|
Massive Airport expansion announced
Terry Harper wrote:
"Graeme Wall" wrote in message ... In message "Terry Harper" wrote: We're not talking about a landing, but the need to "go round again" if the landing has to be aborted. This is unlikely to happen later than when the captain calls finals, when he will be a couple of miles away from the threshold, at least. Last time this happened to me (Dublin) we were over the threshold when the pilot aborted. Apparently an Aeroflot plane had, quote: 'Got lost' and hadn't cleared the runway when expected to. We went up in a straight line and much steeper than a normal take-off. I've also seen go-rounds at Heathrow happen much closer than two miles from threshold. Strictly speaking, the decision to abort ought to be made before the pilot goes to "full flaps", because that inhibits his ability to get away again safely. When he does that, he's almost committed to landing. Trying to climb away on full flap is not nice. You cannot safely raise them until you have enough speed and altitude. In reality, the decision to go around is extremely late - almost at the point of touchdown. All aircraft are able to go around safely as they are very light on fuel anyway. Go around in a modern jet is no more difficult than pressing the go-around button. The plane will automatically apply the correct power, raise the nose to maintain a safe climbout speed, leaving the pilot to raise flaps at the correct speed. -- MrBitsy |
Massive Airport expansion announced
Terry Harper wrote:
"Graeme Wall" wrote in message ... But if it is a choice between a not nice climb out on full flap or mating with a Tupulov half way down the runway, I know which I prefer. If there is a Tupolev halfway down the runway, you should never have got that far. I've done a full-flap overshoot in an Oxford, and didn't enjoy it much. It took forever to get to a height where I could reduce the flap setting, even with the wheels up. I can imagine! Not a problem for a modern airplane. -- MrBitsy |
Massive Airport expansion announced
Terry Harper wrote:
"Graeme Wall" wrote in message ... But if it is a choice between a not nice climb out on full flap or mating with a Tupulov half way down the runway, I know which I prefer. If there is a Tupolev halfway down the runway, you should never have got that far. I've done a full-flap overshoot in an Oxford, and didn't enjoy it much. It took forever to get to a height where I could reduce the flap setting, even with the wheels up. A landing aeroplane at Heathrow has only got to be dalayed on the runway for a very short time to cause the next aircraft to go-around. That go around will nearly always be when the aircraft is over the threshold. I once saw a lufthansa B737 go-around at Heathrow in the storm of 86. Controller said a baggage container was reported to be blowing across 27L. The 737 went around - the wind was so strong that he climbed a couple of thousand feet before making a left turn - he was still over the threshold! Same day a Swissair pilot reported his groundspeed as 56 knots on the approach! -- MrBitsy |
Massive Airport expansion announced
In message , Boltar
writes 40 years ago we didn't have computer prediction, they basically were working on guesswork. Aside from models theres the basic physics that C02 is a green house gas and more CO2 = more trapped energy in the atmosphere whatever effect that may have. Whilst I have no problem with the fact of increased CO2, we don't yet know if the increase allows a corresponding increase in uptake by vegetation. -- Clive |
Massive Airport expansion announced
In message
"Terry Harper" wrote: "Graeme Wall" wrote in message ... But if it is a choice between a not nice climb out on full flap or mating with a Tupulov half way down the runway, I know which I prefer. If there is a Tupolev halfway down the runway, you should never have got that far. I've done a full-flap overshoot in an Oxford, and didn't enjoy it much. It took forever to get to a height where I could reduce the flap setting, even with the wheels up. Being sat somewhere down the back of a Ryanair 737 I didn't actually see the aircraft (it was dark a t the time), just repeating the edited version of what the pilot said once we regained altitude! We were extremely low, can't have been more than 30 feet off the runway. -- Graeme Wall This address is not read, substitute trains for rail. Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html |
Massive Airport expansion announced
Clive wrote:
In message , Boltar writes 40 years ago we didn't have computer prediction, they basically were working on guesswork. Aside from models theres the basic physics that C02 is a green house gas and more CO2 = more trapped energy in the atmosphere whatever effect that may have. Whilst I have no problem with the fact of increased CO2, we don't yet know if the increase allows a corresponding increase in uptake by vegetation. Yes we do: it does (not directly proportional, but it is significant). However, there is the problem of what happens when the plant dies, and also the problem that vegetation only deals with CO2 near ground level. |
Massive Airport expansion announced
"Aidan Stanger" wrote in message ... Clive wrote: In message , Boltar writes 40 years ago we didn't have computer prediction, they basically were working on guesswork. Aside from models theres the basic physics that C02 is a green house gas and more CO2 = more trapped energy in the atmosphere whatever effect that may have. Whilst I have no problem with the fact of increased CO2, we don't yet know if the increase allows a corresponding increase in uptake by vegetation. Yes we do: it does (not directly proportional, but it is significant). However, there is the problem of what happens when the plant dies, and also the problem that vegetation only deals with CO2 near ground level. Not mush of a problem as C02 is heavier than 'air' and it all sinks to the ground over time. tim |
Massive Airport expansion announced
JRS: In article , seen in
news:uk.transport.london, Aidan Stanger posted at Thu, 25 Dec 2003 11:32:00 :- Clive wrote: In message , Boltar writes 40 years ago we didn't have computer prediction, they basically were working on guesswork. Aside from models theres the basic physics that C02 is a green house gas and more CO2 = more trapped energy in the atmosphere whatever effect that may have. Whilst I have no problem with the fact of increased CO2, we don't yet know if the increase allows a corresponding increase in uptake by vegetation. Yes we do: it does (not directly proportional, but it is significant). However, there is the problem of what happens when the plant dies, and also the problem that vegetation only deals with CO2 near ground level. When the plant dies, another one grows. We do not, after all, want to reduce CO2 to zero. The atmosphere, on relevant time scales, is fully mixed. To affect CO2 by 50ppm, which is a useful but not necessarily sufficient amount, about 33 mg/cm^2 of dry plant is required; which is about half a pound per square yard, or two-thirds of a kiloton per square mile, including sea, ice, desert, city and all. -- © John Stockton, Surrey, UK. Turnpike v4.00 MIME. © Web URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links; some Astro stuff via astro.htm, gravity0.htm; quotes.htm; pascal.htm; &c, &c. No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News. |
Massive Airport expansion announced
Dr John Stockton wrote:
Aidan Stanger posted: Clive wrote: writes 40 years ago we didn't have computer prediction, they basically were working on guesswork. Aside from models theres the basic physics that C02 is a green house gas and more CO2 = more trapped energy in the atmosphere whatever effect that may have. Whilst I have no problem with the fact of increased CO2, we don't yet know if the increase allows a corresponding increase in uptake by vegetation. Yes we do: it does (not directly proportional, but it is significant). However, there is the problem of what happens when the plant dies, and also the problem that vegetation only deals with CO2 near ground level. When the plant dies, another one grows. We do not, after all, want to reduce CO2 to zero. When CO2 is continuously being released from the burning of fossil fuels (and from animals, including humans themselves) there is no danger of reducing CO2 to zero. The problem is that often when a plant dies, the carbon is often soon converted back into CO2 (or methane, which is worse). This would not matter were it not for the extra CO2 from fossil fuels - we now need even more plants to absorb it. The atmosphere, on relevant time scales, is fully mixed. What timescales do you consider relevant? The atmosphere does mix fairly quickly, but I'd still expect the time it takes to be significant. To affect CO2 by 50ppm, which is a useful but not necessarily sufficient amount, about 33 mg/cm^2 of dry plant is required; which is about half a pound per square yard, or two-thirds of a kiloton per square mile, including sea, ice, desert, city and all. |
Massive Airport expansion announced
|
Massive Airport expansion announced
In message , Aidan Stanger
writes A lot of people would argue that holidays are essential for the successful operation of our society. However, according to Newsnight, the main growth area is now in the middle-to-high income bracket travellers. Even if you assume overseas holidays are essential, there's no need to build more runways at the main airports. England has HUNDREDS of disused and underused runways, many of which are suitable for conversion to airports. Personally, I'd like to see the re-introduction of Wisley airfield, which while very handy for the M3/M25, would also increase the Nimby factor. My reasoning is that the more people that are affected by aircraft movements then the more they'll empathise with the other poor buggers living underneath them, and so vote for a moratorium. -- Martin @ Strawberry Hill |
Massive Airport expansion announced
Usenet wrote:
writes: Even if you assume overseas holidays are essential, there's no need to build more runways at the main airports. England has HUNDREDS of disused and underused runways, many of which are suitable for conversion to airports. Personally, I'd like to see the re-introduction of Wisley airfield, which while very handy for the M3/M25, would also increase the Nimby factor. My reasoning is that the more people that are affected by aircraft movements then the more they'll empathise with the other poor buggers living underneath them, and so vote for a moratorium. NIMBYs generally don't mind things being built elsewhere. There are a few BANANAs, but I don't think that tactic would make them any more active than they already are. Furthermore a moratorium would be bad for the economy, as it would reduce London's relative connectivity (although the number of destinations reachable direct from Heathrow is actually unimportant, the number of destinations on flights from London airports does matter). SERAS stage 0 identified the following list of airfields that were suitable for conversion to airports: Abingdon (Oxon), Alconbury (Cambs), Boreham (Essex), Boscombe Down (Wilts), Cranfield (Beds), Fairford (Gloucs), Hullavington (Wilts), Lyneham (Wilts), North Weald (Essex), Oakley (Bucks), Odiham (Hants), Thurleigh (Beds), Waterbeach (Cambs), Wormingford (Essex). [For some unknown reason, Bournemouth and Manston were also on the list, despite already being airports.] Of these, I consider the best to be Lyneham [because developing it into an airport would minimize the economic disruption from the RAF's abandonment of the place], Alconbury [it already has good road links, and has the potential for very good rail links], North Weald [because the tube can easily be extended there], and Thurleigh [because it has a long runway, and because together with Alconbury it provides a compelling reason to construct a railway between St.Ives (Cambs) and Bedford, completing a strategic East - West link]. Having checked all the options in the England Photographic Atlas, there is one more airfield that I think might be worth converting into an airport: Upper Heyford (Oxon). This has a long runway, is near railways and a motorway, is in a high growth area, and is close enough to Birmingham to serve some of its demand. |
Massive Airport expansion announced
Aidan Stanger wrote:
Having checked all the options in the England Photographic Atlas, there is one more airfield that I think might be worth converting into an airport: Upper Heyford (Oxon). This has a long runway, is near railways and a motorway, is in a high growth area, and is close enough to Birmingham to serve some of its demand. Isn't Upper Heyford still operational? |
Massive Airport expansion announced
"Stimpy" wrote in message ... Aidan Stanger wrote: Having checked all the options in the England Photographic Atlas, there is one more airfield that I think might be worth converting into an airport: Upper Heyford (Oxon). This has a long runway, is near railways and a motorway, is in a high growth area, and is close enough to Birmingham to serve some of its demand. Isn't Upper Heyford still operational? It's largely used a car storage and police riot training area, (not on the same bit obviously). The runway is no longer viable and it is on top of a hill that regularly restricted military flying. Lots of well to do senior civil servants and government ministers live nearby as well so no chance of there being an airport there. |
Massive Airport expansion announced
"Aidan Stanger" wrote in message ... Usenet wrote: writes: Of these, I consider the best to be Lyneham [because developing it into an airport would minimize the economic disruption from the RAF's abandonment of the place], Alconbury [it already has good road links, and has the potential for very good rail links], North Weald [because the tube can easily be extended there], and Thurleigh [because it has a long runway, and because together with Alconbury it provides a compelling reason to construct a railway between St.Ives (Cambs) and Bedford, completing a strategic East - West link]. Lyneham rejected early on because of runway length and local weather situation, also would require massive investment in local roads, a major factor in it's closure. |
Massive Airport expansion announced
In message , Aidan Stanger
writes Having checked all the options in the England Photographic Atlas, there is one more airfield that I think might be worth converting into an airport: Upper Heyford (Oxon). This has a long runway, is near railways and a motorway, is in a high growth area, and is close enough to Birmingham to serve some of its demand. How about Filton, it has both road and rail links, a very long runway and the latest avionics around? -- clive Coleman. |
Massive Airport expansion announced
"clive Coleman." wrote in message ... In message , Aidan Stanger writes Having checked all the options in the England Photographic Atlas, there is one more airfield that I think might be worth converting into an airport: Upper Heyford (Oxon). This has a long runway, is near railways and a motorway, is in a high growth area, and is close enough to Birmingham to serve some of its demand. How about Filton, it has both road and rail links, a very long runway and the latest avionics around? -- clive Coleman. Development around Filton has in effect halved the size of the airfield. More such work is on he way. There is actually a daily service from there at the moment to Toulouse. (Airbus contract) because of the proximity of housing/schools etc. BAe146 or Dash 8 aircraft have to be used as the noise footprint is low. Chartered in from British European. |
Massive Airport expansion announced
clive Coleman. wrote:
In message , Aidan Stanger writes Having checked all the options in the England Photographic Atlas, there is one more airfield that I think might be worth converting into an airport: Upper Heyford (Oxon). This has a long runway, is near railways and a motorway, is in a high growth area, and is close enough to Birmingham to serve some of its demand. How about Filton, it has both road and rail links, a very long runway and the latest avionics around? Unfortunately there are now a lot of houses under the Filton flightpath, so Filton is generally considered to now be unsuitable for the purpose (although they might get away with developing it as a business airport. A few minutes' drive away at Pilning is the only greenfield site where it would be worth building an airport - it's got almost no houses under the flightpath (so it would be suitable for 24 hour operation) and it has railways and motorways to half of England (and quite a lot of Wales) but the government have just decided to rule it out! |
Massive Airport expansion announced
G Crozier wrote:
wrote: Personally, I'd like to see the re-introduction of Wisley airfield, which while very handy for the M3/M25, would also increase the Nimby factor. To hell with more airports in the southeast we only have one decent airport here in the northwest and that's Manchester and the time is long overdue for us to have another the same size or larger . Why? Do any other airports in the NW operate anywhere near their capacity? |
Massive Airport expansion announced
|
Massive Airport expansion announced
G Crozier wrote...
(Aidan Stanger) wrote: G Crozier wrote: wrote: Personally, I'd like to see the re-introduction of Wisley airfield, which while very handy for the M3/M25, would also increase the Nimby factor. To hell with more airports in the southeast we only have one decent airport here in the northwest and that's Manchester and the time is long overdue for us to have another the same size or larger . Why? Do any other airports in the NW operate anywhere near their capacity? We only have one and that has I stated is Manchester in the SE there are 4 or 5 major airports each within easy reach of people living in the area I am thirty odd miles away from Manchester people living in the Cumberland area have around a hundred mile journey to Manchester . Capacity doesn't matter it is accessability that matters which many people up here in the northwest don't have. I certainly agree that there is great scope for expanding use of the airports in the NW (especially Liverpool, which as such excellent runway facilities and a near-perfect estuarine location, but wouldn't particularly residents of Cumberland). AAMOF, developing Liverpool and Leeds/Bradford could even take some of the (international) pressure off the London airports - surely not everyone who lands at Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted and Luton is travelling to London and environs? But you are mistaken if you think that South East residents all have an airport within 30 miles of their homes. Even if they did (they don't), travelling 30 miles in the SE can be a real penance, especially if it involves the M25. Other things being equal, I'd rather drive from Whitehaven to Ringway than from Southend to Heathrow. |
Massive Airport expansion announced
In article , G Crozier
writes Capacity doesn't matter it is accessability that matters which many people up here in the northwest don't have. Wrong. I live 30 miles from Heathrow. I can get to Swindon (60 miles away) in less time than it takes to get to Heathrow. -- Andrew Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this communication can not be guaranteed. Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not associations or companies I am involved with. |
Massive Airport expansion announced
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 15:33:31 +0000, Andrew P Smith
wrote: Wrong. I live 30 miles from Heathrow. I can get to Swindon (60 miles away) in less time than it takes to get to Heathrow. I never mentioned anything about time you do have a major airport within 30 miles which most people up here haven't and you do NOT have to go to HRW by car now do you . Grant . |
Massive Airport expansion announced
In article , G Crozier
writes and you do NOT have to go to HRW by car now do you . OK, let's see what possible route I have by public transport. 1. Bus into the centre of High Wycombe (every 30 mins at peak periods, one an hour after 7pm, none after 10pm. 2. Walk from bus station to train station carrying luggage. 3. Train into London. 4. Tube or taxi from Marylebone across London to Paddington for the Hex or a suitable tube station for the Picc. Alternative 1. Bus and walk as before. 3. Train to South Ruislip (or similar) then bus to Hayes then another bus to the airport. Alternative 2. Bus from bus station in Wycombe to Bourne End, Bus from Bourne End to Slough, then bus to the airport. Alternative 3 (if it still runs). Bus from Wycombe bus station to Slough, then bus to the airport. Other combinations of bus/train available. What we need is for Heathrow to be connected to the Reading and Waterloo train lines. Then a number of huge, security patrolled park and rides at dedicated train stations with fast journeys into the airport running every 15 mins during the day and every 25 mins at night. I would use it every time. Is it going to happen? Unfortunately not. I wish it would. -- Andrew Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this communication can not be guaranteed. Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not associations or companies I am involved with. |
Massive Airport expansion announced
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 15:58:52 +0000, Andrew P Smith
wrote: In article , G Crozier writes and you do NOT have to go to HRW by car now do you . OK, let's see what possible route I have by public transport. [snip] alternative 4 http://www.carouselbuses.com/ HTH -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
Massive Airport expansion announced
In article , Paul Corfield
writes http://www.carouselbuses.com/ HTH -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! Woa!!!! When did this start?? July 2003??? Nothing in the local press about it when they launched. Follows a good route too. Only a fiver to the airport! A good alternative to the car if you are travelling during office hours. No good for evening flights, but a start. And a good one at that. -- Andrew Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this communication can not be guaranteed. Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not associations or companies I am involved with. |
Massive Airport expansion announced
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 18:06:30 +0000, Andrew P Smith
wrote: When did this start?? July 2003??? Nothing in the local press about it when they launched. Follows a good route too. Yes Andrew has one who spent the early part of life spotting conducting and later driving buses up here in the northwest for 25 years I have never seen this operator mentioned anywhere before you live and learn . Grant . |
Massive Airport expansion announced
G Crozier wrote:
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004, (Aidan Stanger) wrote: G Crozier wrote: To hell with more airports in the southeast we only have one decent airport here in the northwest and that's Manchester and the time is long overdue for us to have another the same size or larger . Why? Do any other airports in the NW operate anywhere near their capacity? We only have one and that has I stated is Manchester in the SE there are 4 or 5 major airports each within easy reach of people living in the area I am thirty odd miles away from Manchester people living in the Cumberland area have around a hundred mile journey to Manchester . Capacity doesn't matter it is accessability that matters which many people up here in the northwest don't have. It was size you were complaining about before, and there's no point building another airport (or even expanding an existing one) if there's already enough capacity to satisfy demand. If access to airports is the problem then you should say so in the first place. |
Massive Airport expansion announced
|
Massive Airport expansion announced
On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 03:21:58 +0000, G Crozier
wrote: On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 23:53:40 +0000, wrote: I take it you want it somewhere other than in your own back yard. ;-) That's where you are wrong in my case I would love one in my own back yard has you put it in fact to live a stones throw from HRW would please me no end . Let's just wait for a plane or two to demolish Slough One did fall out of the sky a few years ago now over Slough if I am not mistaken the captain didn't close the flaps or something after taking off I think this is the one. 27/10/1965 London, UK VC-9 BEA Crew tiredness . Lancs and Cheshire have many, many farmers who'd like nothing more than to sell a few hundred acres and retire without worries. You think so did you not here about the big stink they all made when the second runway was proposed at Manchester ? . Personally, I'd bung in a fiver for demolition of 'The Swamp' (Trafford Park, Salford and *outside* Manchester) to make way for a new airport! What's the point of building in the Manchester area the people in North Lancashire and Cumbria would be no better provisioned regarding access . A much better place WOULD be right in my " back yard" the BAC establisment at Salmlesbury nr Preston about 5 miles away from me and if I am not mistaken I think a 747 has been down on there once soon after they went into service . Grant . PS the Captain's name of the BEA flight was Captain Stanley Key that I am certain of . Grant . |
Massive Airport expansion announced
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 18:06:30 +0000, Andrew P Smith
wrote: In article , Paul Corfield writes http://www.carouselbuses.com/ Woa!!!! When did this start?? July 2003??? Nothing in the local press about it when they launched. Follows a good route too. Only a fiver to the airport! A good alternative to the car if you are travelling during office hours. No good for evening flights, but a start. And a good one at that. Hopefully you'll give it a go and give Carousel some support. It seems like quite a risk to take - new Mercedes Buses etc - but I wish them well. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
Massive Airport expansion announced
G Crozier wrote:
On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 23:53:40 +0000, wrote: Let's just wait for a plane or two to demolish Slough One did fall out of the sky a few years ago now over Slough if I am not mistaken You are mistaken. It was over Staines. the captain didn't close the flaps or something after taking off I think this is the one. The captain, or perhaps another member of the crew, prematurely closed the leading-edge droops. 27/10/1965 London, UK 18 June 1972 VC-9 BEA Trident Crew tiredness . The captain had a heart attack. [from later post} PS the Captain's name of the BEA flight was Captain Stanley Key that I am certain of. You got that bit right! -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
Massive Airport expansion announced
"Aidan Stanger" wrote in message ... G Crozier wrote: wrote: Personally, I'd like to see the re-introduction of Wisley airfield, which while very handy for the M3/M25, would also increase the Nimby factor. To hell with more airports in the southeast we only have one decent airport here in the northwest and that's Manchester and the time is long overdue for us to have another the same size or larger . Why? Do any other airports in the NW operate anywhere near their capacity? Leeds/Bradford took a lot of market share from Manchester when some lower fares were introduced in 2000 on some European routes. I have no personal experience but a colleague from Warrington found it cheaper and quicker to use than Manchester at peak times. |
Massive Airport expansion announced
"Andrew P Smith" wrote in message ... In article , G Crozier writes and you do NOT have to go to HRW by car now do you . OK, let's see what possible route I have by public transport. 1. Bus into the centre of High Wycombe (every 30 mins at peak periods, one an hour after 7pm, none after 10pm. 2. Walk from bus station to train station carrying luggage. 3. Train into London. 4. Tube or taxi from Marylebone across London to Paddington for the Hex or a suitable tube station for the Picc. Alternative 1. Bus and walk as before. 3. Train to South Ruislip (or similar) then bus to Hayes then another bus to the airport. Alternative 2. Bus from bus station in Wycombe to Bourne End, Bus from Bourne End to Slough, then bus to the airport. Alternative 3 (if it still runs). Bus from Wycombe bus station to Slough, then bus to the airport. Other combinations of bus/train available. What we need is for Heathrow to be connected to the Reading and Waterloo train lines. Then a number of huge, security patrolled park and rides at dedicated train stations with fast journeys into the airport running every 15 mins during the day and every 25 mins at night. I would use it every time. Is it going to happen? Unfortunately not. I wish it would. -- Andrew Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this communication can not be guaranteed. Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not associations or companies I am involved with. Yes it is, Hayes will be the interchange from the West. Heathrow train from there from December 2004. In addition coaches already run from Reading every 15 mins or so. If cost is important (which to me it is) I would never park at Heathrow, even the off airport parking is undercut by the public transport costs. |
Massive Airport expansion announced
On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 01:25:18 +0000, (Steve Firth)
wrote: That's not needed. What is needed is for the government to recognise that a lot of the traffic through Heathrow/Gatwick is travellers who have travelled from the North to use the airport because the southern airports are the international gateways. No Steve has you have mentioned if I want to go to say LA most of the cheaper flights go via Schiphol or Charles de ball . Distributing air traffic around the country would help with the "crowded skies" problem. We do need another international airport up here preferably somewhere in the Kendal area or even turn Carlisle into one at the moment its either Prestwick Manchester or London's airports for long haul flights with nothing in between . In the present climate I don't think I shall be flying anywhere for many months to come especially after yesterdays debacle with flight 223 . Grant . |
Massive Airport expansion announced
On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:17:21 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote: You are mistaken. It was over Staines. I do beg your parden you are right it was a long time ago though. The captain, or perhaps another member of the crew, prematurely closed the leading-edge droops. I know it was something of that nature :)) . Crew tiredness . The captain had a heart attack. Well the report stated Crew tiredness but I did think it was some health problem and he had mentioned before boarding the plane that he did not feel well but put it down to indigestion or something. [from later post} PS the Captain's name of the BEA flight was Captain Stanley Key that I am certain of. You got that bit right! God only knows how or why I have hung on to that name all these years !!. Grant . |
Massive Airport expansion announced
In article , Jon Porter
writes Yes it is, Hayes will be the interchange from the West. Heathrow train from there from December 2004. In addition coaches already run from Reading every 15 mins or so. If cost is important (which to me it is) I would never park at Heathrow, even the off airport parking is undercut by the public transport costs. I know about coaches from Reading, they have been running for years just like the coach link from Feltham. Have they built a new station at Heathrow then or will the trains use the Hex platforms?? -- Andrew Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this communication can not be guaranteed. Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not associations or companies I am involved with. |
Massive Airport expansion announced
"Steve Firth" wrote in message
.. . Although I live in the south, I refuse to use either Thiefrow or Pratwick. I get a flight from my local airport to Schiphol and start from there. For long-haul flights several carriers will include the connecting flight in the ticket cost - often at no extra cost to me. And I believe that parking at Southampton is reasonably priced as well. I've had a few decent deals travelling via Schipol or CDG which were a lot cheaper than a direct flight. -- Terry Harper http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/ |
Massive Airport expansion announced
On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 15:42:33 +0000 (UTC), "Jon Porter"
wrote: "Aidan Stanger" wrote in message ... G Crozier wrote: wrote: Personally, I'd like to see the re-introduction of Wisley airfield, which while very handy for the M3/M25, would also increase the Nimby factor. To hell with more airports in the southeast we only have one decent airport here in the northwest and that's Manchester and the time is long overdue for us to have another the same size or larger . Why? Do any other airports in the NW operate anywhere near their capacity? Leeds/Bradford took a lot of market share from Manchester when some lower fares were introduced in 2000 on some European routes. I have no personal experience but a colleague from Warrington found it cheaper and quicker to use than Manchester at peak times. Is a hell of a long drive over to Leeds from Warrington I can be on Manchester airport in an hour from here and its only half an hour from Warrington . L&B from here would take me a good two hours at least and not much different from Warrington and no motorway or rail access right to the door as is the case with Manchester . I can be in the center of Amsterdam within three hours of leaving home via Manchester would probably be longer now with all the palavour that is going on at airports these days I couldn't be going via L&B though. Grant . |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 02:01 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk