisation of the economy.

The ruling is that the third runway would be permitted if it met these laws. This requires a major shift from the status quo. For example LHR could limit additional flights to those only powered by alternative fuels.

Airport constraints have previously driven aviation innovation; short or hot/high runways, noise limits etc. Fuel requirements are one of the challenge this innovative industry I love (and work in) has to respond to.

As alternative fuels are at an early stage of development, my hope is that this ruling will be of sufficient precedent and magnitude to accelerate the rate of development in this field.
 
Planetalk
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:12 pm

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Sun Mar 01, 2020 7:38 pm

Gangurru wrote:
Planetalk wrote:
I'm an aviation enthusiast. I'm also a democracy enthusiast.


Me too. I’m also an environment enthusiast. The UK has laws around decarbonisation of the economy.

The ruling is that the third runway would be permitted if it met these laws. This requires a major shift from the status quo. For example LHR could limit additional flights to those only powered by alternative fuels.

Airport constraints have previously driven aviation innovation; short or hot/high runways, noise limits etc. Fuel requirements are one of the challenge this innovative industry I love (and work in) has to respond to.

As alternative fuels are at an early stage of development, my hope is that this ruling will be of sufficient precedent and magnitude to accelerate the rate of development in this field.


Agreed, thanks for the informative post. It's a shame for some reason some think being an aviation enthusiast and caring about the environment are mutually exclusive. That attitude ironically will end up harming aviation even more, because if it doesn't take measures itself, those imposed on it are likely to be harsher. The work you're involved in is what aviation needs to do. It already receives considerable special tax treatment in regards to fuel compared to other forms of transport. It's ironic to see supposed supporters of the free market constantly arguing for aviation to be given special treatment.

Given that environmental pollution kills millions of people worldwide every year, I assume those who think it can be ignored, would also be in favour of removing all airport security, since terrorism would kill far far fewer people than pollution every year even without any security. Fascinating how irrational people can be in what concerns them.
 
uta999
Topic Author
Posts: 904
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:10 am

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Sun Mar 01, 2020 8:23 pm

It’s more irrational to think not building one runway in the southeast of England, is going to have any environmental impact at all. Particularly given the average 20 minute delays, plus 15 minute taxi times (x 480000) now, which would evaporate completely by building a third runway.

This ruling is just Nimbies using the law to get their own way, with little impact on helping climate change.
Your computer just got better
 
Malayil
Posts: 154
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 1:04 pm

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Sun Mar 01, 2020 8:48 pm

Southeast England desperately needs another runway. If Heathrow is out, here's to hoping Gatwick gets a second runway.
 
Turnhouse1
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Sun Mar 01, 2020 10:39 pm

Malayil wrote:
Southeast England desperately needs another runway. If Heathrow is out, here's to hoping Gatwick gets a second runway.


But does it? How many destinations are not served from at least one of the London Airports? And how many are served by the largest aircraft available? There is a lot of scope to increase capacity in SE England, without another runway. Both through improved runway utilisation and up-gauging. Ideally where the Emissions per Available Seat Mile (EASM) goes down.
 
User avatar
spinotter
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 1:37 am

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Mon Mar 02, 2020 12:22 am

Iloveboeing wrote:
jamsco99 wrote:
Armodeen wrote:
A lot of us who don’t live next to Heathrow are pretty exasperated by this whole situation. Just build the damn expansion already.

I can understand those living next door to LHR being against it though.


You mean the people who decided to move next door to an international airport,complaining about noise?


That's the thing; those people should never have been allowed to move there in the first place. London should have done what Denver and Kansas City did and that was to acquire a bunch of land in the beginning and not allow development to get in the way. Kansas City has 10,000 acres of land with their airport and I believe Denver has 34,000 acres with theirs.

I think LHR should get a third runway; if not, they should close LHR, LGW, LCY, LUT and STN simultaneously and build a gigantic airport on an artificial island out at sea. HKG did it, so why can't London?


I can't decide if you are being sarcastic or what. Let's take the village of Sipson - it was already urbanizing in 1890 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sipson). Heathrow Airport originated in 1929 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heathrow_Airport. So "decided to move next door" is not an accurate account of reality - and much more importantly, the human race needs to start curtailing its polluting air traffic, are you not agreed? This is a victory for the human race - no third runway at Heathrow.
 
Planetalk
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:12 pm

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Mon Mar 02, 2020 5:56 am

uta999 wrote:
It’s more irrational to think not building one runway in the southeast of England, is going to have any environmental impact at all. Particularly given the average 20 minute delays, plus 15 minute taxi times (x 480000) now, which would evaporate completely by building a third runway.

This ruling is just Nimbies using the law to get their own way, with little impact on helping climate change.


Planes won't need to taxi anymore? Fascinating, this runway is more advanced than I realised, does.the runway taxi to the plane?

If you think they won't use a new runway at capacity you're in cloud cuckoo land. There will still be the same holding and delays, just 1.5 times more. Trying to pretend a new runway is beneficial for the environment because a lot more planes will have to go into holding a bit less is absurd.

Again nothing to do with NIMBYs. The government isn't even appealing it, the government doesn't want the runway. And outside of this forum I don't think many people do, it is simply irrelevant in the scheme of things. Brexit has probably already killed any business case for a third runway. We have far bigger things to worry about.
 
uta999
Topic Author
Posts: 904
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:10 am

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Tue Mar 03, 2020 4:26 pm

With three runways, the taxi distance to/from the holding point(s) will be greatly reduced, as at least two of the runways will be used in mixed-mode. It will also mean there are two departure runways during the peaks, and two landing runways most of the time. That's an awful lot less wasted fuel on the ground and in the air. Added to this are the planned new stands, reducing the amount of time waiting for one, as often happens now. Even with an increase in aircraft using LHR, it will not fill up for another 20 years by which time technology will have moved on.

The various groups taking legal action are well known anti-third runway Nimbies. They have just changed tack to use CC to get their way. In 2018 UK MP's voted by 415 to 119 in favour of building a third runway at London's Heathrow airport.

Even HS2 is not immune to this nonsense now. UK PLC is doomed.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51722251
Your computer just got better
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 4111
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Tue Mar 03, 2020 10:43 pm

uta999 wrote:
It’s more irrational to think not building one runway in the southeast of England, is going to have any environmental impact at all. Particularly given the average 20 minute delays, plus 15 minute taxi times (x 480000) now, which would evaporate completely by building a third runway.

This ruling is just Nimbies using the law to get their own way, with little impact on helping climate change.


If you would do the math, you will quickly find out that the extra fuel consumption (and thus carbon emissions) of the 20 minute delay and 15 minutes taxi time, is small change compared to the fuel consumption of 100 000+ extra flights that a third runway would enable (just the take-off and initial climb to 10 000 ft trumps the fuel consump[tion of your 20 minute delay and 15 minute taxi time, never mind the fuel required to reach destination).
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
Sokes
Posts: 1308
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Wed Mar 04, 2020 1:13 pm

Blerg wrote:
Heathrow should ban all those who advocate against the third runway from flying from there. Then again, none of these greens should be flying from anywhere, they should use eco-friendly transport means like bicycles or paddle boats.


Just because I don't want people to shit in public gardens doesn't mean that I should never go to toilet again. Maybe there are people not concerned about CO2 who consider population density around the third runway as unsuitable?


wawaman wrote:
It is worth looking at the decision of the court here. This is not about a bunch of green protesters. It is about the court of appear ruling that the expansion is illegal. i.e. against UK law made by parliament. You don't get around that by rubbishing the protesters. Therefore you can only assume that this is the decision the government wanted.


Thank you.
Liberty requires that administration can not do decisions on will and that their decisions can be challenged before courts. Independent judges have to apply law, whatever may be their personal opinion.


TC957 wrote:
FluidFlow wrote:
...
160km of tunnel with 115km of track build for $10B. For half the costs of the HS2 they probably could build one tunnel from London to Birmingham without destroying anything on the surface.

Think about the poor moles they will be displacing if they built such a tunnel....


Your statement shows a lack of empathy with moles. I guess the problem is that when general franchise was introduced, moles were kept out. At least some greens try to represent "mole" positions.


Bongodog49 wrote:
The Government hasn't as such violated any of its own laws, the Judges have made a link between two pieces of legislation i.e. the Paris accord where nations agreed to cut emissions and the bill to build the 3rd runway and said that the Govt needs to clearly state how it will build a 3rd runway whilst meeting the paris emissions promise. There is to the best of my knowledge nothing in UK planning law that presently states that applications have to be in accordance with the agreement to cut emissions. If there were literally all development in the UK would grind to a halt.


I struggle to believe that. If true the judges grossly overstepped their authority.


spinotter wrote:
This is a victory for the human race - no third runway at Heathrow.


Image
source:https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/features/snapshotsofthepast/11754623.remembering-sir-winston-churchill-iconic-prime-minister-who-led-the-country-to-victory/
Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
 
User avatar
SQ32
Posts: 108
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2018 2:18 pm

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Wed Mar 04, 2020 1:32 pm

It is hubris to think that an insignificant contribution of CO2 can have great impact on weather. Come on, human are not God.
 
kayik
Posts: 114
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:58 pm

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Wed Mar 04, 2020 1:35 pm

Sokes wrote:
Bongodog49 wrote:
The Government hasn't as such violated any of its own laws, the Judges have made a link between two pieces of legislation i.e. the Paris accord where nations agreed to cut emissions and the bill to build the 3rd runway and said that the Govt needs to clearly state how it will build a 3rd runway whilst meeting the paris emissions promise. There is to the best of my knowledge nothing in UK planning law that presently states that applications have to be in accordance with the agreement to cut emissions. If there were literally all development in the UK would grind to a halt.


I struggle to believe that. If true the judges grossly overstepped their authority.


UK has case law. Nothing written. Judges just judge, literally. It perfectly fits in to judges' authority. If you don't like the ruling you take it to lords of law. They again judge and document their reasoning. Times change, reasons change, until a new ruling comes due to changing circumstances, it is the law.
 
Sokes
Posts: 1308
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Wed Mar 04, 2020 1:47 pm

I believe what Heathrow needs in order to meet environmental obligations is a railgun for short distance traffic.

"As of 2020, railguns have been researched as weapons utilising electromagnetic forces to impart a very high kinetic energy to a projectile (e.g. APFSDS) rather than using conventional propellants. While explosive-powered military guns cannot readily achieve a muzzle velocity of more than ≈2 km/s, railguns can readily exceed 3 km/s."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun

Critics may object to the acceleration. However humans are tougher than generally assumed:
"The record for peak experimental horizontal g-force tolerance is held by acceleration pioneer John Stapp, in a series of rocket sled deceleration experiments culminating in a late 1954 test in which he was clocked in a little over a second from a land speed of Mach 0.9. He survived a peak "eyeballs-out" acceleration of 46.2 times the acceleration of gravity, and more than 25 g for 1.1 seconds, proving that the human body is capable of this. Stapp lived another 45 years to age 89[17] without any ill effects.[18]

The highest recorded G-force experienced by a human who survived was during the 2003 IndyCar Series finale at Texas Motor Speedway on October 12, 2003 in the 2003 Chevy 500 when the car driven by Kenny Bräck made wheel-to-wheel contact with Tomas Scheckter's car. This immediately resulted in Bräck's car impacting the catch fence that would record a peak of 214 g."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-force#Horizontal

The tricky question is how to make a nice gliding wing that can withstand the starting speed? How much starting speed is required to reach Paris, Amsterdam and northern British cities?
Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
 
Sokes
Posts: 1308
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Wed Mar 04, 2020 3:11 pm

Sokes wrote:
...He survived a peak "eyeballs-out" acceleration of 46.2 times the acceleration of gravity, and more than 25 g for 1.1 seconds, proving that the human body is capable of this. Stapp lived another 45 years to age 89[17] without any ill effects.[18]

...


It sounds more dramatic than it is. For visualisation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7c55bM9_GYo
Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
 
NiMar
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2019 7:08 pm

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Wed Mar 04, 2020 3:47 pm

SQ32 wrote:
It is hubris to think that an insignificant contribution of CO2 can have great impact on weather. Come on, human are not God.


Wow...
 
User avatar
spinotter
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 1:37 am

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Wed Mar 04, 2020 4:17 pm

SQ32 wrote:
It is hubris to think that an insignificant contribution of CO2 can have great impact on weather. Come on, human are not God.


Do you really believe that? Was it hubris that made the early photosynthesizers believe that they could increase the proportion of oxygen in the atmosphere from essentially zero to its current 20-21%? Well, if it was hubris it was hubris rewarded, because they achieved their goal and it meant that many anaerobic orgnisms were killed off or had to retreat to anaerobic environments. So let's not be so falsely modest about the capability of human beings to perform our own wrecking operation on the biosphere - we are already well on our way down that path. And by the way, there is no god or goddess or godthem. We human beings are currently the most godlike beings that we know in the universe.
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 4111
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Wed Mar 04, 2020 4:39 pm

SQ32 wrote:
It is hubris to think that an insignificant contribution of CO2 can have great impact on weather. Come on, human are not God.


Earth has been scrubbing carbon atmosphere for (hundreds of) millions of years and storing that in the ground (all the carbon in oil, gas, coal etc. at one time was part of our atmosphere). Humans are digging and pumping that carbon up and burning in a matter of a couple of hundred years, releasing/returning it as CO2 in our atmoshepere. In a process that is thousands, perhaps million times faster than earth can scrub it.

It is hubris to think there will be no atmospheric reaction in releasing that carbon back into the atmosphere thousands, perhaps million times faster (God has nothing to do with this . . . ).
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
Breathe
Posts: 664
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:06 pm

Re: Environment campaigners win Heathrow runway ruling

Thu May 07, 2020 2:26 pm

Heathrow Airport has been granted permission to appeal against a block on its plans for a third runway.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-52556421

n February the Court of Appeal found the government decision to allow the plans to go ahead was unlawful.

At the time the court said the government had not taken its climate commitments into account, but Heathrow said it would appeal.

The Supreme Court has now given permission for an appeal to go ahead.

Heathrow said it would go ahead with the appeal, despite the aviation sector taking a massive hit from the coronavirus crisis.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos