Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Please sign Chiswick's anti-3rd Runway petition | |
Posted by: | Paul Green | |
Date/Time: | 29/10/15 15:47:00 |
Lets be clear, R3 is nothing about the UK economy, nor will not building R3 mean that LHR cannot continue to grow passenger numbers. Its all about expanding the huge shopping and restaurant experience at LHR from which the owners make most of their money. London is already the best connected city in the world, we are not falling behind anyone. Figures quoted such as saying there are more flights to China from Frankfurt and Paris always ignore the fact that there lots of flights from London to HK, still the financial and trade centre for Greater China. There are bilateral agreements that limit the number of flights between two countries and the airlines that can use these. We are already at the current quota for China I have traveled extensively for business in the past and never had a problem getting anywhere. Nor have I ever met a single busines person who said, 'ooh I would invest millions in the UK if only I had more flights to LHR'. Its a complete lie from the airport owners. We have made up and fanciful numbers from all those backing airport expansion, be it at LHR or LGW, its all rubbish. Schipol has five or six runways yet the Dutch economy has been struggling for years. If someone in Newcastle decides to transit via Schipol instead of LHR, it makes no difference to the UK economy. What the UK really needs is better connectivity for the region, such as more direct flights and better transport within the region. Again, govnt regulations prevent a flight taking off from Glasgow, stopping at Manchester for more passengers, then flying on to say China. This would make many long haul routes more feasible. The last Labour govnt approved R3 without any idea of how passengers would get to the airport, and its not been addressed yet. LHR does the bare minimum for air quality or congestion, sound proofing schools etc. But now claims it will do loads if R3 is approved. Expanding LHR will further reduce the number of direct flihts available in the regions and force more people to come to London Indeed, LHR isnt even full. Average passenger loads are c70% (ie 30% of seats are empty) and mainly airlines continue to fly ghost flights or cancel routes for periods (as BA did in the summer as reported in the FT) as they cant fill the planes but want to keep hold of the valuable landing slots. Also, if you live in Grove Park under the current flight path, you will lose the half day respite and only get around a third of the day, as well as hearing planes on the new flight path. Currently c 60% of passengers arrive at LHR by road (LHR own figures). Dont underestimate just how much of the M4 traffic is LHR related. when the volcano stopped air travel, the reduction on traffic volumes on the M4 was staggering. |