London Banter - View Single Post

Recliner[_2_] · May 8th 13, 10:42 AM posted to uk.transport.london

On Wed, 8 May 2013 10:36:00 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:

On Wed, 08 May 2013 11:17:35 +0100
Recliner wrote:
On Wed, 8 May 2013 10:12:49 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:
There is of course another option - don't bother expanding any airport since
its all a con. There is quite enough air traffic over south east england
already - we don't need any more. And the comparisons between heathrow and
Schippol or CDG are bogus. Those ARE the main airports for the amsterdam and
paris. Amsterdam doesn't have any others of note and paris only has Orly.
London has heathrow, gatwick, stanstead, city, luton and - at a push -
southend. Thats plenty. This whole drive for airport expansion is nothing
more
than vested interests in the airline industry pushing their own agenda at the
expense of quality of life of millions and the enviroment.

You apparently don't understand the concept of a hub airport.

A "hub" is of little benefit to anyone other than the airport itself since
by definition most of the passengers and freight will simply be passing
through. Any tired old economic growth arguments put forward in support are
specious and are purely self interest.

There are enough runways in the SE. We don't need anymore just to bolster the
share price of Ferrovia or get Boris a seat on the board of a construction
company when he finally gets bored of playing at being Major.

Sigh Hub airports allow many more secondary destinations to be
served directly than would be viable otherwise, thus benefiting local
businesses and citizens. For example, I'd like to be able to fly
directly to cities like Santiago without having to change, as is
currently required. This has been discussed here at length in the
past.