|
Post by sid on Sept 2, 2014 8:58:38 GMT
I think Boris has done ok, but it seems his crazy 'Boris Island' idea has finally been discarded. Some would say it's not as crazy as either adding a third runway at Heathrow or closing Heathrow Airport altogether. Personally, I think its one of the more sensible ideas out there regarding the need to expand London airport capacity. Yes I thought the idea behind Boris Island was to close Heathrow? The whole thing just seemed like Fantasy Island to me, expansion at Gatwick would seem the most viable option?
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Sept 2, 2014 9:28:29 GMT
Some would say it's not as crazy as either adding a third runway at Heathrow or closing Heathrow Airport altogether. Personally, I think its one of the more sensible ideas out there regarding the need to expand London airport capacity. Yes I thought the idea behind Boris Island was to close Heathrow? The whole thing just seemed like Fantasy Island to me, expansion at Gatwick would seem the most viable option? "Boris Island" is not a new concept. Back in the 70's(?) there was a similar proposal called Maplin Sands off the coast of Southend. Another was the use of RAF Manston, which was used in the past as an emergency airfield due to the length of the runway.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Sept 2, 2014 9:39:04 GMT
Yes I thought the idea behind Boris Island was to close Heathrow? The whole thing just seemed like Fantasy Island to me, expansion at Gatwick would seem the most viable option? "Boris Island" is not a new concept. Back in the 70's(?) there was a similar proposal called Maplin Sands off the coast of Southend. Another was the use of RAF Manston, which was used in the past as an emergency airfield due to the length of the runway. Manston is surely a far more viable option? Seems a shame to see stood idle.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Sept 2, 2014 11:29:14 GMT
I think Boris has done ok, but it seems his crazy 'Boris Island' idea has finally been discarded. Some would say it's not as crazy as either adding a third runway at Heathrow or closing Heathrow Airport altogether. Personally, I think its one of the more sensible ideas out there regarding the need to expand London airport capacity. Personally I think expanding Heathrow is possibly the best solution out there. It's not going to be easy moving 4/5 Terminals worth of airplanes to completely another airport as well as constructing a whole new Island. As I'm pretty sure the airlines that are currently at Heathrow are probably not willing to move out of the airport to move to an airport which is further from London and risk loosing their runway slot
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 2, 2014 17:39:21 GMT
Some would say it's not as crazy as either adding a third runway at Heathrow or closing Heathrow Airport altogether. Personally, I think its one of the more sensible ideas out there regarding the need to expand London airport capacity. Personally I think expanding Heathrow is possibly the best solution out there. It's not going to be easy moving 4/5 Terminals worth of airplanes to completely another airport as well as constructing a whole new Island. As I'm pretty sure the airlines that are currently at Heathrow are probably not willing to move out of the airport to move to an airport which is further from London and risk loosing their runway slot I don't think the '3rd runway at Heathrow' idea will ever happen because of the amount of uproar from locals on all sides of the airport, not least the people living in Sipson, Harlington & Harmondsworth where the third runway would be plonked. I'm very much against the Heathrow idea. Another option that could of been explored was rather than build a new garden city on the Hoo peninsula, a new airport could of been built there instead - this would eradicate the cost of building an island and you wouldn't need to move 5 terminals worth of airplanes - you could move 2 or 3 terminals of airplanes to Hoo leaving Heathrow with plenty of capacity to bring in new connections.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2014 18:01:20 GMT
Personally I think expanding Heathrow is possibly the best solution out there. It's not going to be easy moving 4/5 Terminals worth of airplanes to completely another airport as well as constructing a whole new Island. As I'm pretty sure the airlines that are currently at Heathrow are probably not willing to move out of the airport to move to an airport which is further from London and risk loosing their runway slot I don't think the '3rd runway at Heathrow' idea will ever happen because of the amount of uproar from locals on all sides of the airport, not least the people living in Sipson, Harlington & Harmondsworth where the third runway would be plonked. I'm very much against the Heathrow idea. Another option that could of been explored was rather than build a new garden city on the Hoo peninsula, a new airport could of been built there instead - this would eradicate the cost of building an island and you wouldn't need to move 5 terminals worth of airplanes - you could move 2 or 3 terminals of airplanes to Hoo leaving Heathrow with plenty of capacity to bring in new connections. Unfortunately for a new London Airport to be viable Heathrow would have to close ... The new one would just not get the business if Heathrow were to remain open. If there is a new London airport anywhere Heathrow has to close. So the options are expand Heathrow or Gatwick ... otherwise Heathrow will end up getting closed down.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Sept 2, 2014 22:45:14 GMT
I don't think the '3rd runway at Heathrow' idea will ever happen because of the amount of uproar from locals on all sides of the airport, not least the people living in Sipson, Harlington & Harmondsworth where the third runway would be plonked. I'm very much against the Heathrow idea. Another option that could of been explored was rather than build a new garden city on the Hoo peninsula, a new airport could of been built there instead - this would eradicate the cost of building an island and you wouldn't need to move 5 terminals worth of airplanes - you could move 2 or 3 terminals of airplanes to Hoo leaving Heathrow with plenty of capacity to bring in new connections. Unfortunately for a new London Airport to be viable Heathrow would have to close ... The new one would just not get the business if Heathrow were to remain open. If there is a new London airport anywhere Heathrow has to close. So the options are expand Heathrow or Gatwick ... otherwise Heathrow will end up getting closed down. Considering Heathrow have got plans for the next 10 years demolishing and expanding terminals. As well as a possible terminal 5D, I think closing Heathrow would be a huge waste of money. Another solution to Heathrow is possibly the use of High Capacity aircraft such as the 747-8 and A380 should possibly help. But looking at some airlines (Emirates and Singapore Airlines) even the A380s need multiple journeys a day. I think if Heathrow should expand it needs to be towards the North towards the M4 motorway, there they will also have space for a 6th Terminal. But one option I have thought of for a while is that they could hve a terminal that is mostly underground, similar to Terminal 3 at Dubai International. That way they would only need space for the boarding gates and the concourses will not take up as much space as the main terminal buildings. I don't know why people these days complain about noise pollution from the planes, as a lot of the newer aircraft are pretty quiet these days. Another thing I don't understand is the fact people complain about Air Pollution, not expanding Heathrow isn't really going to stop Air Pollution. Planes still fly to other countries and if another airport gets built it's inevitable that there is going to be air pollution from that.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 3, 2014 0:08:57 GMT
Unfortunately for a new London Airport to be viable Heathrow would have to close ... The new one would just not get the business if Heathrow were to remain open. If there is a new London airport anywhere Heathrow has to close. So the options are expand Heathrow or Gatwick ... otherwise Heathrow will end up getting closed down. Considering Heathrow have got plans for the next 10 years demolishing and expanding terminals. As well as a possible terminal 5D, I think closing Heathrow would be a huge waste of money. Another solution to Heathrow is possibly the use of High Capacity aircraft such as the 747-8 and A380 should possibly help. But looking at some airlines (Emirates and Singapore Airlines) even the A380s need multiple journeys a day. I think if Heathrow should expand it needs to be towards the North towards the M4 motorway, there they will also have space for a 6th Terminal. But one option I have thought of for a while is that they could hve a terminal that is mostly underground, similar to Terminal 3 at Dubai International. That way they would only need space for the boarding gates and the concourses will not take up as much space as the main terminal buildings. I don't know why people these days complain about noise pollution from the planes, as a lot of the newer aircraft are pretty quiet these days. Another thing I don't understand is the fact people complain about Air Pollution, not expanding Heathrow isn't really going to stop Air Pollution. Planes still fly to other countries and if another airport gets built it's inevitable that there is going to be air pollution from that. Most of the people who are against the third runway at Heathrow are actually far more concerned about the runway being slapped over villages that lie to the north of Heathrow - I don't see why the residents of Sipson, Harlington & Harmondsworth should have to give up to their homes to allow a third runway. Expanding Gatwick, for me, is a better option - there is some space north east of the airport that could be utilised and it would effect far fewer people and should involve no nearby towns & villages to be demolished.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2014 8:16:27 GMT
Expansion at Gatwick, Manston and Biggin Hill would be best, I spoke to a Green Party MP yesterday and she said the domestic flights should be scrapped, I completely agree
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2014 9:41:13 GMT
Expansion at Gatwick, Manston and Biggin Hill would be best, I spoke to a Green Party MP yesterday and she said the domestic flights should be scrapped, I completely agree Green party have no idea I am afraid. Are they saying domestic air travelers should travel on the already congested roads or overcrowded trains. He could always build a new fast rail link to attract people away from domestic airlines ... Oh no they are against that as well. The Greens are great at objecting about things, but useless with coming up with suitable alternatives. The thing that is needed is an airport HUB. If either of the latter 2 of your suggestions is going to be feasible ... then a multi runway, multi terminal airport must be built on those sites to replace Heathrow.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2014 10:06:52 GMT
Expansion at Gatwick, Manston and Biggin Hill would be best, I spoke to a Green Party MP yesterday and she said the domestic flights should be scrapped, I completely agree Green party have no idea I am afraid. Are they saying domestic air travelers should travel on the already congested roads or overcrowded trains. He could always build a new fast rail link to attract people away from domestic airlines ... Oh no they are against that as well. The Greens are great at objecting about things, but useless with coming up with suitable alternatives. The thing that is needed is an airport HUB. If either of the latter 2 of your suggestions is going to be feasible ... then a multi runway, multi terminal airport must be built on those sites to replace Heathrow. They believe more investment in rail would help
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2014 10:16:25 GMT
Green party have no idea I am afraid. Are they saying domestic air travelers should travel on the already congested roads or overcrowded trains. He could always build a new fast rail link to attract people away from domestic airlines ... Oh no they are against that as well. The Greens are great at objecting about things, but useless with coming up with suitable alternatives. The thing that is needed is an airport HUB. If either of the latter 2 of your suggestions is going to be feasible ... then a multi runway, multi terminal airport must be built on those sites to replace Heathrow. They believe more investment in rail would help Why do they not support HS2 then? That is a major potential investment in rail.
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Sept 3, 2014 10:22:59 GMT
Green party have no idea I am afraid. Are they saying domestic air travelers should travel on the already congested roads or overcrowded trains. He could always build a new fast rail link to attract people away from domestic airlines ... Oh no they are against that as well. The Greens are great at objecting about things, but useless with coming up with suitable alternatives.
The thing that is needed is an airport HUB. If either of the latter 2 of your suggestions is going to be feasible ... then a multi runway, multi terminal airport must be built on those sites to replace Heathrow. They believe more investment in rail would help They would have been against the wheel if they were around at the time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2014 10:23:48 GMT
They believe more investment in rail would help Why do they not support HS2 then? That is a major potential investment in rail. Because it is environmentally damaging, and they support investment in existing lines
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Sept 3, 2014 10:26:45 GMT
Expansion at Gatwick, Manston and Biggin Hill would be best, I spoke to a Green Party MP yesterday and she said the domestic flights should be scrapped, I completely agree "A Green Party MP" I thought there was only one elected?
|
|