atfc village
Well-known member
Farnborough.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Which London airport needs another runway?
- Thread starter easynow
- Start date
BensGrandad
New member
You were complaining of the time it takes to get from JFK to Manhattan I just mentioned a quicker alternative, that many do not appreciate or know of. You would being a resident of NYC
AmexRuislip
Trainee Spy 🕵️♂️
I guess so, but probably would mean extending in to green belt land / 'farmer giles' field!!
Barham's tash
Well-known member
Or surely far more likely would be a loss of jobs for the west Londoners and job opportunities for east Londoners and Kent inhabitants?
I think any move other than Gatwick = political suicide.
Tom Hark Preston Park
Will Post For Cash
- Jul 6, 2003
- 70,418
Manston airport in Kent has a nine thousand foot long runway and massive potential - if it could be reclaimed from the grasping new owners who recently closed it down.
Else Gatwick. Far more civilised than Heathrow.
Else Gatwick. Far more civilised than Heathrow.
None of them. There are too many planes. What we should be looking at is closing down airports and getting people to use alternative methods of transport instead.
(Well, someone usually comes up with that sort of ill-considered argument whenever we discuss transport)
(Well, someone usually comes up with that sort of ill-considered argument whenever we discuss transport)
We need to take the emphasis away from the southeast and stop flying airplanes over London full stop.
A radical change is needed. Bulldoze Heathrow and turn into either green belt, nature reserve or another eco new town, akin Milton Keynes.
Build another brand new, 4 runway, state of the art airport in the flood planes up just north of Aylesbury, which will serve more as a national airport, with high speed train links (HS1/2) serving London and other major cities in the UK, thus also reducing the need for so much domestic air travel and also accommodating night flights which Heathrow does not allow. Gatwick should continue as a regional airport only at its current capacity.
As a pilot who flies into Heathrow everyday I find it incredible that we are talking about increasing the amount of aircraft flying directly over London, with the associated environmental and noise issues, not to mention the risk of a rogue plane taking a dislike to the Houses of Parliament, etc. Most major city airports I fly into do not have flight paths directly over their main populous and many are 30 miles or so from the centre, served by excellent trains or roads so you are potentially in the centre within 30 mins anyway.
This concept would be good for the UK in general, reduce the disparity between the South East and the rest of the UK, give an addition purpose to HS1/2/3 and be the sensible environmental option.
Unfortunately with our lack of political will, (building runways and airports are not a vote winner) this will not happen in our life-time and we'll fall further behind the rest of the world who are forging ahead with change.
A radical change is needed. Bulldoze Heathrow and turn into either green belt, nature reserve or another eco new town, akin Milton Keynes.
Build another brand new, 4 runway, state of the art airport in the flood planes up just north of Aylesbury, which will serve more as a national airport, with high speed train links (HS1/2) serving London and other major cities in the UK, thus also reducing the need for so much domestic air travel and also accommodating night flights which Heathrow does not allow. Gatwick should continue as a regional airport only at its current capacity.
As a pilot who flies into Heathrow everyday I find it incredible that we are talking about increasing the amount of aircraft flying directly over London, with the associated environmental and noise issues, not to mention the risk of a rogue plane taking a dislike to the Houses of Parliament, etc. Most major city airports I fly into do not have flight paths directly over their main populous and many are 30 miles or so from the centre, served by excellent trains or roads so you are potentially in the centre within 30 mins anyway.
This concept would be good for the UK in general, reduce the disparity between the South East and the rest of the UK, give an addition purpose to HS1/2/3 and be the sensible environmental option.
Unfortunately with our lack of political will, (building runways and airports are not a vote winner) this will not happen in our life-time and we'll fall further behind the rest of the world who are forging ahead with change.
I used to work at the CAA at Gatwick and the planning for this has been going on for over a decade. I was taken on a drive to see what would be destroyed should the second runway become reality - it was absolutely horrific. Yes there would be a boost to the local economy but a lot of people would lose their homes and an awful lot of countryside would be destroyed. Boris airport was by far the best idea for destroying less peoples lives and environmentally.
I see your point, but Sussex residents should still back the LGW option for economic reasons.
Back to the caves!
D
Deleted member 18477
Guest
If we build another runway at either gatwick or Heathrow then we need to build more lanes on the motorways and have more trains running first.
Washboard Didgets
Graphic Designer
If LHR gets the nod, the runway is allegedly planned for the area where the A4 / Bath Road is, which includes Harmondsworth, Sipson & Harlington resulting in a big upheaval for lots of people.
The debate has been going on for a while now.
Another angle is that if it is built, it may mean the closure of the runway at RAF Northolt, which could lose the MOD a fortune??
Together with the proposed HS2 carving its way through my neighbourhood, its going to be a fun ride all the way
View attachment 60134
No need to speculate, the maps showing the shortlisted runway options are public. And they are further west at Heathrow resulting in major works to divert the M25 under the new runway(s).
View attachment 60140
View attachment 60141
Apparently Gatwick will have much improved train services in the next two years, meaning a London bound train will leave every 150 seconds at peak times. If the second runway is approved there will be a new terminal and transport hub.
View attachment 60142
View attachment 60143
I disagree. A second runway would mean more houses needed and pressure to approve the Mayfields development between Sayers Common and Henfield ... an awful plan for a greenfield site.
More trains to London from Gatwick? How? East Croydon is already a bottleneck with no capacity for additional train paths.
The M23 could not handle much more traffic. Build another lane in each direction? Pointless unless the M25 was widened AGAIN.
All in all an additional runway at Gatwick is very bad news for Sussex residents.
Washboard Didgets
Graphic Designer
Not sure that is accurate. Most of the land that would be needed for a second runway at Gatwick has been safeguarded for years preventing it being built on. There aren't any residential areas in that piece of land, only a handful of isolated houses. The majority of the buildings in the path of the runway are industrial sheds which can/will be relocated.
Were you driven around the area that a northern option would take? In which case villages like Charlwood and Povey Cross would have been affected.
Both the Heathrow and Gatwick shortlisted options are in the images I attached to my last post (not sure why they aren't showing inline?! haven't posted images on here recently).
There seems to be a lot of misinformation going around or old options from years back being confused for the options shortlisted by the Airports Commission.
Also I seem to remember that Boris Island would have had an impact on a lot of people living on the island of Grain, not to mention the massive impact of building new roads, railway links, four(?) runways and all the associated infrastructure plus a lot of new housing estates to accommodate all the staff that would be needed to run a massive new hub airport?
Heathrow needs an extra runway just to deal with its current capacity adequately and efficiently. It runs at way too high capacity compared to other major airports.
AmexRuislip
Trainee Spy 🕵️♂️
As politely as is possible sir.......BALDERDASH!
To the post overall, and especially the bit about the M23.
Raleigh Chopper
New member
I wondered who would be the first to notice my little jokelet that I slipped in there.
So the airport doubles in size. Currently 23,500 on-airport jobs, so lets very conservatively assume another 5,000 people required. Where exactly will they live? How will they get to/from work? I can forsee road chaos on local roads around the airport and on the M23/M25 if you take into account the travel plans of thousands of additional passengers and staff.
Not exactly sure what's balderdash about that?
So if it happens, not only will the runway get built but there will be investment in infrastructure too presumably. Homes will need to be built, road links improved, rail links upgraded. And the overall winner will be...........Sussex! There will be some losers, residents of the village of 'I never thought the airport might be expanded', and a few others in the short to medium term only.
What's not to like?