About Us

[email protected] · June 11th 18, 01:40 PM posted to uk.transport.london

On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 13:00:39 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 11/06/2018 11:53, wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 11:15:01 +0100
John Williamson wrote:
On 11/06/2018 09:35, wrote:

No one would want to fly from heathrow if it didn't have 2 rail links and
a motorway going to it.

For about half the passengers who fly in to and out of Heathrow, the
road and rail links outside the airport don't matter, as they fly in
from one airport, possibly change terminals, and fly out to another one.

Which means there's even less reason not to use Manston.

This is the target audience for expansion, as Heathrow is the biggest
hub airport in Europe, and has a wider choice of international
destinations than any other. They are trying to keep their lead in this
over Frankfurt, Charles de Gaulle and Schiphol.

And a hub airport brings very little to the UK other than pollution and
profit for Heathrow Plc. The fact that the cabinet has been suckered into
approving the new runway demonstrates - if we didn't know already - what a
dim
bunch of 2nd raters they are.

Among the many problems with using Manston as London's major airport,
there's fitting the flight paths in with those over mainland Europe for
airports there. Do you reckon France and the Netherlands would nicely
move those for Schipol and CDG to make room?

I'm not suggesting supplanting the whole of heathrow with manston. But even
if I was, aircraft could still stack over the UK, it would have no impact on
french or dutch airspace.

Graeme Wall · June 11th 18, 02:24 PM posted to uk.transport.london

On 11/06/2018 14:40, wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 13:00:39 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 11/06/2018 11:53, wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 11:15:01 +0100
John Williamson wrote:
On 11/06/2018 09:35, wrote:

No one would want to fly from heathrow if it didn't have 2 rail links and
a motorway going to it.

For about half the passengers who fly in to and out of Heathrow, the
road and rail links outside the airport don't matter, as they fly in
from one airport, possibly change terminals, and fly out to another one.

Which means there's even less reason not to use Manston.

This is the target audience for expansion, as Heathrow is the biggest
hub airport in Europe, and has a wider choice of international
destinations than any other. They are trying to keep their lead in this
over Frankfurt, Charles de Gaulle and Schiphol.

And a hub airport brings very little to the UK other than pollution and
profit for Heathrow Plc. The fact that the cabinet has been suckered into
approving the new runway demonstrates - if we didn't know already - what a
dim
bunch of 2nd raters they are.

Among the many problems with using Manston as London's major airport,
there's fitting the flight paths in with those over mainland Europe for
airports there. Do you reckon France and the Netherlands would nicely
move those for Schipol and CDG to make room?

I'm not suggesting supplanting the whole of heathrow with manston. But even
if I was, aircraft could still stack over the UK, it would have no impact on
french or dutch airspace.

Check the prevailing wind directions, also the location of the stacks
for LHR and LGW.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

[email protected] · June 11th 18, 02:31 PM posted to uk.transport.london

On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:24:59 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 11/06/2018 14:40, wrote:
I'm not suggesting supplanting the whole of heathrow with manston. But even
if I was, aircraft could still stack over the UK, it would have no impact on
french or dutch airspace.

Check the prevailing wind directions, also the location of the stacks
for LHR and LGW.

It might be convenient to have a stack downwind of an airport but its not
essential.

Robin[_4_] · June 11th 18, 02:43 PM posted to uk.transport.london

On 11/06/2018 15:31, wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:24:59 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 11/06/2018 14:40, wrote:
I'm not suggesting supplanting the whole of heathrow with manston. But even
if I was, aircraft could still stack over the UK, it would have no impact on
french or dutch airspace.

Check the prevailing wind directions, also the location of the stacks
for LHR and LGW.

It might be convenient to have a stack downwind of an airport but its not
essential.

So do you reckon the head of UK ATC was wrong to see problems for
Schipol and the Netherlands with "Boris Island"? Or that with Manston,
some 45km further East, they just wouldn't feature?

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

Recliner[_3_] · June 11th 18, 02:55 PM posted to uk.transport.london

Robin wrote:
On 11/06/2018 15:31, wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:24:59 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 11/06/2018 14:40, wrote:
I'm not suggesting supplanting the whole of heathrow with manston. But even
if I was, aircraft could still stack over the UK, it would have no impact on
french or dutch airspace.

Check the prevailing wind directions, also the location of the stacks
for LHR and LGW.

It might be convenient to have a stack downwind of an airport but its not
essential.

So do you reckon the head of UK ATC was wrong to see problems for
Schipol and the Netherlands with "Boris Island"? Or that with Manston,
some 45km further East, they just wouldn't feature?

Boltar thinks everyone less ignorant than him is wrong. That's most of the
population.

[email protected] · June 11th 18, 03:25 PM posted to uk.transport.london

On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 14:55:21 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Robin wrote:
On 11/06/2018 15:31, wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:24:59 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 11/06/2018 14:40, wrote:
I'm not suggesting supplanting the whole of heathrow with manston. But
even
if I was, aircraft could still stack over the UK, it would have no impact
on
french or dutch airspace.

Check the prevailing wind directions, also the location of the stacks
for LHR and LGW.

It might be convenient to have a stack downwind of an airport but its not
essential.

So do you reckon the head of UK ATC was wrong to see problems for
Schipol and the Netherlands with "Boris Island"? Or that with Manston,
some 45km further East, they just wouldn't feature?

Boltar thinks everyone less ignorant than him is wrong. That's most of the
population.

You just think everyone is wrong. Go slurp some booze, maybe you'll have
something more worthwhile to say.

Recliner[_3_] · June 11th 18, 03:43 PM posted to uk.transport.london

wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 14:55:21 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Robin wrote:
On 11/06/2018 15:31, wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:24:59 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 11/06/2018 14:40, wrote:
I'm not suggesting supplanting the whole of heathrow with manston. But
even
if I was, aircraft could still stack over the UK, it would have no impact
on
french or dutch airspace.

Check the prevailing wind directions, also the location of the stacks
for LHR and LGW.

It might be convenient to have a stack downwind of an airport but its not
essential.

So do you reckon the head of UK ATC was wrong to see problems for
Schipol and the Netherlands with "Boris Island"? Or that with Manston,
some 45km further East, they just wouldn't feature?

Boltar thinks everyone less ignorant than him is wrong. That's most of the
population.

You just think everyone is wrong.

No, just you. Let me translate the remark you were replying to: most of the
population is smarter than you.

Go slurp some booze, maybe you'll have
something more worthwhile to say.

I'd have to be seriously drunk to spout the waffle you do, supposedly while
sober.

[email protected] · June 11th 18, 03:21 PM posted to uk.transport.london

On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:43:03 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 11/06/2018 15:31, wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:24:59 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 11/06/2018 14:40, wrote:
I'm not suggesting supplanting the whole of heathrow with manston. But even
if I was, aircraft could still stack over the UK, it would have no impact
on
french or dutch airspace.

Check the prevailing wind directions, also the location of the stacks
for LHR and LGW.

It might be convenient to have a stack downwind of an airport but its not
essential.

So do you reckon the head of UK ATC was wrong to see problems for
Schipol and the Netherlands with "Boris Island"? Or that with Manston,
some 45km further East, they just wouldn't feature?

Well somehow planes managed to land at manston for decades so why not ask them
how they solved it.

Robin[_4_] · June 11th 18, 03:37 PM posted to uk.transport.london

On 11/06/2018 16:21, wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:43:03 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 11/06/2018 15:31, wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:24:59 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 11/06/2018 14:40, wrote:
I'm not suggesting supplanting the whole of heathrow with manston. But even
if I was, aircraft could still stack over the UK, it would have no impact
on
french or dutch airspace.

Check the prevailing wind directions, also the location of the stacks
for LHR and LGW.

It might be convenient to have a stack downwind of an airport but its not
essential.

So do you reckon the head of UK ATC was wrong to see problems for
Schipol and the Netherlands with "Boris Island"? Or that with Manston,
some 45km further East, they just wouldn't feature?

Well somehow planes managed to land at manston for decades so why not ask them
how they solved it.

I do know that actually, having first landed at Manston in 1965 in a
Chipmunk. But why not share your figures for Manston's previous peak
performance and tell us where the extra flight paths will come from to
justify I also know that Manson never achieved a fraction of the
movements necessary to justify the infrastructure investment you are
calling for? Or are they Scotch mist (mist being something Manston used
to be rather good at)

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

[email protected] · June 12th 18, 08:50 AM posted to uk.transport.london

On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 16:37:28 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 11/06/2018 16:21, wrote:
Well somehow planes managed to land at manston for decades so why not ask
them
how they solved it.

I do know that actually, having first landed at Manston in 1965 in a
Chipmunk. But why not share your figures for Manston's previous peak
performance and tell us where the extra flight paths will come from to
justify I also know that Manson never achieved a fraction of the
movements necessary to justify the infrastructure investment you are
calling for? Or are they Scotch mist (mist being something Manston used
to be rather good at)

Flight paths are not fixed tracks in the sky, they can be adjusted to suit.
You're just putting up made up problems to back up the feeble assertion that
manston is unsuitable. The planes could use exactly the same stacks as
heathrow and gatwick with obviously a different final approach. How do you
think City Airport manages?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
No Crossrail stations to be scrapped in cost-cutting	1506[_2_]	London Transport	1	September 28th 10 10:01 PM
LEZ phase 3 for vans and minibuses scrapped - Boris has no balls	Mizter T	London Transport	7	February 4th 09 07:07 PM
Western Extension Scrapped	Tom Barry	London Transport	18	November 29th 08 05:52 PM
Boundary zone n fares scrapped?	Colin Rosenstiel	London Transport	9	January 6th 07 04:04 PM
Massive Oxford Street Traffic Jam Saturday 28 Feb ?	Jonathan	London Transport	1	February 29th 04 03:26 PM

Menu

About Us