|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Aug 21, 2024 8:50:41 GMT
I don't think John McDonnell would be able to stop something like that as he's not in any sort of power. Obviously not on his own but there were a large number of MPs amongst both parties who were opposed aswell as all 3 mayors so far. That will always be the case, what's important is that there's more support than opposition. |
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Aug 21, 2024 9:09:08 GMT
Try living under the flight path watching TV with windows and doors open. Can't see many benefits to the local community when its mainly business customers who arrive on trains / cabs direct to the airport. Granted there might be more jobs but the local built up residential areas should be taken into consideration. I do live under the flight path and watch TV with the windows open. There are plenty of airports around the world which are more densely populated locally and they don't complain. It's a national benefit and I'm sure any benefit provided by City Airport is more important than a few unhappy locals. Right so I am wrong in what I experience on a daily basis? I live much closer to the airport than you (based on what you say about your local bus routes). It’s not a pleasant experience noise wise for us who are so close that you can even smell the fuel. I don’t care if you turn your noise up and call us “unhappy locals”. Funny it’s okay for you to complain about buses but it’s wrong for others to complain about something that you think is fine. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Aug 21, 2024 9:41:38 GMT
I do live under the flight path and watch TV with the windows open. There are plenty of airports around the world which are more densely populated locally and they don't complain. It's a national benefit and I'm sure any benefit provided by City Airport is more important than a few unhappy locals. Right so I am wrong in what I experience on a daily basis? I live much closer to the airport than you (based on what you say about your local bus routes). It’s not a pleasant experience noise wise for us who are so close that you can even smell the fuel. I don’t care if you turn your noise up and call us “unhappy locals”. Funny it’s okay for you to complain about buses but it’s wrong for others to complain about something that you think is fine. Living closer to an airport doesn't mean much, if we are going by people's local bus routes then you don't live under the flight path which is where the majority of noise actually is, whilst I do. Baring in mind City Airport is served by a lot of smaller aircraft like A220s which produce only a very small fraction of the noise that a Boeing 777 would make over at Heathrow. Unfortunately the airport takes priority over the locals as we are talking about the UK economy, alongside UK aviation of which City Airport is a small but growingly noticeable influence. The decision has been done and given the green light and it is something that is happening now regardless. |
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Aug 21, 2024 9:57:05 GMT
I don't know why people are complaining about LCY, the increase will have many benefits to the local economy and obviously have the benefit of increasing air capacity in the local area. Now the sooner the 3rd Runway at Heathrow Airport is approved the better. I’d build a 2nd runway at Gatwick as well as the northern runway. And a 3rd at Heathrow. And a 2nd at Stansted. After those, you could look at closing City Airport and building a new town there. But in the meantime, expanding City Airport is the right thing to do. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Aug 21, 2024 10:10:23 GMT
I don't know why people are complaining about LCY, the increase will have many benefits to the local economy and obviously have the benefit of increasing air capacity in the local area. Now the sooner the 3rd Runway at Heathrow Airport is approved the better. I’d build a 2nd runway at Gatwick as well as the northern runway. And a 3rd at Heathrow. And a 2nd at Stansted. After those, you could look at closing City Airport and building a new town there. But in the meantime, expanding City Airport is the right thing to do. Completely agree, I'd probably hold off at Stansted just because there's some capacity there currently but there's no harm in future proofing at all. The UK was once a world leader in aviation and still has the knowledge to be able to do so again. Dubai and Doha have shown how you can build an economy just around having a big airport where people stop over on their way to somewhere else. London is positioned for it amazingly. |
|
|
|
Post by borneobus on Aug 21, 2024 10:36:32 GMT
I’d build a 2nd runway at Gatwick as well as the northern runway. And a 3rd at Heathrow. And a 2nd at Stansted. After those, you could look at closing City Airport and building a new town there. But in the meantime, expanding City Airport is the right thing to do. Completely agree, I'd probably hold off at Stansted just because there's some capacity there currently but there's no harm in future proofing at all. The UK was once a world leader in aviation and still has the knowledge to be able to do so again. Dubai and Doha have shown how you can build an economy just around having a big airport where people stop over on their way to somewhere else. London is positioned for it amazingly. This strategic model was first employed by Singapore / Singapore Airlines in the 1990s and of course, and as you suggest it is about the economy but also putting smaller (in terms of geographical area) nations on the 'World Map'. Critical in this approach is that it's government led, medium to long-term in outlook and supported by massive budgets to build the necessary airport / airline infrastructure that will deliver outstanding and memorable customer experience |
|
|
|
Post by borneobus on Aug 21, 2024 10:53:26 GMT
I don't know why people are complaining about LCY, the increase will have many benefits to the local economy and obviously have the benefit of increasing air capacity in the local area. Now the sooner the 3rd Runway at Heathrow Airport is approved the better. I’d build a 2nd runway at Gatwick as well as the northern runway. And a 3rd at Heathrow. And a 2nd at Stansted. After those, you could look at closing City Airport and building a new town there. But in the meantime, expanding City Airport is the right thing to do. I'm not sure that there's a business case to build a second runway at Gatwick; the perennial problem for LGW is that 'flag carriers' always want to operate solely, or primarily from/to LHR. London-City provides a different role to the other London airports and I've stated before that LCY's original business case for the airport being built was predicated on business traffic, primarily financial sector related tapping into City of London / Canary Wharf and 30 years later that remains true but also over the last decade leisure traffic with much of the feed coming from NE London and SE London (via DLR). |
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Aug 21, 2024 11:29:08 GMT
I’d build a 2nd runway at Gatwick as well as the northern runway. And a 3rd at Heathrow. And a 2nd at Stansted. After those, you could look at closing City Airport and building a new town there. But in the meantime, expanding City Airport is the right thing to do. I'm not sure that there's a business case to build a second runway at Gatwick; the perennial problem for LGW is that 'flag carriers' always want to operate solely, or primarily from/to LHR. London-City provides a different role to the other London airports and I've stated before that LCY's original business case for the airport being built was predicated on business traffic, primarily financial sector related tapping into City of London / Canary Wharf and 30 years later that remains true but also over the last decade leisure traffic with much of the feed coming from NE London and SE London (via DLR). A lot of the leisure travel from City Airport has been developed by airlines such as British Airways, whose CityFlyer subsidiary used planes on fill-in turns in between commuter and business flights. It was easy to put on a return flight to somewhere like Nice or Barcelona with the time available, time that would otherwise be unproductive. I used to use the Barcelona flight; it was usually well loaded. |
|
|
|
Post by buspete on Aug 21, 2024 18:27:27 GMT
I used to fly regularly from City to Majorca, simple Uber to Woolwich Arsenal then the DLR, not a stressful airport like Gatwick/Heathrow.
City Airport has been there for 35+ years, so I would say very few residents lived near to the airport before it opened. The main aircrafts E190/A220 are quieter than predecessors - so given that, flights should operate 7 days a week and at weekends the same as weekdays.
I would also say build the Silvertown/City Airport Station on the Elizabeth.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Aug 21, 2024 19:10:45 GMT
I used to fly regularly from City to Majorca, simple Uber to Woolwich Arsenal then the DLR, not a stressful airport like Gatwick/Heathrow. City Airport has been there for 35+ years, so I would say very few residents lived near to the airport before it opened. The main aircrafts E190/A220 are quieter than predecessors - so given that, flights should operate 7 days a week and at weekends the same as weekdays. I would also say build the Silvertown/City Airport Station on the Elizabeth. I do think it was a huge miss to not have a station at City Airport, however I imagine the logic is that the Woolwich DLR branch already had its link to the Lizzie Line while the Beckton branch didn't. I think if these extended hours soak up any demand then there should be no barrier to a 7 day a week operation much like Heathrow airport. As you rightly say most residents probably have not been there longer than the airport by this point and regardless you'll always have to make some sacrifices living near one. |
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Aug 21, 2024 19:15:18 GMT
I used to fly regularly from City to Majorca, simple Uber to Woolwich Arsenal then the DLR, not a stressful airport like Gatwick/Heathrow. City Airport has been there for 35+ years, so I would say very few residents lived near to the airport before it opened. The main aircrafts E190/A220 are quieter than predecessors - so given that, flights should operate 7 days a week and at weekends the same as weekdays. I would also say build the Silvertown/City Airport Station on the Elizabeth. I appreciate my claims of the airport being noisy is falling on deaf ears but want to share the below which was found after a minutes search, yes its old but many who live local to me agree. https://www.reddit.com/r/london/comments/ekd2f6/living_next_to_london_city_airport/ What people are not considering is just how densely populate the area around the airport is. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Aug 21, 2024 19:22:51 GMT
I used to fly regularly from City to Majorca, simple Uber to Woolwich Arsenal then the DLR, not a stressful airport like Gatwick/Heathrow. City Airport has been there for 35+ years, so I would say very few residents lived near to the airport before it opened. The main aircrafts E190/A220 are quieter than predecessors - so given that, flights should operate 7 days a week and at weekends the same as weekdays. I would also say build the Silvertown/City Airport Station on the Elizabeth. I appreciate my claims of the airport being noisy is falling on deaf ears but want to share the below which was found after a minutes search, yes its old but many who live local to me agree. https://www.reddit.com/r/london/comments/ekd2f6/living_next_to_london_city_airport/ What people are not considering is just how densely populate the area around the airport is. Nobody is debating the airport is noisy, people are saying that you shouldn't move next to an airport then complain of the noise problem. It's just something that you need to deal with and appreciate that it's probably one of the quietest airports in the country. The Embraer E190 and Airbus A220 are both some of the quietest aircraft available and the A220 at least is one of the most efficient ones too. The airport can take a huge amount of strain off Heathrow, many more European routes can be opened up as a result to Italy and the South of Spain which probably don't need planes as big as A320s. It's a bit silly when we have airlines like Emirates and Qatar taking away a lot of the demand from the UK and even British Airways/Virgin Atlantic and pumping their own economies with the money made from those airlines. That money really should be going to IAG or the Virgin Group which can be invested back into the UK economy which is how we'll need to go ahead if we're going to improve our economic state. |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Aug 21, 2024 19:27:05 GMT
I used to fly regularly from City to Majorca, simple Uber to Woolwich Arsenal then the DLR, not a stressful airport like Gatwick/Heathrow. City Airport has been there for 35+ years, so I would say very few residents lived near to the airport before it opened. The main aircrafts E190/A220 are quieter than predecessors - so given that, flights should operate 7 days a week and at weekends the same as weekdays. I would also say build the Silvertown/City Airport Station on the Elizabeth. I do think it was a huge miss to not have a station at City Airport, however I imagine the logic is that the Woolwich DLR branch already had its link to the Lizzie Line while the Beckton branch didn't. I think if these extended hours soak up any demand then there should be no barrier to a 7 day a week operation much like Heathrow airport. As you rightly say most residents probably have not been there longer than the airport by this point and regardless you'll always have to make some sacrifices living near one. I wonder if the site near the airport may be safeguarded in case there is a proposal in the future to add a station there on the Elizabeth Line? Do the platforms still remain from the former Silvertown station? I guess part of the problem is that, given the location betwen the docks and the river, there isn't much housing etc close by to the airport, and so a new station wouldn't attract many passengers who aren't going to the airport. And obviously as a smaller airport, even with the number of flights likely to increase, the potential passenger numbers may not be enough to justify the cost of a new station. With the DLR already deemed sufficient for both airport and non-airport passengers. |
|
|
|
Post by ronnie on Aug 21, 2024 19:52:17 GMT
I used to fly regularly from City to Majorca, simple Uber to Woolwich Arsenal then the DLR, not a stressful airport like Gatwick/Heathrow. City Airport has been there for 35+ years, so I would say very few residents lived near to the airport before it opened. The main aircrafts E190/A220 are quieter than predecessors - so given that, flights should operate 7 days a week and at weekends the same as weekdays. I would also say build the Silvertown/City Airport Station on the Elizabeth. I appreciate my claims of the airport being noisy is falling on deaf ears but want to share the below which was found after a minutes search, yes its old but many who live local to me agree. https://www.reddit.com/r/london/comments/ekd2f6/living_next_to_london_city_airport/ What people are not considering is just how densely populate the area around the airport is. (Disclaimer - do not mean this personally) I hear you, but I would also point out that I lived for almost 2 years in an apartment from where I could see the runway at Mumbai airport (I.e., less than 500m as the plane flies). This was 10Y back, when planes were far noisier. Also no nighttime restrictions; in fact most big international / intercontinental flights operate at night. So mostly 777/330/380/747/340 and the like. I don’t think I ever had disturbed sleep, all it takes is double glazing / triple glazing I still live next to the A2 on the 50mph stretch and once windows are closed you barely hear anything I get it that everyone wants peace and quiet but we do live in a densely populated city and the airport has been around for a fair bit of time. Unless one has been living near the airport since before it started operating, it’s not difficult to realise that airports can be noisy …. What does highly annoy me is that on one hand, in a relatively poorer part of London, one is expanding something which will increase air (and noise) pollution, despite significant local opposition. On the other hand, the same party in a different part of London, right next to one of the biggest green areas of London, LTNs are being imposed (again to ostensibly reduce pollution) but will actually increase pollution on all the border roads. Again in the face of intense local opposition So much for democracy |
|
|
|
Post by buspete on Aug 21, 2024 21:00:27 GMT
I do think it was a huge miss to not have a station at City Airport, however I imagine the logic is that the Woolwich DLR branch already had its link to the Lizzie Line while the Beckton branch didn't. I think if these extended hours soak up any demand then there should be no barrier to a 7 day a week operation much like Heathrow airport. As you rightly say most residents probably have not been there longer than the airport by this point and regardless you'll always have to make some sacrifices living near one. I wonder if the site near the airport may be safeguarded in case there is a proposal in the future to add a station there on the Elizabeth Line? Do the platforms still remain from the former Silvertown station? I guess part of the problem is that, given the location betwen the docks and the river, there isn't much housing etc close by to the airport, and so a new station wouldn't attract many passengers who aren't going to the airport. And obviously as a smaller airport, even with the number of flights likely to increase, the potential passenger numbers may not be enough to justify the cost of a new station. With the DLR already deemed sufficient for both airport and non-airport passengers. The whole point of the City Airport Station is exactly that, to give a one seat tide from Canary Wharf, which you cannot do on the DLR. |
|
