On 11 Apr, 12:37, Roland Perry wrote:

In message
, at
04:32:10 on Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Mizter T remarked:

The delay in moving will have a knock-on effect on other airlines who
had been due to take over Terminal 4 once BA had left.

Which will have a knock-on effect on being able to close T2 for
redevelopment, which is due to finish for the drum roll Olympics.

Given the requirement for construction capacity in east London to
build the Olympic venues one wonders whether BAA's timetable for
Heathrow redevelopment is really that wise. That said, perhaps it all
makes more sense when one considers BAA's real game plan - getting a
third runway at Heathrow...

In message
, at
05:05:15 on Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Mizter T remarked:
The delay in moving will have a knock-on effect on other airlines who
had been due to take over Terminal 4 once BA had left.

Which will have a knock-on effect on being able to close T2 for
redevelopment, which is due to finish for the drum roll Olympics.

Given the requirement for construction capacity in east London to
build the Olympic venues one wonders whether BAA's timetable for
Heathrow redevelopment is really that wise. That said, perhaps it all
makes more sense when one considers BAA's real game plan - getting a
third runway at Heathrow...

Upgrading the terminals for the current runways is actually running
against the need for a new runway. Capacity (in terms of passenger
numbers) is set to increase because of larger planes, not more runway
capacity.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message
, at
05:05:15 on Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Mizter T remarked:
The delay in moving will have a knock-on effect on other airlines who
had been due to take over Terminal 4 once BA had left.

Which will have a knock-on effect on being able to close T2 for
redevelopment, which is due to finish for the drum roll Olympics.

Given the requirement for construction capacity in east London to
build the Olympic venues one wonders whether BAA's timetable for
Heathrow redevelopment is really that wise. That said, perhaps it all
makes more sense when one considers BAA's real game plan - getting a
third runway at Heathrow...

Upgrading the terminals for the current runways is actually running
against the need for a new runway. Capacity (in terms of passenger
numbers) is set to increase because of larger planes, not more runway
capacity.
--

saw a slide show on the new Peking airport. Designed and built in less time
than the public inquiry and the rest of the bureaucratic BS that preceded
the construction of T5.

BF


---- Posted via Pronews.com - Premium Corporate Usenet News Provider ----
http://www.pronews.com offers corporate packages that have access to 100,000+ newsgroups

On 11 Apr, 13:54, "Bryan Flint" wrote:

"Roland Perry" wrote:

In message
, at
05:05:15 on Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Mizter T remarked:
The delay in moving will have a knock-on effect on other airlines who
had been due to take over Terminal 4 once BA had left.

Which will have a knock-on effect on being able to close T2 for
redevelopment, which is due to finish for the drum roll Olympics.

Given the requirement for construction capacity in east London to
build the Olympic venues one wonders whether BAA's timetable for
Heathrow redevelopment is really that wise. That said, perhaps it all
makes more sense when one considers BAA's real game plan - getting a
third runway at Heathrow...

Upgrading the terminals for the current runways is actually running
against the need for a new runway. Capacity (in terms of passenger
numbers) is set to increase because of larger planes, not more runway
capacity.


saw a slide show on the new Peking airport. Designed and built in less time
than the public inquiry and the rest of the bureaucratic BS that preceded
the construction of T5.


But I'd rather have all that than the dictatorial rule one gets in
China.