ZOMBIE THREAD ALERT: This thread hasn't been posted on for a while.
Boris Johnson wants to close down Heathrow(30 Posts)
Why bother building a totally newairport at huge cost in a place with an insufficient transport network? Just move all the traffic to Schiphol ...
I think it may be a good idea. If it is true that Heathrow can't be expanded, then we need an alternative with room for growth. We have to invest for the future to save the country and ignore the doomsayers who say it will not save the planet.
It was tongue in cheek .... I think that the idea to close Heathrow is devoid ofmunderstanding the economic realities but popular with the Boris voters in Richmond, Kingston, Twickenham, Barnes etc. Heathrow could be expanded but the biggest issue will be the increase in noise. Gatwick and Stansted are not really viable alternatives as it will take travellers so much longer to reach central London.
A totally ne airport will cost a fortune as it will need a fast rail and motorway to Central London. Given that it would take years and years in planning permission approval, legal challenges no doubt and actual time to build, it seems pie in the sky. Plus airlines may not want to move there but rather move to Schiphol with all its excellent facilities and onward transport links (including frequent flights to London).
LoveSewingBee, we do have some plonkers in senior positions in our country, but Boris Johnson is not one of them!
I think there must be planners and strategists who know what they are doing and who can provide infrastructure that will support the future of the country.
I am not sure that Stansted is not viable. It has quick access to the City of London, and I am sure that it could be improved further.
We need to increase capacity and have forward, strategic planning. The future of our country depends on transport - and I don't mean Boris bikes! Boris is one to often say yikes! but he knows that we need a modern, sophisticated transport infrastructure to be able to compete.
It takes about 35-40 minutes to get to London by train from Gatwick, depending on whether you use the Express or the normal train.
the underground from Heathrow takes longer.
So Gatwick is NOT further out. Trouble is, no-one really wants their nearby airport to expand. The other issue is whether the forecast endless growth in passenger numbers is real.
Oh and with New Labour out of power, the bonus is that the number of plonkers in senior positions has been reduced substantially!
When it comes to careful, meticulous planning on the future transport needs of the country, I can't think of a person better fitted to the task than Boris! Look what he managed to achieve with Boris Bikes!
You don't think he implemented the Boris Bikes himself, do you, claig? Serco did all the grunt work.
Heathrow Express is 15 mins from Paddington isn't it? That's a pretty quick journey and half the time of the Gatwick Express.
I really can't imagine Heathrow closing, it has excellent transport links being so close to 2 major motorways and having such a quick service into Paddington.
I might have known they would be involved somewhere down the line!
I am joking, I am not a fan of bikes and the "save the planet" green crowd. I am all for modern, sophisticated transport infrastructure to maintain our economic position in the world.
"I really can't imagine Heathrow closing, it has excellent transport links being so close to 2 major motorways and having such a quick service into Paddington."
But I think it is almost running to capacity now, and it needs to be expanded. Is it true that it can't be expanded? If so, then an alternative needs to be found.
Yes it does need to be expanded. It can be done if people would stop arguing and get on with it. It's very sad for the people who live in the area earmarked for expansion but I do think that it needs to be done.
Boris's plan for an east London hub is ridiculous for anyone living to the west of London. All those companies in the M4 corridor will still want easy access to flights and a trip to the other side of London will add hours to their journey.
Another alternative of adding a second runway to Gatwick and increasing competition between the airports is also a bad idea. Airlines want major hubs. Business travellers want to get back to work or to central London asap. Gatwick is in the wrong place. So is Stanstead.
We have spent decades building Heathrow up. Why not continue to invest rather than throwing it all away to start again at significantly increased costs?
And I say this as someone who lives under one of the Heathrow flightpaths.
"Boris Bikes" were Ken Livingstone's project that was managed and delivered by Serco. The only thing Boris had to do with them was not cancel the project, that was nearly to fruition, when he won the election.
I might have known that Ken Livingstone had something to do with it as well!
Does it upset you to know that something you have publicly praised was actually the responsibility of Red Ken?
Not at all, because when I praised Boris Bikes, I was only joking, because I am not a fan of the "save the planet" biking philosophy.
<<snort>. Of course claig, you keep claiming that
The idea is, instead of adding a bit here and a bit there, to plan for and build (which will take decades) a new airport and transport hub which will have potential to grow in the future. For Heathrow to grow as much as necessary people's homes will have to be demolished and the land built on.
One advantage of moving to the east is that most of the landings will be over the sea. With winds generally coming from the west in the UK, having flights coming in to land at one of the world's busiest airports over one of the world's largest cities seems like a major incident just waiting to happen.
I don't get "an east London hub is ridiculous for anyone living to the west of London. " . Surely a west London hub is ridiculous for anyone living to the, expanding, east of London. Oddly enough, Heathrow is very hard to reach by public transport from many parts of west London.
Heathrow is a pain to reach for pretty much anyone, and it's a truly abominable experience once you're in there. Knock the whole bloody thing down and build Boris Island out in the Estuary where it belongs.
we do have some plonkers in senior positions in our country, but Boris Johnson is not one of them!
Thanks for the laugh!
It was not my intention to make a humorous remark, I have never been more serious!
Well, it still made me chuckle
There is onlygoing to be one winner: Schiphol.
Flying to LHR is much quicker due to Heathrow Express. There is no way that Stansted and Gatwick can compete with Heathrow.
Due to strong local opposition from Boris' voters it is u likely LHR gets planning permission to expand and e en if they do it will be subject to prolonged legal challenge.
A totally new airport is worth nothing unless it has extremely fast rail and motorway links to Central London. Let's be honest that is not going to happen in the next thirty years or so.
LHR really needs to expand as it is already the busiest airport in the world. However it needs political will and radical changes to the planning system. As especially Tory voters will be affected by the expansion, their interest will prevail over the national interest hence Boris involvement.
Bee are you the PR for Schipol??
Nope, don't think they need me.
I do find it incredibly damaging for Heathrow and ultimately Britain, how Heathrow expansion has been blocked by NIMBIES at least since the late eighties now. So nothing new here but the damage will impact on the whole of the UK.
Why do we need airport expansion? Air fares are rising fast and will soon be beyond many peoples' budgets. Do you think that the 'average' family will be able to afford to fly to holiday destinations in ten years time?
There must be people in Whitehall tossing out data about estimated flights in the future, and I really can't imagine that they are predicting an exponential rise in air traffic.
Join the discussion
Please login first.