[TerryMcManus24]

That figure could rise to £26bn a year by 2030, the report said

so if the sunshine boys sit around for another18 years doing their traditional “navel gazing” act then the country will have lost anything up to @ 300 Billion Pounds..and that could be a base figure..

.Suppose in the sceme of things… its nothing….

[BigDog.]

Entertaining as usual, Michael O’Leary shares his thoughts on future airport runways with the Commons Transport Select Committe.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20402584

[AnthonyDunn]

@ BigDog. – 20/11/2012 22:56 GMT

Bearing in mind the utter contempt that O’Blarney normally displays for all politicians, I am astonished that he deigned to attend this session – particularly as he normally insists on absolute control of the questions as well as the answers! It is my recollection that the only time he’s ever had anything favourable to say of politicians, governments or state functionaries is when they have been giving him taxpayers’ money to fly his planes to airports situated in the back of beyond.

Beyond that, a predictable O’Blarney rant predicated upon the view that the only person with any valid contribution is his own and if you happen to be one of the locals in the vicinity of Gatwick (Crawley and Horley) or Heathrow (W, SW London and Berkshire) or Stanstead (|Bishops Stortford) then your rights to enjoy a life not impacted by aircraft noise are entirely subordinate to his right to make a mint. That is the polite version… I dare say that O’Blarney would be “rather more pithy”…

[canucklad]

I have to say that O’leary is a bit more realistic about about the current “slow death of our aviation industry” than the Conservative peer Lord Glendonbrook being interviewed by Andrew Neil, who blindly doesn’t recognise the damage being done by us not having direct flights to the emerging markets…especially China…..Not understanding the difference between Hong Kong and Guangzhou is eccentrically colonial !

[VintageKrug]

Eccentrically colonial, but rather charming nonetheless.

What such people are doing commenting on aviation policy, I just can’t fathom.

[BeckyBoop]

On 4/12/2012 Willie Walsh answered questions to a Govt Transport Committee on the UK’s Aviation Strategy and airline economics. I suggest you all watch this, very interesting…

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01pdw9z/Select_Committees_Aviation_Strategy/

Available until
7:04PM Sat, 15 Dec 2012

[JohnHarper]

I agree with an earlier post, if LHR is to be a world class facility then it needs five or six runways and where are they going to be built? Those questions should be answered now before any more serious consideration is given to a third. If they are not, we will end up with a classic British compromise that costs a lot and improves nothing for very long. T5 is a fine example of this, too small for BA’s operation even before they bought out BD.

[canucklad]

Good link Becky…..

Not really a Willie fan, but in this case he really made his point….

Especially, at the end when he basically called the whole effort a waste of time, and he wouldn’t even bother reading the final report…

As he said, 93 London politicians will determine short term policy….in other words…….UK PLC will end up stagnating….

A very eloquent damnation of our governance!!

Also liked the barbed warning of VS being taken over by a foreign carrier.

And the danger of Scotland scrapping APD…all good stuff

[BigDog.]

The influential IOD is backing additional runways for LHR.

Having polled its members, the number for LHR expansion was more than double a Thames estuary solution.

The Estuary solution came third after a broad expansion across London’s airports.

To address the noise problem, older, noisier aircraft would be banned from LHR.

The report also demanded an improvement in UK border and passport systems as the long queues are damaging UK Plc competitiveness.

http://www.iod.com/Influencing/Press-Office/Press-releases/New-IoD-report-Business-leaders-urge-comprehensive-overhaul-of-UK-aviation-policy

Detailed analysis is in the link to the “Flying into the future” report.

[Bucksnet]

That’s the plan!

[VintageKrug]

The Estuary solution hasn’t really yet been fully articulated to the public at large…so there really isn’t yet an understanding of what it’s about.

Any “poll” result should not be considered as a true indicator of whether the Estuary should be considered or not.

Businesspeople, just like politicians, will seek a shorter term approach – a massive infrastructure project won’t affect the plans of senior executives who will largely be retired in the supposed 15-20 years many misguidedly believe it would take to construct a runway in the Estuary vs. the similarly misguided quick fix short runway at LHR, which many believe could be knocked up in a matter of a few years (also incorrect).

There still remain the very serious issues in expanding Heathrow *beyond* the short Third Runway, and that is the crux of the issue which will take a longer term perspective to overcome.

The answer, whether Estuary or elsewhere, is not more expansion at Heathrow.

[NTarrant]

The IoD is well respected and listened to by governments of all colour. What the survey shows is that people recognise the access problems with the Boris Island scheme.

Heathrow has easy access to most parts of the country by road, it just needs improvement on the rail front.

[VintageKrug]

You should remember that before the M4 flyover and M25 was completed, Heathrow didn’t have especially good road access.

Its rail access is relatively recent and hugely overpriced, and not well linked to the rest of the country.

The M4 flyover will need to be rebuilt within the next quarter century, and as we saw from a partial closure earlier this year, such major work will bring chaos to the area. M25 has well documented congestion problems, which are added to by Heathrow’s location.

There are obviously issues with access to the Thames Hub, as it’s currently a marsh. Criticising it on that basis is facile.

But such access issues are entirely surmountable. This was similarly overcome in Hong Kong, and you only have to look at Sydney’s recent tunnelling initiative to see what’s possible.

In many ways starting with a clean slate on a greenfield site will allow innovations and different approaches not only to provide easy access quickly, but also with a view to providing access for the future, and opening up a whole new part of the country to the East of London.

http://www.dexigner.com/news/24129

[canucklad]

You make eloquent and persuasive points VK….especially about business people seeking short term gains for immediate profit and potentially unsustainable growth for the benefit of shareholders and the city charlatans, rather than the long term sustainability of the company and its employees.

I fear however as much as we debate on this subject, as much as we all recognise the short comings of travelling by air in the UK…..we will just have to accept the status quo, and being totally selfish, I will probably be long dead before they even start addressing the capacity issue in the South East….

Quoting HK & Oz are bad examples, because in those countries there is a” lets just get it done attitude to life” …as I mentioned earlier,

The best part of WW’s appearance at the parliamentary committee was when he told them that he wasn’t even going to bother reading the final report because nothing will come of it….

Just more hot air and wasted paper !!

[BeckyBoop]

VK what did you think of WW views at the recent select committee?

[Author]

Posts