Heathrow Third Runway

  oresome 19:16 01 Oct 2008
Locked

The next Conservative government will build a high speed railway linking London with some northern cities rather than expand capacity at Heathrow.

The rail link will replicate journeys made by less than 3% of current flights from Heathrow and will take until 2027 to complete.

Does it seem like £20 billion of taxpayers money well spent and will it do much to alleviate congestion at Heathrow?

On the other hand, have present economic conditions, declining oil reserves and a shift in world economic power put projected UK air traffic growth in the realms of fiction?

  Forum Editor 19:34 01 Oct 2008

we were supposed to have high-speed rail links with some Northern cities already.

Heathrow isn't congested because of passengers flying up to Newcastle, it's congested because it's a major international hub in one of the world's major cities, and because everyone wants to fly from,to,or through it.

Either we want to continue to deal with this traffic in London or we don't - spending vast sums on rail links that don't address the problem isn't remotely helpful. A third runway at Heathrow will cost around £13 billion (how easily these huge figures trip off our tongues these days), so the rail link idea had better have at least £7 billion's worth of extra goodies up its sleeve.

Window dressing, that's all it is. Expect more of the same from both major parties in the coming year - methinks there's going to be an election in 2009.

  birdface 20:16 01 Oct 2008

Seen a bit of the speech to-day And not a lot new.We are already getting quicker trains but who can afford them.Does not want a 3rd terminal at Stanstead.Will probably loose more votes than it gains,We will have a vote whether we want to join the European market or not.labour promised us that as well but we never got it.Will give Gordon Brown full support on fixing the problem in the money market what else could he say..I thought the speech went down like a damp squib but the conference seemed to like it.Now if he really wanted folk to vote for him why not bring all our troops back home and that would swing it for him.

  sunny staines 20:59 01 Oct 2008

living close to heathrow i am all for ditching the 3rd runway plan due to noise and air pollution.

  john bunyan 21:25 01 Oct 2008

Maybe the answer is the proposed Thames Estuary airport with 4 or 5 runways and the long term closure of Gatwick and Heathrow. Following the success of the Hong Kong airport and the organising of the Olympics, maybe a Chinese contractor ???

  Forum Editor 22:21 01 Oct 2008

and that would swing it for him."

I wouldn't bank on that.

  Jak_1 22:23 01 Oct 2008

Hm! Has this thread been edited somewhat! Last time I looked there were 10 posts!

  bluto1 23:35 01 Oct 2008

Sorry buteman, but the way I read it there's either very few or no servicemen who will vote for Brown.

  birdface 00:45 02 Oct 2008

You can't really blame brown for it as he was not the PM at the time.I did mean if Hamilton brought them home it would be a vote catcher.I just think its about time we had some good news for a change rather than the doom and gloom we get most days.

  laurie53 09:07 02 Oct 2008

I wouldn't mind going by train if I didn't have twenty miles to go by car to get to my nearest railway station!

  JanetO 09:19 02 Oct 2008

I couldn't agree more. But I think you'll find a similar situation will occur like terminal 5. The government have already made up their minds, along with BAA (to line their pockets even more) to go ahead. All they're doing is paying lip service.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Acer Predator 21X review

These hilarious robot GIFs will be sure to make you smile

Best podcast apps for iPhone & iPad

Nokia 8 : design, caractéristiques techniques, date de sortie