Son of Maplin Sands?

[[e-mail]]

--------------------------------------------------------
Source:www.airwise.com
--------------------------------------------------------
January 18, 2011
London Mayor Boris Johnson has called for a new airport to be built
in
south-east England after a report said Heathrow was losing out to
European rivals, reigniting the debate on London's airport capacity.
Details:http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1295359901.html

[Graeme Wall]

Post by ***@hotmail.com
--------------------------------------------------------
Source:www.airwise.com
--------------------------------------------------------
January 18, 2011
London Mayor Boris Johnson has called for a new airport to be built
in
south-east England after a report said Heathrow was losing out to
European rivals, reigniting the debate on London's airport capacity.
Details:http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1295359901.html

There is nowhere in the south-east you would be able to build a major
new airport.

[tim....]

Post by ***@hotmail.com
--------------------------------------------------------
Source:www.airwise.com
--------------------------------------------------------
January 18, 2011
London Mayor Boris Johnson has called for a new airport to be built
in
south-east England after a report said Heathrow was losing out to
European rivals, reigniting the debate on London's airport capacity.
Details:http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1295359901.html

There is nowhere in the south-east you would be able to build a major new
airport.

Not allowed on what basis?

The whole idea of building in the Thames estuary is that there would not be
any problems with noise etc.

The problems are all ecological, which can be overruled if thought
necessary.

tim

[Graeme Wall]

Post by tim....

Post by ***@hotmail.com
--------------------------------------------------------
Source:www.airwise.com
--------------------------------------------------------
January 18, 2011
London Mayor Boris Johnson has called for a new airport to be built
in
south-east England after a report said Heathrow was losing out to
European rivals, reigniting the debate on London's airport capacity.
Details:http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1295359901.html

There is nowhere in the south-east you would be able to build a major new
airport.

Not allowed on what basis?

I didn't say it wouldn't be allowed.

Post by tim....
The whole idea of building in the Thames estuary is that there would not be
any problems with noise etc.
The problems are all ecological, which can be overruled if thought
necessary.

So a greatly increased risk of birdstrikes can just be overruled can it?

The problems are not just ecological, there's the problem of access as
well. And the noise is not such an insignificant problem as you seem to
think.

[Mister Niceguy]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by tim....

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by ***@hotmail.com
--------------------------------------------------------
Source:www.airwise.com
--------------------------------------------------------
January 18, 2011
London Mayor Boris Johnson has called for a new airport to be built
in
south-east England after a report said Heathrow was losing out
to European rivals, reigniting the debate on London's airport
capacity.
Details:http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1295359901.html

There is nowhere in the south-east you would be able to build a
major new airport.

Not allowed on what basis?

I didn't say it wouldn't be allowed.

Post by tim....
The whole idea of building in the Thames estuary is that there would
not be any problems with noise etc.
The problems are all ecological, which can be overruled if thought
necessary.

So a greatly increased risk of birdstrikes can just be overruled can it?
The problems are not just ecological, there's the problem of access as
well. And the noise is not such an insignificant problem as you seem
to think.

I can't see it happening. Hopefully new rail links will mean fewer
domestic flights and thence more landing space for internationals.

Anyway, isn't the capacity argument more about being in the business of
providing a hub than about meeting local demand?

[Joe Curry]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 18:35:23 -0000, "tim...."

Post by tim....
The whole idea of building in the Thames estuary is that there would not be
any problems with noise etc.
The problems are all ecological, which can be overruled if thought
necessary.

Being old enough to remember the Maplin Sands fiasco I would say
the ecological problems are insurmountable.

[Michael Bell]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by ***@hotmail.com
--------------------------------------------------------
Source:www.airwise.com
--------------------------------------------------------
January 18, 2011
London Mayor Boris Johnson has called for a new airport to be built
in
south-east England after a report said Heathrow was losing out to
European rivals, reigniting the debate on London's airport capacity.
Details:http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1295359901.html

There is nowhere in the south-east you would be able to build a major
new airport.

I never understood why Boris Johnson was against a 3rd Heathrow
airport.

But if you're willing to spend the money, you can always build a new
airport SOMEWHERE on the Thames estuary, Cliffe or Maplin sands or
anywhere else. But has Boris the money or the clout? I don't think so.


Michael Bell


--

[Joe Curry]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:57:35 +0000, Graeme Wall
<***@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:


http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1295359901.html

Post by Graeme Wall
There is nowhere in the south-east you would be able to build a major
new airport.

Not without the usual protests there isn't.

[William Black]

Post by ***@hotmail.com
--------------------------------------------------------
Source:www.airwise.com
--------------------------------------------------------
January 18, 2011
London Mayor Boris Johnson has called for a new airport to be built
in
south-east England after a report said Heathrow was losing out to
European rivals, reigniting the debate on London's airport capacity.
Details:http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1295359901.html

The reason people don't want to use Heathrow as a hub is that Heathrow
is a dreadful place to be when you're changing planes...

[Roland Perry]

Post by William Black
The reason people don't want to use Heathrow as a hub is that Heathrow
is a dreadful place to be when you're changing planes...

I'd like to think that, but I suspect most people just grin and bear it
(like they do a CDG, ORD etc). I wonder how much busier Heathrow would
be with "better" changes - have BA seen any attributable increase in
passengers since T5 opened? (I'm making the leap of imagination that T5
is in fact perceived to be any better).

[William Black]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by William Black
The reason people don't want to use Heathrow as a hub is that Heathrow
is a dreadful place to be when you're changing planes...

I'd like to think that, but I suspect most people just grin and bear it
(like they do a CDG, ORD etc). I wonder how much busier Heathrow would
be with "better" changes - have BA seen any attributable increase in
passengers since T5 opened? (I'm making the leap of imagination that T5
is in fact perceived to be any better).

We now fly via CDG.

It's faster, cleaner and more comfortable and the staff smile now and
again.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by William Black

Post by Roland Perry

Post by William Black
The reason people don't want to use Heathrow as a hub is that Heathrow
is a dreadful place to be when you're changing planes...

I'd like to think that, but I suspect most people just grin and bear it
(like they do a CDG, ORD etc). I wonder how much busier Heathrow would
be with "better" changes - have BA seen any attributable increase in
passengers since T5 opened? (I'm making the leap of imagination that T5
is in fact perceived to be any better).

We now fly via CDG.
It's faster, cleaner and more comfortable and the staff smile now and
again.

You mean the CDG near Paris????

[William Black]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by William Black

Post by Roland Perry

Post by William Black
The reason people don't want to use Heathrow as a hub is that Heathrow
is a dreadful place to be when you're changing planes...

I'd like to think that, but I suspect most people just grin and bear it
(like they do a CDG, ORD etc). I wonder how much busier Heathrow would
be with "better" changes - have BA seen any attributable increase in
passengers since T5 opened? (I'm making the leap of imagination that T5
is in fact perceived to be any better).

We now fly via CDG.
It's faster, cleaner and more comfortable and the staff smile now and
again.

You mean the CDG near Paris????

Yes.

[Roland Perry]

Post by William Black

Post by Roland Perry

Post by William Black
The reason people don't want to use Heathrow as a hub is that Heathrow
is a dreadful place to be when you're changing planes...

I'd like to think that, but I suspect most people just grin and bear it
(like they do a CDG, ORD etc). I wonder how much busier Heathrow would
be with "better" changes - have BA seen any attributable increase in
passengers since T5 opened? (I'm making the leap of imagination that T5
is in fact perceived to be any better).

We now fly via CDG.
It's faster, cleaner and more comfortable and the staff smile now and
again.

I've been using CDG quite a bit, but T1 (Easyjet) is a bit of a dump
(and a shuttle ride away from the RER and most of the rest of the
gates). What bugs me most at CDG is the way they check your documents so
often. I lost count at about six or seven one time I changed
longhaul-shorthaul, which is also as tortuous in terms of an airside bus
ride merry-go-round as getting from LHR T4 to T3.

[William Black]

On 01/19/2011 06:14 PM, Roland Perry wrote:

What bugs me most at CDG is the way they check your documents so

Post by Roland Perry
often.

Try getting off a Middle Eastern flight into Bombay International...

[Roland Perry]

Post by Roland Perry
What bugs me most at CDG is the way they check your documents so

Post by Roland Perry
often.

Try getting off a Middle Eastern flight into Bombay International...

Last year I got off an Emirates flight at Hyderabad, was nodded through
immigration and waved through customs. Attending a UN conference, along
with a thousand others. Getting the visa, however, was a bit of an
exercise, but once done (it doesn't fit any of the categories issued
through the Indian High Commission's usual agents so you have to do it
direct) everything went very smoothly. And much the same on my previous
conference/trip to Hyderabad, which happened to be a week after the
Mumbai incident, which had a few of the attendees a bit rattled.

[William Black]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Roland Perry
What bugs me most at CDG is the way they check your documents so

Post by Roland Perry
often.

Try getting off a Middle Eastern flight into Bombay International...

Last year I got off an Emirates flight at Hyderabad, was nodded through
immigration and waved through customs. Attending a UN conference, along
with a thousand others. Getting the visa, however, was a bit of an
exercise, but once done (it doesn't fit any of the categories issued
through the Indian High Commission's usual agents so you have to do it
direct) everything went very smoothly. And much the same on my previous
conference/trip to Hyderabad, which happened to be a week after the
Mumbai incident, which had a few of the attendees a bit rattled.

Delhi isn't bad either.

For some reason Bombay International is very bad for excessive security
for flights coming in from the Middle East.

Nine check-points plus immigration, customs (including an X-ray of all
baggage) and the silly 'import declaration chitty handing over'.

I seem to remember reading somewhere that there is no real Indian
immigration service all the officers are actually Indian Police Service
officers (which means graduate specialist trained police officers) who
have offended someone and been sent to the job as a punishment posting.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by William Black
The reason people don't want to use Heathrow as a hub is that Heathrow
is a dreadful place to be when you're changing planes...

I'd like to think that, but I suspect most people just grin and bear it
(like they do a CDG, ORD etc). I wonder how much busier Heathrow would
be with "better" changes - have BA seen any attributable increase in
passengers since T5 opened? (I'm making the leap of imagination that T5
is in fact perceived to be any better).

IME experience T5 is a lot better than T2/T3. I suspect that when the
refurb of the later is complete that will be a lot better as well. I
also suspect that there will still be people ritually moaning about how
awful LHR is despite not having actually been there for decades.

[JohnT]

Post by Roland Perry

The reason people don't want to use Heathrow as a hub is that Heathrow is
a dreadful place to be when you're changing planes...

I'd like to think that, but I suspect most people just grin and bear it
(like they do a CDG, ORD etc). I wonder how much busier Heathrow would be
with "better" changes - have BA seen any attributable increase in
passengers since T5 opened? (I'm making the leap of imagination that T5 is
in fact perceived to be any better).

I find that doing a Domestic (from NCL) to International transfer at LHR T5
is very easy, because it is just a boarding pass check and then up the
escalator without any security search. Unfortunately, on the return trip I
do find the walking distances involved and the number of
immigration/security checks to be rather tiresome. But LHR is better than
CDG. I haven't transferred through AMS recently but my experience there was
that it was much better than LHR or CDG.

[Roland Perry]

Post by JohnT

Post by Roland Perry

Post by William Black
The reason people don't want to use Heathrow as a hub is that
Heathrow is a dreadful place to be when you're changing planes...

I'd like to think that, but I suspect most people just grin and bear
it (like they do a CDG, ORD etc). I wonder how much busier Heathrow
would be with "better" changes - have BA seen any attributable
increase in passengers since T5 opened? (I'm making the leap of
imagination that T5 is in fact perceived to be any better).

I find that doing a Domestic (from NCL) to International transfer at
LHR T5 is very easy, because it is just a boarding pass check and then
up the escalator without any security search. Unfortunately, on the
return trip I do find the walking distances involved and the number of
immigration/security checks to be rather tiresome.

It's those arrivals issues which bugged me too. I suspect the distances
are deliberate - to spread out the other queues and make baggage reclaim
appear more efficient (ie less of a wait). But I've normally been
travelling hand baggage only.

Post by JohnT
But LHR is better than CDG. I haven't transferred through AMS recently
but my experience there was that it was much better than LHR or CDG.

AMS is good, unless you are flying inside Schengen, when some of the
gates are a very long way from the rest of the airport (and from baggage
reclaim) and the arrangements to get between the Schengen and
non-Schengen sides leave something to be desired.

Last time I tried such a transfer via landside (having an EU passport,
obviously), and got pulled up by the passport control people for, in
effect, doing what they claimed was unnecessary diversion. But I simply
said "have you seen the queues for an airside transfer?".