Reply to: Boris wants to close Heathrow

[thunderlizard]

The Daily Mash has excelled itself with this one!

[Troll]

Troll, glad you picked up on this.

However, What about the resulting damage to London when the "monty" blows up?

It really depends if they can close the Thames Barrier in time & how quickly the wave dissipates as it travels up the Thames.
Canvey Island would cease to exist (no bad thing)

[Churchill]

"Almost every window in Sheerness (pop. c20,000) would be broken and buildings would be damaged by the blast."

So about £5 worth of damage then?

Its going to happen at some point - why not just explode it now and get it over with?

Agreed..the whole of Sheppey is such a dump it may actually help

Troll, glad you picked up on this.

However, What about the resulting damage to London when the "monty" blows up?

[Cyberman]

Hang on, isn't Boris a Tory?

Obviously not everything the Tories propose is necessarily a good idea, but at least they are not blinded by left-wing doctrine at every turn, and will not reject a good idea based on narrow-minded prejudice.

Boris Johnson probably has a touch of information overload at present, due to the mess left behind by Red Ken. At least he had the good sense to remove the silly 25 quid per car tax that Ken was going to introduce!!

[Peoplesoft bloke]

I don't think this idea has been thought through. ......t.

Hang on, isn't Boris a Tory?

[swamp]

High speed train.

They are talking about using a spur off the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (from St. Pancras) which is of course currently used for the Channel Tunnel... Meanwhile the Heathrow Express runs every 15 mins on dedicated track, and probably only serves a fraction of Heathrow's passengers.

So how exactly are they going to squeeze in all the trains they need, bearing in mind most of the passengers will have to travel by rail as this airport will have no meaningful road links (or tube line)? And what are the passengers meant to do when the get to (a now very crowded) St Pancras?!

[Cyberman]

These are not my estimates - I read them in paper.

Northern Rock cost £100 bln, now talk is about £200 bln more to buy off toxic morgage tulip.

For this money UK could have build super fast railways like in Japan, airports, hospitals etc etc etc.

Atw, I never for once thought that these were your estimates. Why would I think that ? I think you are slightly paranoid. They are in fact the usual garbage knocked up to try to promote an argument in the direction in which politicians want us to go.

Northern Rock has not cost 100 Billion, and as usual people such as yourself are drawn in by government propaganda, and thus the need for a court case so the real facts are aired. In fact it has not cost anything, because all loans(remember LOANS on which the Rock is paying interest to HMG) will be repaid, and it is a going concern, making profits, if you exclude over-inflated HMG write-offs which again will be aired in court. If you remember, Alastair Darling himself stated that all returns in the future should go to the taxpayer. This is clearly theft because the Rock is a going concern and thus not bust.

On top of that Northern Rock has and had NO US-subprime because it was not involved in buying SIVs(packaged US mortgages) from US banks, as opposed to the other banks which have multi-Billions of it. Rather ironic indeed!!!

[AtW]

These estimated figures are ridiculous. They obviously ignore extra road and rail infrastructure which would cost multi-billions in itself. This shows cost estimates on a par with that of the Olympics, which double or triple over time!!

These are not my estimates - I read them in paper.

Northern Rock cost £100 bln, now talk is about £200 bln more to buy off toxic morgage tulip.

For this money UK could have build super fast railways like in Japan, airports, hospitals etc etc etc.

[BrilloPad]

How will you get to this new Thames Estuary airport by car?

Whatever you say about Heathrow it does have excellent road links: M4 west, M4 east into central London, M25, plus M3, A3 and A40/M40 close by, and not too far from M1. Also some A roads to a bunch of local places.

Thames Estuary: bridge to Sheppy, M2 (wow), and really carp eastern bit of M25. Chatham and Gravesend nearby too, which can't be a good thing.

And another thing: who is going to occupy a business park in Heathrow when there is no longer an airport there? Surely part of the point of the M4 corridor is it is near to Heathrow...

A2 (from M2 to M25) just being upgraded now. M25 part from M2 to M20 almost completed now. Sorted......

(well it would be if not for the M2/M25 junction, M25 from M20 to sevenoaks and that stupid stupid junction with the A21 - but lets not bring all the facts into a good argument.....)

[OwlHoot]

Another idea, apart from its possible hideous appearance, would be to build a new runway *over* the M4 or M25.

It would need to be quite high, and with plenty of side openings and a V-shaped reinforced steel ceiling, to avoid being too vulnerable to truck bombs and crashing oil tankers blowing up beneath it.

But I'd have thought the entire M25 width, for a couple of miles between roughly junction 11 and 13 would be ample for a runway.

You could also cover the Wraysbury reservoir, or one of the others nearby, and site the new terminal over that (and reduce evaporation from the reservoir at the same time).

[expat]

How will you get to this new Thames Estuary airport by car?

Whatever you say about Heathrow it does have excellent road links: M4 west, M4 east into central London, M25, plus M3, A3 and A40/M40 close by, and not too far from M1.

M25 is a mess, M1 only available via M25. The road links are all too crowded, and worse, the M25 is too unpredictable: if you're going to catch a flight, you need to plan on the longest time it might take, not the average.

And another thing: who is going to occupy a business park in Heathrow when there is no longer an airport there? Surely part of the point of the M4 corridor is it is near to Heathrow...

Rather a good point IMO.

[Cyberman]

High speed train.

If the price of 3rd runway at Heathrow is £13 bln and the price of brand new airport is like £6 bln, then it is crazy to even think of 3rd runway. Boris will now get 100% of votes of those who live (if you call that living) near Heathrow.

These estimated figures are ridiculous. They obviously ignore extra road and rail infrastructure which would cost multi-billions in itself. This shows cost estimates on a par with that of the Olympics, which double or triple over time!!

[Cyberman]

I don't think this idea has been thought through. Relying on high speed trains is pretty stupid as there would be regular major disruption by strikes and possibly even terrorists. You would still need excellent road infrastructure but this would be a nightmare because you are forcing millions of people to travel to a remote area of the South East instead of the much more convenient Heathrow, which is accessible from all points of the compass, whereas Sheppey clearly is not.

[Moscow Mule]

How will you get to this new Thames Estuary airport by car?

Whatever you say about Heathrow it does have excellent road links: M4 west, M4 east into central London, M25, plus M3, A3 and A40/M40 close by, and not too far from M1. Also some A roads to a bunch of local places.

Thames Estuary: bridge to Sheppy, M2 (wow), and really carp eastern bit of M25. Chatham and Gravesend nearby too, which can't be a good thing.

Park and ride.

I think it's a splendid idea, even though commuting to the continent would become harder (I live about 25 mins from Heathrow) for me.

You would also be able to link it to CrossRail for an additional billion or 15.

[AtW]

How will you get to this new Thames Estuary airport by car?

High speed train.

If the price of 3rd runway at Heathrow is £13 bln and the price of brand new airport is like £6 bln, then it is crazy to even think of 3rd runway. Boris will now get 100% of votes of those who live (if you call that living) near Heathrow.