On Tue, 2 Sep 2014 10:22:49 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message
,
at 02:36:55 on Tue, 2 Sep 2014, Recliner
remarked:
Having lived through the "Third airport" debacle, where unless I'm very
much mistaken the result was expanding the biggest existing shortlisted
airport (and rejecting otherwise preferred but more expensive builds), I
wouldn't be surprised to see Gatwick being chosen for the "next new runway".

By that logic, surely Heathrow would be chosen?

Lots of local opposition, and much more expensive.

True, but also much, much more demand for it. Apart from Gatwick
airport itself, not many people are demanding a second runway there.
Pretty much the entire business community and airline industry want
Heathrow to expand.


All the logic favours a
third Heathrow runway as first choice, with a second Gatwick runway the
next expansion option a few years later.

Doesn't the plan to redevelop the railway station there almost take that
outcome for granted?

I don't know the details, but if the new runway and terminals are well to
the south of the existing railway station,

The new terminal will be between the old and new runways, no further
from the station than the current North Terminal (with its shuttle
train).

If it's the other side of the existing runway, it'll be a lot further
from the current south terminal than the north terminal is.

wouldn't the station need to be moved as well as expanded?

No.

There would almost certainly need to be a new, fast, direct rail link
between the airports as well, if they're to share the hub airport role.

No. The proposal is to keep the most valuable "hub" flights at Heathrow
and move the more point-to-point ones to Gatwick.

But how do you decide that the point-to-point flights don't support
the hub flights?