London Banter - View Single Post - BAA still making plans to resurrect dead runway

Bruce[_2_] · June 8th 10, 01:57 PM posted to uk.transport.london

On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 13:48 +0100 (BST), lid (Paul
Cummins) wrote:
In article ,
(Bruce) wrote:
*From:* Bruce
*Date:* Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:16:03 +0100

On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 13:02 +0100 (BST), lid
(Paul
Cummins) wrote:
In article
,
(CJB) wrote:

The letter sent to residents to confirm the end of BAA's buy-up,
also reveals that BAA is still considering applying for planning
permission for a third runway.

Why don't they just reinstate the third runway that currently
exists?

Because its clearances have been infringed by new building. Because
it crosses the two east-west runways (09-27L and 09-27R) and using
it
would mean that those two runways would have to be closed.

Next question?

OK - why were the clearances on runways 3,4,5 and 6 (yes, Heathrow was designed for
6 runways!) been allowed to be either built on or infringed, without consideration
of the future implications.

Because those runways would have been too short for modern airliners.
The "future implication" was that they were not needed, and they still
aren't, and never will be, unless the Laws of Physics are changed.

Also, you are being deliberately misleading by suggesting that modern
Heathrow could have had six runways, because only a maximum of two
parallel runways could ever have been in use at any one time. So
whichever way the wind blew, the design allowed for only two runways
to operate.

And why have successive owners done this, when they must have had a clue of the
implications!

They did it precisely because they *did* understand the implications,
which is clearly not something that you could ever claim.

Please don't ask any more stupid questions. However, in the unlikely
event that you want to ask an intelligent question, go ahead.