June 11th 18, 03:43 PM
posted to uk.transport.london
|
|
external usenet poster
|
|
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Oct 2014
Posts: 2,990
|
|
Plan to pedestrianise London's Oxford Street scrapped
wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:54:55 +0100
John Williamson wrote:
On 11/06/2018 14:36, wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 13:52:34 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
If a third [approximately] of all flights are generated by transfer
passengers then all the maintenance and support (eg airline meals and
baggage handling, and cleaning and fuelling and dispatch) for those
flights creates work in the local economy.
A trivial amount.
Equivalent to about 20,000 full time jobs, mostly customers of local
businesses, for an extra 5,000 full time jobs in local businesses.
LOL, yes, I'm sure it says that in Heathrow Plcs strategy document.
There's no such organisation.
Now how
about a link to some projections by a neutral 3rd party?
Heathrow employs about 60,000 people, or the entire population of a
small town, all of whom need entertainment, food and other services.
Not to mention the 23 million or so passengers per year who will need
feedingand other services, again supplied by local businesses.
Trivial?
Yes, because your projected figures are bull****.
Those figures are at least credible. You have no figures at all. You just
have your paranoia about flying, that overwhelms your limited reasoning
ability.
Give some examples then of routes that will be used by transfer passengers
but not in any significant amount by locals.
It's a marginal problem. Some destinations aren't worth flying to with
either the transfer passengers or the local passengers as the sole load.
Add the two together, and you have a full plane which makes a profit, as
against two part full ones, neither of which is profitable. It costs
almost the same to fly empty as full.
So currently no actual examples from either roland or you. Got it.
Why would people bother researching things for an imbecile incapable of
understanding anything?
|