« Boris Johnson: The Government should urgently look at the proposals for an airport in the Thames Estuary | Main | The Boris campaign questions Ken Livingstone's trustworthiness in new video »
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c61a053ef0162fcc358f5970d
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Boris Johnson explains why London and Britain needs a new airport in the Thames estuary:
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
I hate to disagree with Boris but the Thames Estuary is NOT the place for a new London Airport on cost, safety and environmental impact grounds. Instead why not provide an additional runway at London Gatwick which has the infrastructure already having two terminals linked by a monorail and first class road and rail services and is in relatively open countryside? An enhanced Gatwick could be on-line far quicker and with a lot less hassle and cost than "Boris Island".
Posted by: Martin Marprelate- A Man in the Street! | November 23, 2011 at 08:56 AM
Martin: There are no votes in an extra runway at Gatwick or Heathrow even though the cost would be a fraction of Johnson's proposal.
Posted by: Robert DMML | November 23, 2011 at 09:53 AM
Same goes for the 3rd runway at Heathrow. And I thought this government was for business, instead it rolls over in the face of a few local protesters who all bought their houses knowing full well there was an airport down the road.
Posted by: Harry Hill | November 23, 2011 at 10:39 AM
When the last government announced the closure of RAF Lyneham and the move of all its assets to Brize Norton I was somewhat surprised at their reasoning.
They closed Lyneham because it was too small and could not be extended yet just along the road was RAF Wroughton empty with a huge footprint and able to be extended to cater for all the RAF's needs. Brize of course was already capable of taking Concord and would be a perfect choice for another Civil Airport. Close to road and rail links which could easily be extended into the site from Swindon and would bring a massive boost to the local economy.
Plenty of votes there instead they decided to opt for the Thames Estuary which is rather silly and a vote loser still, there is no accounting for the stupidity of politicians!
Posted by: Philias | November 23, 2011 at 11:50 AM
This is for the birds.
Posted by: It doesn't add up... | November 23, 2011 at 01:08 PM
At last Boris' plans are inching forwards. This is not about votes but about practicality and building a long term future for this country.
4 runways are the minimum we need, and Boris' Islands allows for 8 in due course.
Anyone who argues about bird strikes should check every other airport in the world. Birds are not just in the Thames Estuary. Approaches over the sea are infinitely preferable on safety grounds, let alone noise, to approaches over cities.
Posted by: Lindsay Jenkins | November 23, 2011 at 01:57 PM
If we want Heathrow to continue to be a hub airport in competition with Amsterdam, Frankfurt, etc., any expansion should surely be there.
Posted by: david | November 23, 2011 at 02:47 PM
If London wants a new airport it should be put in London.
Posted by: Kentish Rebel | November 23, 2011 at 07:22 PM
Isn`t for the Olympics? Or just because they need it.
Posted by: property inventory London | January 04, 2012 at 07:45 AM
This is something interesting to see in a process of development. Boris is thinking about the city of London.
Posted by: inventory clerk London | February 21, 2012 at 12:57 PM