|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Dec 31, 2014 21:16:59 GMT
Heathrow seems to have lost its place as the world's busiest international airport. To Dubai international.
Heathrow's capacity seems to be a cause to this. I don't see why they can't expand the airport, as in the end this will hinder the economic development of the United Kingdom. Obviously there are some minor issues such as the villages that this could cause inconvenience to. But the people in the villages stopping the expansion of a global hub of the world, slowing down economic growth of the UK? It does look a bit silly. I also don't see what's wrong with night time operation, if people choose to live near an airport, then they should be expecting this. Nowdays you also don't have much noise as planes are getting much more quieter as well.
People are also being compensated if they will be affected by Heathrow expansion. In other areas, where people need to move out for redevelopment do it without a fuss, why can't these local villages do the same?
|
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Dec 31, 2014 21:41:47 GMT
Heathrow seems to have lost its place as the world's busiest international airport. To Dubai international. Heathrow's capacity seems to be a cause to this. I don't see why they can't expand the airport, as in the end this will hinder the economic development of the United Kingdom. Obviously there are some minor issues such as the villages that this could cause inconvenience to. But the people in the villages stopping the expansion of a global hub of the world, slowing down economic growth of the UK? It does look a bit silly. I also don't see what's wrong with night time operation, if people choose to live near an airport, then they should be expecting this. Nowdays you also don't have much noise as planes are getting much more quieter as well. People are also being compensated if they will be affected by Heathrow expansion. In other areas, where people need to move out for redevelopment do it without a fuss, why can't these local villages do the same? Be careful with that argument if you go anywhere near Harmondsworth!  Would you like a dual carriage way at the end of your garden? Happy Birthday |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Dec 31, 2014 22:08:29 GMT
I don't have a strong opinion about Heathrow expansion but I can understand the arguments. I think it is a little simplistic to present the argument as "small villages delaying the UK's economic expansion". There is very considerable concern in West London about the safety of airline operations if you keep expanding flight volumes plus there are huge issues over air quality and noise. Those issues stretch across many boroughs and several parliamentary constituencies. There is also the vexed issue of the employment that Heathrow supports but there is a legitimate question about whether never ending environmental damage is a price worth paying for that employment. I think Boris may find he has a harder time than he imagines in getting elected in Uxbridge if he maintains his anti Heathrow stance. Far too many jobs depend on the airport and there is no convincing argument about what would replace them. All the political parties are in a real mess over Heathrow and BAA know it and they know how to lobby and manipulate people. They're past masters at it. I was never convinced by the arguments for an estuary airport because so many basic issues were simply ignored or treated with disdain with an unspoken subtext that once approval was given the concerns would simply be overridden by parliament. There were also massive transport and logistical issues with the Estuary proposal and no clear idea about where tens of billions of investment in roads and rail links would come from. I doubt there is much vocal opposition to airport construction in the Gulf. If there was then you'd be thrown in jail and have your hands or head chopped off in short order. No democratic right of opposition and complaint out there. I believe the Saudi Arabian way to deal with dissent is either to bribe the population with huge cash hand outs or to "disappear" people - Dosh or Death. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Dec 31, 2014 23:00:12 GMT
I don't have a strong opinion about Heathrow expansion but I can understand the arguments. I think it is a little simplistic to present the argument as "small villages delaying the UK's economic expansion". There is very considerable concern in West London about the safety of airline operations if you keep expanding flight volumes plus there are huge issues over air quality and noise. Those issues stretch across many boroughs and several parliamentary constituencies. There is also the vexed issue of the employment that Heathrow supports but there is a legitimate question about whether never ending environmental damage is a price worth paying for that employment. I think Boris may find he has a harder time than he imagines in getting elected in Uxbridge if he maintains his anti Heathrow stance. Far too many jobs depend on the airport and there is no convincing argument about what would replace them. All the political parties are in a real mess over Heathrow and BAA know it and they know how to lobby and manipulate people. They're past masters at it. I was never convinced by the arguments for an estuary airport because so many basic issues were simply ignored or treated with disdain with an unspoken subtext that once approval was given the concerns would simply be overridden by parliament. There were also massive transport and logistical issues with the Estuary proposal and no clear idea about where tens of billions of investment in roads and rail links would come from. I doubt there is much vocal opposition to airport construction in the Gulf. If there was then you'd be thrown in jail and have your hands or head chopped off in short order. No democratic right of opposition and complaint out there. I believe the Saudi Arabian way to deal with dissent is either to bribe the population with huge cash hand outs or to "disappear" people - Dosh or Death. Reading recent articles, almost everyone out there knows that expanding Heathrow will bring far more economical benefis and if politics didn't exist. That would be what is going on. But as with most things these days, Heathrow expansion has become more of a political thing, if a government opposes Heathrow expansion, then they are likely to interest and appeal to a different range of people. Aviation in the Persian Gulf on the other hand, is a pretty interesting topic  one that interests me. Qatar airways are known for being a highly successful airline, yet pretty inhumane in their practices. Emirates on the other hand are a popular airline with the public, but the way Dubai expands is exactly the way you specify it, people don't get a say. They have to deal with it. But those areas, especially Dubai are highly dependent on their aviation industry for income. Heathrow seems to have lost its place as the world's busiest international airport. To Dubai international. Heathrow's capacity seems to be a cause to this. I don't see why they can't expand the airport, as in the end this will hinder the economic development of the United Kingdom. Obviously there are some minor issues such as the villages that this could cause inconvenience to. But the people in the villages stopping the expansion of a global hub of the world, slowing down economic growth of the UK? It does look a bit silly. I also don't see what's wrong with night time operation, if people choose to live near an airport, then they should be expecting this. Nowdays you also don't have much noise as planes are getting much more quieter as well. People are also being compensated if they will be affected by Heathrow expansion. In other areas, where people need to move out for redevelopment do it without a fuss, why can't these local villages do the same? Be careful with that argument if you go anywhere near Harmondsworth! Would you like a dual carriage way at the end of your garden? Happy Birthday If the people chose to live near one of the worlds busiest airports, they should have been expecting expansion in the future, and all the noise pollution as well |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 1, 2015 2:28:12 GMT
I hope Heathrow isn't expanded because I do think it's unfair to wipe the likes of Sipson & Harmondsworth off the map - most likely, there are people living in these places who were there before the airport was built. I think more capacity needs to be created at other airports like Gatwick or Stanstead where there is more scope and room for expansion projects.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jan 1, 2015 2:39:18 GMT
I hope Heathrow isn't expanded because I do think it's unfair to wipe the likes of Sipson & Harmondsworth off the map - most likely, there are people living in these places who were there before the airport was built. I think more capacity needs to be created at other airports like Gatwick or Stanstead where there is more scope and room for expansion projects. Building a new airport, or expanding other airports isn't the issue. Airlines won't really move out of Heathrow because it's within the M25, Therefore even if other airports expand, most airlines won't plan to move into them as people would still prefer Heathrow. Also considering Heathrow still has quite a lot of plans to go ahead with, it would be an absolute waste to not expand the airport IMO. I do do understand your point of the villages, but this is a few hundred people compared with the whole country, and personally I feel that the country's economy is more important. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jun 29, 2015 16:56:15 GMT
The long awaited report on whether Heathrow or Gatwick is the preferred airport for expansion is finally coming on Wednesday. Whether it will recommend Heathrow or Gatwick it is likely to play a huge part in the government's decision to expand the airport.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jul 1, 2015 14:34:26 GMT
Some great news today!!! The long awaited report from the airport commission has indeed favored Heathrow for expansion over Gatwick. David Cameron has announced a final decision will be made by December
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 1, 2015 14:45:35 GMT
Some great news today!!! The long awaited report from the airport commission has indeed favored Heathrow for expansion over Gatwick. David Cameron has announced a final decision will be made by December However he hasn't said what that "decision" will entail. It could be a decision not to decide or a decision to start a consultation. Whichever way round you put things airport expansion remains a very damaging issue for politicians of the main parties. Cameron certainly has real problems with the obvious people in his party while Labour is also conflicted. It's going to play a role in determining who is the next London Mayor and some candidates have probably signed their own candidacy "death warrants" by being in favour of Heathrow expansion. Let's not forget the £4m of TfL's budget that the Mayor has frittered away on opposing the Airports Commission and promoting his own airport vision. This one will run and run and run. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jul 1, 2015 21:15:04 GMT
Some great news today!!! The long awaited report from the airport commission has indeed favored Heathrow for expansion over Gatwick. David Cameron has announced a final decision will be made by December However he hasn't said what that "decision" will entail. It could be a decision not to decide or a decision to start a consultation. Whichever way round you put things airport expansion remains a very damaging issue for politicians of the main parties. Cameron certainly has real problems with the obvious people in his party while Labour is also conflicted. It's going to play a role in determining who is the next London Mayor and some candidates have probably signed their own candidacy "death warrants" by being in favour of Heathrow expansion. Let's not forget the £4m of TfL's budget that the Mayor has frittered away on opposing the Airports Commission and promoting his own airport vision. This one will run and run and run. Very true, this could actually go on forever and the fact that some mayoral candidates have swapped their views on the airport as soon as it suits them. However they need to act fast with the airport decision as competing airports particularly in the Persian Gulf are at a major advantage as they can easily expand and are already huge. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 1, 2015 22:13:14 GMT
Let's just hope in the end that politics does stop Heathrow expansion and that Gatwick is looked at again, especially with the fact that the amount of people using Gatwick is at record levels. Heathrow expansion would fall foul of noise and aviation pollution limits and thus would be illegal. In fact, pollution would be so bad that even people in South London as far as Beckenham could be affected - I hate to be those who will remain on the border of the expansion in Harmondsworth.
Sadly, the people of Sipson & Harmondsworth are again ignored and forgotten about and that's the biggest tradegy of this saga.
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 1, 2015 22:23:31 GMT
However he hasn't said what that "decision" will entail. It could be a decision not to decide or a decision to start a consultation. Whichever way round you put things airport expansion remains a very damaging issue for politicians of the main parties. Cameron certainly has real problems with the obvious people in his party while Labour is also conflicted. It's going to play a role in determining who is the next London Mayor and some candidates have probably signed their own candidacy "death warrants" by being in favour of Heathrow expansion. Let's not forget the £4m of TfL's budget that the Mayor has frittered away on opposing the Airports Commission and promoting his own airport vision. This one will run and run and run. Very true, this could actually go on forever and the fact that some mayoral candidates have swapped their views on the airport as soon as it suits them. However they need to act fast with the airport decision as competing airports particularly in the Persian Gulf are at a major advantage as they can easily expand and are already huge. We simply can't compete with the big Gulf Airports. They don't have the political opposition that we have and they have vastly more land and money to do as they want. It's ludicrous to even try and compete. The night time flight restrictions apparently being suggested by Howard Davies will wreck existing flights from Australia and HK / Singapore. They're worth big money to several airlines so they'll fight to retain early landings at LHR. I've flown on several of the main overnight flights from HK and even been on the first flight down at about 0440 in the morning. No one is going to want to catch a flight at 0200 from HK to so as to land at 0600 in London. There may even be some restrictions in HK about overnight take offs even with their airport being out on an Island. It's still closeish to Lantau where people live. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jul 2, 2015 19:13:34 GMT
Heathrow expansion would benefit the economy the most, as I have mentioned before (I think) it's two villages compared with the whole economy of the United Kingdom. Heathrow is already a huge airport and as it is and expansion at Gatwick wojt really encourage airlines to move there. All it will encourage is airlines that already have Heathrow slots to become greedy and steal a few slots at Gatwick as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 2, 2015 22:33:48 GMT
Heathrow expansion would benefit the economy the most, as I have mentioned before (I think) it's two villages compared with the whole economy of the United Kingdom. Heathrow is already a huge airport and as it is and expansion at Gatwick wojt really encourage airlines to move there. All it will encourage is airlines that already have Heathrow slots to become greedy and steal a few slots at Gatwick as well. The economy is not going to fall over if Heathrow doesn't get expanded. In fact, making Heathrow bloated could be worse rather than increasing the size of other airports like Gatwick. Heathrow can't continue to have runways lavished upon it especially when the levels of noise and aviation pollution would make it illegal to have a runway. Whether it's two villages or twenty two villages, those people have rights - would you like to live next to 3 runways? |
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Jul 3, 2015 17:22:14 GMT
Heathrow expansion would benefit the economy the most, as I have mentioned before (I think) it's two villages compared with the whole economy of the United Kingdom. Heathrow is already a huge airport and as it is and expansion at Gatwick wojt really encourage airlines to move there. All it will encourage is airlines that already have Heathrow slots to become greedy and steal a few slots at Gatwick as well. The economy is not going to fall over if Heathrow doesn't get expanded. In fact, making Heathrow bloated could be worse rather than increasing the size of other airports like Gatwick. Heathrow can't continue to have runways lavished upon it especially when the levels of noise and aviation pollution would make it illegal to have a runway. Whether it's two villages or twenty two villages, those people have rights - would you like to live next to 3 runways? I agree. Of course, the economy is not going to fall over but Heathrow does need to expand if I had my way it would be right now. What some people are not thinking about is the future. To copy with growing demand if we still want London to be a top financial centre in 30 years we must invest in our resources to attract business; Heathrow is a BIG factor in that. Gatwick is a good airport for what it is, being a supporting airport for London (and Heathrow tbh) but it does not have the capabilities or links that Heathrow has especially with projects like Crossrail coming. Airlines want Heathrow to expand so it sustains business in the future and to fight off competitors which are growing at a rapid rate like Dubai and Frankfurt. Also on the point of the villages next to Heathrow, what I have to say to that is that things change and life is not fair. You can't expect if you live next to an airport especially a major one like Heathrow that there is no risk of expansion that could affect you. It is not like they are not going compensated for their loss of a home. Also Heathrow owns the land of the nearby villages so the ball is really in their court. The expansion will help create thousand of new jobs, retain and attract more business to London which in turns help the economy. Unfortunate that some people have to be affected but for the overall potential the expansion has for the country as a whole, it has to be done. |
|
Would you like a dual carriage way at the end of your garden?
one that interests me. Qatar airways are known for being a highly successful airline, yet pretty inhumane in their practices. Emirates on the other hand are a popular airline with the public, but the way Dubai expands is exactly the way you specify it, people don't get a say. They have to deal with it. But those areas, especially Dubai are highly dependent on their aviation industry for income.
