Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

Which London airport needs another runway?

Which London airport needs another runway?

  • Heathrow

    Votes: 7 5.9%

  • Gatwick

    Votes: 66 55.5%

  • Heathrow and Gatwick both need one more runway

    Votes: 32 26.9%

  • Neither. It's fine as it is.

    Votes: 14 11.8%
  • Total voters
    119


Creaky

Creaky

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2013
3,843
Hookwood - Nr Horley
wellquickwoody said:
Anyone in Sussex, other than the NIMBYs in Charlwood, should vote for LGW as it will bring a massive boost to the local economy.

The NIMBY's should just move ASAP, the airport has been there longer than they have, should have thought about this earlier.
Click to expand...

The proposed second runway for Gatwick is to the South of the existing runway and as such will not really affect the residents of Charlwood.

On a personal basis I preferred the Northern runway proposal as under those plans our land would be subject to compulsory purchase for airport warehousing!
 




The Andy Naylor Fan Club

The Andy Naylor Fan Club

Well-known member
Aug 31, 2012
5,147
Right Here, Right Now
BensGrandad said:
I know that was said as a joke but could not more use be made of small airports for small and private planes thus reducing the load on the likes of Gatwick and Heathrow or do they not accommodate private fliers with their personal planes.
Click to expand...

I'm no expert but I would imagine that the small airports have short runways and could not accommodate large commercial aircraft. That said I would not be surprised if there are some small airports that could be enlarged to take some of the strain.
 




G

goldstone

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
7,123
wellquickwoody said:
Anyone in Sussex, other than the NIMBYs in Charlwood, should vote for LGW as it will bring a massive boost to the local economy.

The NIMBY's should just move ASAP, the airport has been there longer than they have, should have thought about this earlier.
Click to expand...

The fact is that Gatwick is located in the wrong place. Major airlines want to fly to Heathrow and if the only option is Gatwick they will either not fly to London, or take Gatwick as a short term option until they can obtain Heathrow slots.

Gatwick's catchment area is far too small: Sussex, parts of Kent, parts of Surrey, parts of south London. Apart from those areas it is easier to get to Heathrow than Gatwick from every other part of the country. In fact from most places you have to drive right by Heathrow to get to Gatwick.

Business travellers want Heathrow. Gatwick is just too far from central London. Sure there's the train, but the majority of premium class business travellers prefer to be driven, and as we all know Gatwick from central London by road is a disaster.

Sorry, but Gatwick just isn't what airlines or passengers want.
 


C

Cian

Well-known member
Jul 16, 2003
14,262
Dublin, Ireland
Worthingite said:
This might sound like a mental question, but could they not develop Northolt for passenger service? Face it the runway is definitely long enough!!!!
Click to expand...

The issue isn't empty runway capacity for new point to point services - Luton, Stansted and Southend have that. Its for connecting traffic and new routes that will rely on connecting traffic to justify them - and really only Heathrow and Gatwick can offer that.

BensGrandad said:
I know that was said as a joke but could not more use be made of small airports for small and private planes thus reducing the load on the likes of Gatwick and Heathrow or do they not accommodate private fliers with their personal planes.
Click to expand...

Rarely and not enough to make an impact.
 






nicko31

nicko31

Well-known member
Jan 7, 2010
17,595
Gods country fortnightly
We need to find ways to reduce flying. Another runway means another lane on the M25, M23 etc.....until we all just drown in pollution..
 


R

Raleigh Chopper

New member
Sep 1, 2011
12,054
Plymouth
I know that LHR is full up but just about holds it own, if only 1 can have it, it must be LGW and expanded with 1st class connections to central London. More airlines should then fly there like American, United, Cathay Pacific, South African, Dan Air etc etc, rather than expand LHR share the load with Gatwick allowing more slots for both airports.
Holiday flights should all go to Luton, Stanstead.
 




M

Mellor 3 Ward 4

Well-known member
Jul 27, 2004
9,805
saaf of the water
Neither.

Boris Island was the way to go. Anyone who says it's not viable should look to Hong Kong.

Anyone who travels around the M25 knows that whether it's Gatwick or Heathrow, traffic will be a nightmare.

Sussex is a beautiful county, personally I'd like to keep it that way.
 


beorhthelm

beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,310
goldstone said:
The fact is that Gatwick is located in the wrong place. Major airlines want to fly to Heathrow and if the only option is Gatwick they will either not fly to London, or take Gatwick as a short term option until they can obtain Heathrow slots..
Click to expand...

British Airways wants Heathrow. other majors wouldnt really care much for the "hub" market where passengers get off one plane and onto another, and it is this market that is driving the requirement for more capacity, because really there is plenty of capacity for straight forward point to point flights.

its true that business favours Heathrow, down to perception because of distance. in fact its as quick to get from Gatwick to Victoria as it is Heathrow to Green Park. (and to the City requires changes on the underground eitherway). spot on about the road options, which i think is the only reason Heathrow is in the running.

the problem is that passengers in the holiday market dont really want or need either - they have Mancester, Stanstead, Birmingham, Luton, Edinburgh, East Midlands, Liverpool, etc. etc. we have conflicting interests: the airlines that want high profile destinations that charge premium business/first class rates, and the airports that want traffic to charge landing fees and retail rents. in to this we throw ideas around national prestige and boosting the economy by serving routes to far flung places. in reality Heathrow could give over slots from holiday destinations to the business routes if that was such a concern for them.

in the end, neither are suitable, Gatwick is in the wrong place nationally and Heatrow is in the wrong part of the capital so everything has to fly over some of the most expensive real estate in teh world. it'll be interesting if they do ever get the thrid runway how long it takes the people of Kensignton and Chelsea to realise the new run way will put aircraft right over them, rather than the less fashionable postcodes to the south.

on balance, since its been decided we must have an extra runway, Gatwick is the lowest impact, so the best plan. added to this, it should lead to significant upgrade of the Brighton Mainline to support it, so its good for Sussex and we should all back it.
 
Last edited:


Superphil

Superphil

Dismember
Jul 7, 2003
25,419
In a pile of football shirts
Stanstead, or Luton, both easy solutions, minimal disruption, jobs a good'un
 




dazzer6666

dazzer6666

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Mar 27, 2013
52,468
Burgess Hill
Raleigh Chopper said:
I know that LHR is full up but just about holds it own, if only 1 can have it, it must be LGW and expanded with 1st class connections to central London. More airlines should then fly there like American, United, Cathay Pacific, South African, Dan Air etc etc, rather than expand LHR share the load with Gatwick allowing more slots for both airports.
Holiday flights should all go to Luton, Stanstead.
Click to expand...

Dan Air ?!! Went tits up in about 1992
 


G

goldstone

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
7,123
Raleigh Chopper said:
I know that LHR is full up but just about holds it own, if only 1 can have it, it must be LGW and expanded with 1st class connections to central London. More airlines should then fly there like American, United, Cathay Pacific, South African, Dan Air etc etc, rather than expand LHR share the load with Gatwick allowing more slots for both airports.
Holiday flights should all go to Luton, Stanstead.
Click to expand...

There is no way the airlines you list will operate flights to Gatwick. Unfortunately the vast majority of passengers and airlines (particularly foreign airlines) just will not choose to fly to Gatwick. The only workable solution is another runway at Heathrow.
 


M

Mellor 3 Ward 4

Well-known member
Jul 27, 2004
9,805
saaf of the water
Superphil said:
Stanstead, or Luton, both easy solutions, minimal disruption, jobs a good'un
Click to expand...

Both already ruled out, as has my preferred option of Boris Island.

I was directly involved when the new airport was built at Hong Kong, and honestly believe a similar project could have worked here.

Gatwick is in the wrong place, but politically is an easier option, so I think it will go there (unfortunately IMO)
 




W

West Hoathly Seagull

Honorary Ruffian
Aug 26, 2003
3,540
Sharpthorne/SW11
Gatwick might mean that we would at last get some improved roads in the East Grinstead area: the A264 bypasses Horsham and Crawley as a dual carriageway, then as soon as you cross the M23 you go straight to a single carriageway, which is regularly jammed up. It is the only way from Crawley to East Grinstead unless you go via Turners Hill. I just hope if it gets the go-ahead that this happens; Sharpthorne and West Hoathly already act as an unofficial bypass - if you want to see this, try getting onto the B2028 at Selsfield Common during the rush hour.

As others have said, the reason the airlines favour Heathrow is that most of the premium business is within an hour. Work it out: 10 First Class passengers paying £6000 or more, 70-80 Business Class passengers at £3000-4000 and 250 in Economy going for whatever deal they can get, say an average of £500-800.

Which do I favour? To be honest, I'm not sure - I should favour Gatwick; having to travel to Heathrow to go anywhere long distance apart from a few places in the USA and Far East is a pain in the proverbial, but though I'm not a NIMBY I just fear not being able to move through my local villages.
 
Last edited:




beorhthelm

beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,310
Mellor 3 Ward 4 said:
Both already ruled out, as has my preferred option of Boris Island.

I was directly involved when the new airport was built at Hong Kong, and honestly believe a similar project could have worked here.

Gatwick is in the wrong place, but politically is an easier option, so I think it will go there (unfortunately IMO)
Click to expand...

Boris Island has the same location problems as Gatwick, with less infrastructure in place and only works economically if it replaces Heathrow. that would require a relocation of tens of thousands of people from west London to north Kent, none of which is costed in the plans as far is understand.
 


8ace

8ace

Banned
Jul 21, 2003
23,811
Brighton
beorhthelm said:
its true that business favours Heathrow, down to perception because of distance. in fact its as quick to get from Gatwick to Victoria as it is Heathrow to Green Park. (and to the City requires changes on the underground eitherway). spot on about the road options, which i think is the only reason Heathrow is in the running.
Click to expand...

CrossRail should be running by then.
 








You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here