London Banter - View Single Post - London Hub proposal published by Halcrow/Foster+Partners

[email protected] · November 7th 11, 11:56 PM posted to uk.transport.london

In article ,
(The Other Mike) wrote:

On Mon, 7 Nov 2011 14:14:05 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:

On Mon, 07 Nov 2011 12:57:06 +0000
The Other Mike wrote:
The sooner they start building that thrid runway the better and in
parallel build Boris Island.

Why? Why exactly do we need more aircraft movements (and spare me the
******** "business" reasons, they're specious at best, downright lies at
worst)?

Safety

Taking the top 10 airports by passengers

Atlanta 5
Beijing 3
Heathrow 2
Chicago 7
Los Angeles 4
Paris CDG 4
Tokyo Haneda 4
Dallas FW 7
Frankfurt 4
Denver 6

Taking the top 13 airports by aircraft movements

Atlanta 5
Chicago 7
Los Angeles 4
Dallas FW 7
Denver 6
Houston 5
Charlotte 4
Beijing 3
Las Vegas 4
Paris CDG 4
Frankfurt 4
Philadelphia 4
Heathrow 2

Or other European hubs

Madrid 4
Amsterdam 6

All have more than 2 runways (the figure is after each name above is
their runway total)

Heathrow and the UK economy is being crippled by two runways, and the
night curfew.

That the movements have flatlined at saturation point given that
bigger aircraft need bigger gaps on approach) for the last 10 years
while f*ck all is done to build a third runway is a disgrace.

1300 aircraft a day, over 18 hours operation per day is one movement
EVERY 72 SECONDS

Like I said, the reason is safety. If Heathrow had been in a tin pot
nation in the Far East or Africa or South America then the locals
would have been wiped out by plane crashes decades ago.

The third runway should have been up and running well before now and
planning of a fourth well advanced. If you don't like aircraft noise
then don't live anywhere near one!

No it should not. Heathrow airport is too close to London to be allowed to
expand at all.

--
Colin Rosenstiel