• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Heathrow expansion

johnola

johnola

Mitchell Thomas
Rachel Reeves (with support from Kier and Sadiq Khan) is reportedly ready to rubber stamp the addition of a third runway to Heathrow, along with considerable additional transport infrastructure.

The economic case has been made and will overpower the environmental negatives.

Personally I am worried about the M25 and gridlock across the south east. Those tightly packed junctions on the western quadrant carry the lions share of traffic around, in and out of London.

And what troubles me is they now conveniently claim they can build the tunnel under the third runway off grid, I don’t believe them - there will be no flow from north to south on that side for many years.
 
Baleforce said:
I’m against it. Sends the wrong message on climate change.

And with the US being pig ignorant to it, the rest of the world needs to make up for the damage they are about to do.
Click to expand...
Bar a few no-brainer low-hanging fruit policies like onshore wind and binning Rwanda, Labour has been a tragic disappointment so far. Reeves and Starmer haven't the imagination to see that if they keep betraying their base they will usher in a Reform government under the control of tech oligarchs in a few years, and all that entails.
 
Last edited:
Rorschach said:
Bar a few no-brainer low-hanging fruit policies like onshore wind and binning Rwanda, Labour has been a tragic disappointment so far. Reeves and Starmer haven't the imagination to see that if they keep betraying their base they will usher in a Reform government under the control of tech oligarchs in a few years, and all that entails.
Click to expand...
Labour got in on a policy of not being the Conservative party.

The problem for them is that the public don't want Labour policies. They want Conservative policies run by a competent govt.
 
scaramanga said:
Labour got in on a policy of not being the Conservative party.

The problem for them is that the public don't want Labour policies. They want Conservative policies run by a competent govt.
Click to expand...
Even though far less actually voted for them then they did 5 years previously
 
Baleforce said:
I’m against it. Sends the wrong message on climate change.

And with the US being pig ignorant to it, the rest of the world needs to make up for the damage they are about to do.
Click to expand...

Well it will reduce the need of planes circling waiting for a landing time.
 
scaramanga said:
Labour got in on a policy of not being the Conservative party.

The problem for them is that the public don't want Labour policies. They want Conservative policies run by a competent govt.
Click to expand...
Well, that was certainly part of it. But the problem is the public is getting conservative policies by a semi-competent government, competent compared to the last bunch of halfwits at least, when they actually want labour policies. Some supporters were expecting a pivot from their neoliberal election rhetoric, they are only saying that to get in was a common refrain, but that hasn't happened. Being a less brick version of the Tories is not going to be a vote-getter next time out. And since only Tory cult members like yourself will vote Tory next time, out y'all better get used to the idea of puppet PM Farage.
 
Rorschach said:
Well, that was certainly part of it. But the problem is the public is getting conservative policies by a semi-competent government, competent compared to the last bunch of halfwits at least, when they actually want labour policies. Some supporters were expecting a pivot from their neoliberal election rhetoric, they are only saying that to get in was a common refrain, but that hasn't happened. Being a less brick version of the Tories is not going to be a vote-getter next time out. And since only Tory cult members like yourself will vote Tory next time, out y'all better get used to the idea of puppet PM Farage.
Click to expand...
Some supporters maybe. But the electorate hasn't voted for a left of centre govt for over half a century. Given that Reform are topping polls lately, I don't think they will be any time soon, either.
 
johnola said:
That’s interesting. My brain tells me it will be 50% worse.
Click to expand...

In itself an extra runway won't increase or decrease the demand for flights. It will mean less waiting time for planes to land and probably more destinations so less need for stop overs to change flights. So less fuel used = less emissions.
 
Lilbaz said:
In itself an extra runway won't increase or decrease the demand for flights. It will mean less waiting time for planes to land and probably more destinations so less need for stop overs to change flights. So less fuel used = less emissions.
Click to expand...
It might direct flights to or from Heathrow that would otherwise have gone elsewhere too.

But you're right, demand in the airline industry is an entirely different argument.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back