[Edski777]

BigDog, in order to create an Island that fits well into the environment and wouldn’t jeopardize London during a storm: plenty of knowledge and experience is available just across the North Sea. Talk to some Dutch firms. Many of them were involved in creating airports on reclaimed land. Look at airports like HKIA, Tokyo Kansai, Singapore, etc. In may case British firms were involved as well.

What Britain lacks is vision, a willingness to some out of the box thinking and determination to resolve this issue.

What is needed is that politicians come up with long term visions, strategies and plans. They should have the best interest of the country in the long term at heart, not base their decisions on popularity polls and always keeping one eye on their next re-election.

[canucklad]

Continuing on from Edski’s incisive comments

Having listened to and read a few more political commentaries since the commission reported, here is my personal conclusion, and sadly my prediction for the future……,

I start with trying to understand David Cameron and his unbelievably stupid political move , before the 2010 election, by not so much painting himself into a corner, but ensuring that paint is laced with acidic poisonous fumes that now threaten to overwhelm him.

Race forward to his recent triumph …… Imagine you’re David, finally going to bed on Friday, realizing that you’ve managed not only to lay a golden egg, but that the golden egg is a double yoker. Not only have you secured a majority, but by doing so, you’ve also managed to castrate a roaring lion, at least for the term of your parliament.

Now, go forward again to 24 hours ago…….. If you manage to go back on your word, and correctly conclude that after an exhaustive consultation period that the experts are right, then you’re about commit Tory Hari Kari…. Just look at the political landscape of West London…..LHR and its immediate constituencies are totally surrounded by anti LHR Tory constituencies…..

Lose those (at the moment) loyal MP’s support and you lose your Golden egg ……

He can’t disagree with the commission, because the rest of us would then ask what the point was, and he would also more importantly be seen as incredibly weak, because we’ll all know he’s just placating the rebel anti LHR MP’s and more importantly, he’s backing down from his biggest threat Boris the lovable bully……
On the other hand, If he agrees with the commission, he’ll be seen as going back on his word, and his trustworthiness would be called into question. A PM that’s untrustworthy …….mmmmmmm

So, what to do…….take 6 months to read the 350 page report….and here is my prediction……

He’ll thank the Davies commission for all their hard work,, their excellent analysis and contributions to aviation policy in the South East.
Using double speak, he’ll accept the findings, but reject the proposals, and set up an all-party parliamentary white paper, or equivalent to scrutinise his interpretation of the document , that will defer the issue until late into his premiership. Roll on autumn 2018, and he’ll be able to abdicate the decision to the next administration.
By then Boris will be getting measured up for his new clothes, attire fit for an Emperor…… A new commission will be set up to decide, which site is most suitable EAST of Canary Wharf……

I believe, ultimately that LHR will be the rock that DC perishes on !!

[SimonS1]

Indeed Canucklad. Sounds a very plausible way forward.

In the meantime London Schiphol can continue its growth as a hub and competitiveness of the UK economy can continue to head slowly down the nearest WC. After all as London Schiphol already has routes to +/- 15 domestic destinations there is clearly no need for LHR to replicate this.

With a new leader the Labour party may return to favour by 2020, which would enable anything to do with the Tories and Lib Dems to be safely binned and a new enquiry set up to start afresh.

[CathayLoyalist2]

All wrong. In return for staying in the Euro Greece will build the third runway. Everyone is happy!

[Edski777]

Schiphol has at this moment 26 destinations in the UK it services, where LHR has only 6.

I suggest you read the recent interview in Travel Weekly: http://www.travelweekly.co.uk/Articles/2015/04/02/53719/big-interview-schiphol-unfazed-by-london-airport-expansion.html

My guess is that AMS Schiphol is probably as important to the UK economy as LHR is. And they keep coming up with plans to expand. They are discussing a 6th and 7th runway!

Schiphol and KLM run the place like a corporation: growth and success are the key factors. Helped along by the corporate friendly Dutch government. It sounds like The Netherlands Inc.

For the UK on this front: UK Inc. seems to be in desperate need of new management.

As I wrote before: A true statesman is required, one with a vision and courage to move forward. That or the UK risks to become the “sick man of Europe” again. At least in the airline industry.

[SimonS1]

26 destinations. Unbelievable. I didn’t know there were that many places to go.

The only thing I disagree with is the “new management” bit. I think leadership is the thing missing. Someone who can rise above the level most of our politicians operate at.

[MrMichael]

The problem with AMS is the taxi from gate to runway takes longer than the ruddy flight.

[LuganoPirate]

I think it will not happen. A 3rd runway that is. The trouble with Heathrow is it’s in the wrong place. After no. 3 where do you put no. 4 or even 5? So there’s no room for future expansion.

I’ve also read some interesting reports that show short haul travel 20 years down the road will be by VTOL aircraft and a lot of inter European travel will be by fast rail networks. I’ve even heard talk of resurrecting an old British Steel idea of a road/rail bridge across the Channel.

Next, the Tory’s will be in power for at least a decade, so don’t write off DC too quickly. The Scots will be relegated to a minor power in the “English” parliament with no rights to vote on English matters, which will include LHR. Next, the boundaries will change, there will be less MP’s in the Commons next time, but the boundaries will be shifted to increase the number of Tory MP’s.

Labour will sort themselves out so again they look more like the Tories as they did under Blair but ti will be too late. Milliband has lost them virtually all hope of forming the next government, they know this and the knives are out for him.

So my prediction is no new runway at LHR and I believe Boris Island might actually become reality.

[SimonS1]

If the knives are out for Miliband they are about 2 months too late, and it wouldn’t serve much purposes as he resigned the day after the election 🙂

Things can turn around very quickly in politics with a good media friendly person at the helm, which is what Andy Burnham will bring.

[DavidGordon10]

My problem with the third runway at LHR is not about the need for it to be built, and soon. For me, the difficulty is that the management of LHR are just spectacularly bad at the business of actually running an airport.

My most commmon trip these days is backwards and forwards between GVA and LHR on Swiss. The Swiss crews seem generally to regard LHR with derision. Last night, after arrival:
1. No-one on the jetway to drive it out to the aircraft. Long wait for someone to deign to turn up: ~5 minutes? The jetway should be ready to move the moment the plane is on stand.
2. E-passport gates turned off while a long queue was waiting for them. Why? “Because we are switching over” Much of the angry queue shunted off to manual inspection of the passports.
3. 20 minutes from the exit gates of the T2 car park before entering the tunnel. Tunnel was completely open, the delay was just because the central area roads are simply not enough to handle the volume of traffic.

So, if you can’t run the airport you have now, why should we believe that you could run a bigger airport?

[Flightlevel]

London needs more competition,not less competitive airports,& progressive management of airports & airspace.In the long run there will be 3 major airports and the others,space restricted (not just nimby restricted).There must be a way (EC rules allowing) to develop those 3 airports for each airline alliance providing real competition and plenty of capacity for independent airlines & further expansion. United is doing that at Newark, so is the government just slow to follow?It is not sensible to say LHR is the only hub, a hub is where you build it, witness DXB,AMS,DUB,SIN &numerous others!

[transtraxman]

If there were ever an argument to increase capacity of BOTH Heathrow and Gatwick, it is the record number of passengers passing through both airports this summer.

Heathrow hit 6.6million passengers in June…….

http://buyingbusinesstravel.com/news/1424432-heathrow-reports-rise-passenger-traffic

….and 7.29million in July.

http://www.travelweekly.co.uk/Articles/2015/08/11/56239/heathrow-tops-250000-passengers-on-three-days-in-july.html

Meanwhile Gatwick hit 3.8million in June……….

http://www.travelweekly.co.uk/Articles/2015/07/13/55890/low-cost+long-haul+revolution+favours+gatwick.html

………………….and 4.3million in July.

http://www.travelweekly.co.uk/Articles/2015/08/11/56237/gatwick+achieves+record+july+passenger+numbers.html

And all this before August is finished which is expected to produce even higher numbers at both airports.

In fact I remember reading an article(which I cannot find now) saying that Gatwick had achieved the highest number of take-offs /landings ever with over 900 in one day which worked out to about one every 100 seconds.

Thus the government should permit construction at both airports asap. This would proably mean that Gatwick could open first as no new terminals are needed at first.

[AisleSeatTraveller]

agree with Transtraxman, build at both airports (restricting to one does indeed limit competition)

[MrMichael]

I would go a little further AisleSeatTraveller and say that only allowing one is positively uncompetitive. Allowing only one is very clearly putting the other that does not get it at a very significant commercial disadvantage, I see long and drawn out legal battles ahead, unless of course they do opt for two and I think that highly unlikely.

[MrDarwin]

The report conclusions lacked vision and failed to consider how long it would take to get further runway capacity in the future. By the time gets a new runway we’ll already be discussing the need for further capacity. Few things in life bother me more than inertia. Two new runways for LHR and one new runway for Gatwick would have kept the balance between Heathrow and Gatwick even, as they are today, and promoted a decent competitive environment – something Willie Wonka and BA must be terrified about – why else would they vote against additional capacity at the currently protected Heathrow….

[Author]

Posts