Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[The Sheriff]

I don't see what all the discussion is about. The population of the world will continue to grow exponentially, sooner or later every piece of real estate that exists will be used for a purpose. Then, unless we get to another planet or do a Logans run, we will all die.
Enjoy yourself, it's later than you think.

[LC0112G]

Fransbog is far easier to extend, rather than the upheaval caused at Haethrow.

Although sadly the area to the south west would be favourite as its scrub land and a road to move. Rather than any chance them needing to flatten Tunnies house to accommodate it.

Although there's always hope he'll get his chance to see some planes under the flight path.

Hell there's room for two runways at Farnborough.

Nope - I haven't got my AIP's handy, but I'd be surprised if the current FAB runway has a weight loading capability to take modern heavies. You cant go thumping 500+ tons of heavy into any old strip of concrete/tarmac. So to "extend" FAB you'd actually have to dig up the existing runway and re-lay it with stronger foundations, extend it by three quarters of a mile, and build another similar runway 1300m to the north or south. Then build all the terminal buildings and other support infrastructure. You're effectively building a whole new airport, and if you're doing that you wouldn't put it there unless you're prepared to demolish Farnborough town (as Yeovil Town used to do regularly :-) )

I'd be all for a brand new super airport at Stonehenge East - aka Boscombe Down. An hour closer to me, already got a 10K footer and almost infinite room for expansion all over Sailsbury plain. Eco-mentalists wouldn't agree though.

[Marks DTM Calib]

The plans look quite reasonable to me (viewable on line)

[omega2018]

I don't see what all the discussion is about. The population of the world will continue to grow exponentially, sooner or later every piece of real estate that exists will be used for a purpose. Then, unless we get to another planet or do a Logans run, we will all die.
Enjoy yourself, it's later than you think.

world population 7 billion, isle of anglesey 7.7 billion square feet. we can all fit there with 1 square foot each.  some people could even have a garden

[Kevin Wood]

I don't see what all the discussion is about. The population of the world will continue to grow exponentially, sooner or later every piece of real estate that exists will be used for a purpose. Then, unless we get to another planet or do a Logans run, we will all die.
Enjoy yourself, it's later than you think.

world population 7 billion, isle of anglesey 7.7 billion square feet. we can all fit there with 1 square foot each.  some people could even have a garden

Some people would require more then 1 square foot, mind. Some of them might even be members here.

[The Sheriff]

I don't see what all the discussion is about. The population of the world will continue to grow exponentially, sooner or later every piece of real estate that exists will be used for a purpose. Then, unless we get to another planet or do a Logans run, we will all die.
Enjoy yourself, it's later than you think.

world population 7 billion, isle of anglesey 7.7 billion square feet. we can all fit there with 1 square foot each.  some people could even have a garden

Another ten thousand or so since you posted.

[Rods2]

The solution is very, very easy. Have a national referendum on flying. If you agree that the Government should be given a mandate to expand any airport as necessary to meet demand, then you vote yes and in return you get a yes stamp in your passport and can use any UK airport. If you don't have a yes stamp then you are banned from using any UK airport. I think you will then find the number of Nimbys will diappear at the thought of losing their winter skiing, regular stag weekends, not to mention their two weeks on the Costa Del Slaughtered.

I use aircraft and fly, hate the regular long delays where Heathrow and Gatwick runway capacity are running at near to 100% and want my airport where they are quick and easy to reach, which isn't Stansted or Luton or anything further afield. I have used Luton several time over that last few years even though it is more difficult to get to but I don't suffer hours of delays if the aircraft was slightly late landing or turning around and missed it's takeoff slot so you have to wait 6 hours for another one!

Boris estuary will NEVER happen and is like Stansted and Luton, the wrong side of London, with long journey times from the second richest wealth creating area after London in the UK. The M3, M4 corridor. Heathrow is successful and needs to be expanded where it is an airport in the right place for 10's of millions of people to get to very easily. Those that support Boris Island have you thought about all the housing and infrastructure needed for the 100,000+ direct and indirect employees that currently work at heathrow, the logistics of moving them and the effects on the communities they would leave, including house prices. Plus, Schiphol means it will be fine as long as you don't use it for aircraft takeoffs or landings towards the east as they have already stated, they will keep and enforce, here before you rights to that airspace.

Where I am we get quite a lot of aircraft noise from Heathrow, it is the price of convenience, likewise the traffic noise where I live near a main road, having neighbour noise where I live in a town etc, etc. If you want a quiet life, the Scottish highlands have much to commend for such peace, but don't expect less than a 50 mile round trip for your nearest supermarket, pub, restaurant, pub, doctor and dentist, all of which are within a few 100 metres from where I live. Nothing in life is free, which any engineer and scientist will tell you, what you gain from this design, you will lose from, this, this and this. Nature and life are like that, make your choices and accept the compromises.

As I've stated before, turning Farnborough into an International airport is fine by me.

[Marks DTM Calib]

An interesting overlap here as I also fly a lot, with lots of long haul.

I hate getting to Gatwick but can tolerate Heathrow.....so the only overlap on access is Heathrow....

[Shackeng]

Boris Island - or something similar - will happen, it is only a question of when the decision is made. In the next ten years? I doubt it. In the next 50? Perhaps. In the next 100, definitely. So bite the bullet now and get on with it, and stop inflicting noise pain, and the present danger to inhabitants of London ASAP.
I wonder if all those advocating the expansion of Heathrow are aware of the operating standards of foreign airlines operating into LHR. Consider this, international agreements are in place to ensure that all airlines operate to certain standards, this enables long haul British Airlines to operate into the far flung corners of the world, and in return allows their airlines to operate into London. I know from my previous employment as an instructor with a British Airline, and as a technical rep. for BALPA, that my airline made every effort to operate to these standards. Am I convinced that every foreign airline flying over the centre of London does the same? In a word, No.

[LC0112G]

Bristol is our current airport of choice - decent selection of Sleasy Jet and Rhino Air destinations, but no Long haul. 45 mins from here, but more importantly you can walk to/from long stay car park to terminal in 5 minutes, and immigration rarely takes 5 minutes. All that means that from crash landing on the runway at 11pm on a Sunday evening to front door can be done in an hour. However, the short runway (6600') means no long haul flights.

We also regularly use Heathrow, Luton and Gatwick - all much of a muchness and less than 2 hours drive. For long haul we prefer Gatwick to Heathrow, but you have to go where the airlines fly from - which like it or not is Heathrow.

I've used Southampton, Bournemouth and Exeter, but prices are high and flight destinations and timings are generally poor.

Stansted - Arrrgggg -  2.5 hour drive (on a good day), 30 minutes waiting for a bus to/from long stay, 1 hour to get through immigration (longer on a Sunday evening), Fracking stupid train thing to get to/from terminal to departure gates. Why the hell didn't they use the monorail to get to/from Long stay instead (like in San Fransisco)? For a 'new' airport it's an abortion.

And whoever invented "Remote Parking" of aircraft airside so that you have to get a bus to/from the aircraft wants a kicking.

[Varche]

The solution is very, very easy. Have a national referendum on flying. If you agree that the Government should be given a mandate to expand any airport as necessary to meet demand, then you vote yes and in return you get a yes stamp in your passport and can use any UK airport. If you don't have a yes stamp then you are banned from using any UK airport. I think you will then find the number of Nimbys will diappear at the thought of losing their winter skiing, regular stag weekends, not to mention their two weeks on the Costa Del Slaughtered.

I use aircraft and fly, hate the regular long delays where Heathrow and Gatwick runway capacity are running at near to 100% and want my airport where they are quick and easy to reach, which isn't Stansted or Luton or anything further afield. I have used Luton several time over that last few years even though it is more difficult to get to but I don't suffer hours of delays if the aircraft was slightly late landing or turning around and missed it's takeoff slot so you have to wait 6 hours for another one!

Boris estuary will NEVER happen and is like Stansted and Luton, the wrong side of London, with long journey times from the second richest wealth creating area after London in the UK. The M3, M4 corridor. Heathrow is successful and needs to be expanded where it is an airport in the right place for 10's of millions of people to get to very easily. Those that support Boris Island have you thought about all the housing and infrastructure needed for the 100,000+ direct and indirect employees that currently work at heathrow, the logistics of moving them and the effects on the communities they would leave, including house prices. Plus, Schiphol means it will be fine as long as you don't use it for aircraft takeoffs or landings towards the east as they have already stated, they will keep and enforce, here before you rights to that airspace.

Where I am we get quite a lot of aircraft noise from Heathrow, it is the price of convenience, likewise the traffic noise where I live near a main road, having neighbour noise where I live in a town etc, etc. If you want a quiet life, the Scottish highlands have much to commend for such peace, but don't expect less than a 50 mile round trip for your nearest supermarket, pub, restaurant, pub, doctor and dentist, all of which are within a few 100 metres from where I live. Nothing in life is free, which any engineer and scientist will tell you, what you gain from this design, you will lose from, this, this and this. Nature and life are like that, make your choices and accept the compromises.

As I've stated before, turning Farnborough into an International airport is fine by me.

I said at the beginning Heathrow extra runway is a no brainer and the country should just get on with it. I wonder just how France and Spain managed their massive infrastructure projects this last decade unlike our trifling few( Crossrail excepted)? I use Boris island as an example of what could be achieved with far thinking and once again refer to the Victorian engineers. Need more housing? Well build more land near but not that near to the new airport. That at a stroke frees up housing for more immigrants. Poor roads and rail links? Build some more OVER the existing congested dross. Use new technology- Maglev or its successor. New airport to centre of London etc so fast your sick gets left behind. Sadly Britain has wasted twenty  maybe fifty years in getting infrastructure in place by passing the buck to the next parliament.

[Varche]

Bristol is our current airport of choice - decent selection of Sleasy Jet and Rhino Air destinations, but no Long haul. 45 mins from here, but more importantly you can walk to/from long stay car park to terminal in 5 minutes, and immigration rarely takes 5 minutes. All that means that from crash landing on the runway at 11pm on a Sunday evening to front door can be done in an hour. However, the short runway (6600') means no long haul flights.

We also regularly use Heathrow, Luton and Gatwick - all much of a muchness and less than 2 hours drive. For long haul we prefer Gatwick to Heathrow, but you have to go where the airlines fly from - which like it or not is Heathrow.

I've used Southampton, Bournemouth and Exeter, but prices are high and flight destinations and timings are generally poor.

Stansted - Arrrgggg -  2.5 hour drive (on a good day), 30 minutes waiting for a bus to/from long stay, 1 hour to get through immigration (longer on a Sunday evening), Fracking stupid train thing to get to/from terminal to departure gates. Why the hell didn't they use the monorail to get to/from Long stay instead (like in San Fransisco)? For a 'new' airport it's an abortion.

And whoever invented "Remote Parking" of aircraft airside so that you have to get a bus to/from the aircraft wants a kicking.

LCO122G. Simple question. Why don't they double the length of Bristol runway to facilitate long haul flights. That would save the road congestion of a plane load of folk driving towards London and its longer runways?

I am with you on the interminable delays you outline. I vowed never to use Stansted again after a duff experience there. Hardly any airports seem to think of their customers. It is all about their process. even simple things like the barriers for guiding you to the next process. No one waiting? You still have to walk a mile because they don't open a short cut. Have you ever seen anyone taken away at immigration?

[LC0112G]

Boris Island - or something similar - will happen, it is only a question of when the decision is made.

It won't. It might work as a hub airport, but so would an airport built at Rockall. Any new airport would have to be sited where the maximum number of UK passengers could easily access it. That probably means somewhere close to the London end of the HS2 route, so the ex RAF Upper Heyford, or RAF Gaydon would be good choices. But you're back in the land of Tory NIMBY's so it just won't happen. Boris Island only gets put forward because it shifts Tory problems out to sea - literally.

The money for this is going to have to come from private sources - not government taxation. So private investors are going to want a return on their money. They're not going to fund Boris Island, because they know that no-one can get to it. So its Heathrow and Gatwick or nothing. And whilst the Tories are in it'll be nothing. 

[LC0112G]

LCO122G. Simple question. Why don't they double the length of Bristol runway to facilitate long haul flights. That would save the road congestion of a plane load of folk driving towards London and its longer runways?

Because the local NIMBY's run the local council, and they object to most airport improvement proposals. Access is carp - there isn't even a decent road from the M5 (or more importantly A37) to the airport. They've only just passed plans to build an on airport hotel. The airport has grown massively in the past 10 years despite the locals, not because of them.

[Shackeng]

Boris Island - or something similar - will happen, it is only a question of when the decision is made.

It won't. It might work as a hub airport, but so would an airport built at Rockall. Any new airport would have to be sited where the maximum number of UK passengers could easily access it. That probably means somewhere close to the London end of the HS2 route, so the ex RAF Upper Heyford, or RAF Gaydon would be good choices. But you're back in the land of Tory NIMBY's so it just won't happen. Boris Island only gets put forward because it shifts Tory problems out to sea - literally.

The money for this is going to have to come from private sources - not government taxation. So private investors are going to want a return on their money. They're not going to fund Boris Island, because they know that no-one can get to it. So its Heathrow and Gatwick or nothing. And whilst the Tories are in it'll be nothing.

But they will eventually, because access and infrastructure will have been put in place! Again you are thinking short term. See my post above.