News Thames Estuary Airport

[Embattle]

It would appear the idea has gained a tiny bit more support, whats peoples opinions on it?

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4f4e3a0a-11d4-11e1-a114-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1eCPfMukC

 

[Zenith.UK]

What's it say for the non-registered?

What's wrong with Heathrow, Gatwick, Stanstead and London City airports? I thought the one in London's docklands was as good as Thames estuary.

 

[Embattle]

Strange since I'm not registered, well here - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2063620/George-Osborne-backs-Boris-Island-airport.html

 

[Reno]

Since I'm not English I don't really have an oppinion about it, just a few questions.
Biggest question is: what is the date on the report that says the London Airports will fill up by 2030 and have the actual growth figures ( if any) since that report came out kept up with projected growth figures.
With UK/EU/Global economy going as it is, will the projections actually come through?
Safety concerns might also put quite a damper on the project, I doubt they have been studied as much as the economics and engineering of the plan.

I could read the FT piece just fine though.

 

[Chilly]

Population growth accounts for a reasonable chunk of future aviation growth, not all underlying economic growth (when normalised for population)

 

[DaGaffer]

Heathrow is in the wrong place, everyone knows it, but they kept expanding it anyway, and now its maxxed out unless they compulsory purchase some of the most expensive land in Europe, and reroute the M25. Plus its a safety hazard as most flights come in across London itself. Stanstead is too far out and Gatwick isn't suitable for much more expansion either. If you believe air traffic is going to soar as much as the projections (which personally I doubt), then the Thames Estuary idea does actually make a lot of sense.

 

[Mabs]

methinks they shouldnt have built houses on all the old RAF etc airfields post-war.