Should Gatwick be allowed to expand?

[News Guru]

Campaigners believe new Gatwick runway ruled out of Government national policy statement

Conservation campaigners have said they believe a new runway at Gatwick Airport has been ruled out of a new Government national policy statement.

Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign (GACC), which is based in Charlwood, has said it believes a new runway at Gatwick - Britain's second biggest airport and the world's busiest single runway airport - is unlikely to feature in a draft white paper on sustainable aviation which is expected to be published this month (July).

Read more: http://www.redhillandreigatelife.co.uk/ ... statement/

 

[Aviador]

The government are getting themselves into a right old tizz over this. They don't want to expand Heathrow basically because of internal party wrangling and they are showing signs of not wanting to expand Gatwick airport for similar reasons. Boris Island is reportedly no good because it's too expensive and it's a potential hazard due to the amount of birds in the Themes Estuary. British Airways recently said they need a four runway airport. So just what are the government going to do? Surely the environmental impact of expanding airports that are already built will be far more acceptable than building a totally new airport?

 

[flashgordon1952]

gatwicks second runway

things appear to be happening now ! Orginally about 20 years ago the local councils and sussex council agreed that there would not be another runway built !
But this has changed because the ruleing was with the old owners of the airport and because there are new owners (by govt decree) they are about to apply for a secund runway on the basis that the original order was with the old owners and not them !
To me this sounds ok, because it will lesson the pressure on the govt from makeing a bad mistake on allowing the third runway at heathrow and say well soemone has to have the new runway it might as well be gatwick or stanstead instead.. (this would save the govt from potential serious problem).
There is no doubt stanstead luton gatwick and southend will have to have expansion if the current predictions of increase in travel are proven right.
The only spanner in the works is that if proven wrong the govt will have to bite the bullet and all those expansion plans be for nothing.

 

[News Guru]

No case for Gatwick airport expansion, says IAG's Willie Walsh

Airlines will only pay for expansion at one UK airport and that is Heathrow, Britain's foremost airline executive told MPs, in a pointed rejoinder to Gatwick chiefs pushing for a second runway.

Willie Walsh, the boss of British Airways' parent company IAG, told the transport select committee that there was no business case to expand the UK's second biggest airport.

Full Story: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012 ... llie-walsh

 

[Aviador]

To be honest I think Gatwick should be allowed to expand and build a second runway. Airlines such as British Airways don't want Gatwick airport to offer more slots because as things stand they have the majority of slots at Heathrow preventing other airlines from developing services. If a significant number of slots became available at Gatwick it would enable major hub activity by an alternative airline alliance.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Came into the North Terminal at Gatwick last week and it's looking a little tired and down at heel in places.

It could do with sprucing up and being given the appearance of a large 21st Century airport terminal.

Not a good impression for an airport that wants to remain in the big league. That said, it's a far more civilised experience than Dubai Airport which is modern (most of it anyway) but chronically overcrowded every time I pass through it.

 

[News Guru]

Gatwick second runway 'more feasible' than Heathrow expansion

Airport chief says solution would affect fewer people and distribute benefits as well as environmental impact of air travel

Gatwick is urging the government-backed Airports Commission to break Heathrow's dominance of the London aviation market by supporting its proposal for a second runway, alongside a doubling of capacity at Stansted.

The chief executive of Gatwick, Stewart Wingate, said adding an extra landing strip at the Sussex airport is the most reliable solution compared with the expense of a new hub airport in the Thames estuary or the noise and pollution caused by a third runway at Heathrow.

Gatwick believes the south-east will be best served by three two-runway airports around London, including an eventual second runway at Stansted. This will benefit passengers through competition, rather than "recreating the Heathrow monopoly", said Wingate.

Full Story: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... -expansion

 

[News Guru]

[textarea]Gatwick Airport boss defends plans for second runway with promise of 19,000 jobs

Stewart Wingate, chief executive at Gatwick Airport, said the plans for a second runway will create 19,000 new jobs across the region.

He told The Argus a new runway would have substantial environmental impact but said it would be managed as carefully as possible.

Critics say the airport is glossing over the environmental and health implications.

Airport chiefs wants a second runway, south of the existing airport, as the first stage in creating a constellation of three airports - Gatwick, Heathrow and Stansted - each with two runways.

Full story: http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/10566288 ... _000_jobs/[/textarea]

 

[Aviador]

A constellation of airports does sound like a good idea because for the majority of people this would mean they will be driving away from central London to the airport as opposed to through London.

Source: http://evansparks.files.wordpress.com/2 ... rports.jpg

 

[Steve]

I agree. Everything that takes the load off London traffic is very much appreciated. When I last went from Wimbledon to Stansted with a limousine service we got caught in a traffic jam and I nearly missed my flight. So in spite of god preparation and early departure this can always happen, but still, reducing the traffic in London is vital.

 

[News Guru]

Airport has ways to limit noise impact of second runway for 11,800 people

Expansion at Gatwick Airport would mean the number of people impacted by noise could increased from 3,300 to 11,800 .

However, in a response to the Airports Commission comments on noise, Gatwick Airport says it has a number on methods it is using to make this number lower.

Stewart Wingate, chief executive of London Gatwick said: “Noise issues for local communities are taken very seriously at Gatwick, which is why we are a leading airport in the crucial area of noise management.

Read more: http://www.westsussextoday.co.uk/news/c ... -1-5476305

 

[News Guru]

Boris island airport scheme is 'sinking', says Gatwick boss

The boss of Gatwick today intensified the battle with its rivals to build a new runway in the South East- and claimed that Boris Johnson’s Thames estuary airport was “sinking without trace.”

Gatwick chief executive Stewart Wingate also claimed a four-runway airport at Stansted - the mayor’s alternative site to the Estuary - was “undeliverable”.

Mr Wingate Told the Standard: "On Davies’ [Sir Howard Davies who is heading the Airports Commission on Britain’s aviation future] mind is that the Estuary option is dropping down the pecking order and perhaps dropping off altogether.

Read more: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transpor ... 86208.html

 

[Aviador]

Gatwick airport has just Tweeted "And we've just heard more good news that East Sussex County Council has confirmed that they support our proposal for a 2nd runway at Gatwick"

It makes sense to expand Gatwick airport rather than the £45bn alternative. A new runway for Gatwick will come at a fraction of the cost.

 

[News Guru]

Growth prompts Gatwick boss to demand second runway

The boss of Gatwick today reiterated his call for a second runway to be allowed at the airport.

The call came from chief executive Stuart Wingate as Gatwick reported a 4.4% rise in passengers to 20.8 million in the half year to September 30.

Turnover was up by 10.7% to £360.6 million to deliver a pre-tax profit of £127.3 million in the six months.

Read more: http://www.travelweekly.co.uk/Articles/ ... unway.html

 

[News Guru]

Gatwick Airport boss: Second runway at Gatwick is the right choice

GATWICK'S chief executive believes the airport is the "right choice" for a new runway for the South East.

An interim report by the Airports Commission, published this morning, says that a new runway will be needed by 2030 - and Gatwick and Heathrow are the only options on a shortlist for providing it.

The fact that Gatwick is in the running has delighted

Stewart Wingate, the airport's chief executive.

He said: "I am very pleased that the strength of London Gatwick's case has been recognised by the Airports Commission and that the shortlist has been narrowed down to two main locations.

Read more: http://www.crawleynews.co.uk/Gatwick-Ai ... z2nx6ZHKsf

 

[News Guru]

Gatwick offers second runway noise compensation to residents

Households most affected by noise from a second runway at Gatwick would receive annual compensation equivalent to Band A Council Tax - currently £1,000 - the airport announced today.

Read more: http://www.travelweekly.co.uk/Articles/ ... dents.html

 

[Aviador]

Most Londoners want extra runway at Gatwick not Heathrow

Crawley News is reporting that most Londoners would support a new runway for London Gatwick over Heathrow. The airport is currently running at 38m passengers per year so it must be very close to capacity. I wouldn't be surprised to see new runways for both Gatwick and Heathrow in the future if the government ever pulls it's finger out and makes a decision.

 

[Aviador]

Gatwick’s open letter to MPs: back growth and certainty by choosing Gatwick
13/10/2016

• Letter sets out ten key questions at the heart of expansion debate
• MPs have a once in a generation opportunity to support Gatwick’s deliverable plan
• Gatwick CEO: “After years of delay only by backing Gatwick can we build a new runway faster, at half the cost, delivering similar economic benefits, all at a dramatically lower environmental cost meaning we can finally reap the benefits of additional runway capacity and demonstrate to the world Britain truly remains open for business.”

Ahead of a long-awaited decision on airport expansion, Gatwick’s Chief Executive Stewart Wingate has written an open letter to MPs urging them to choose growth and back a second runway at Gatwick so that Britain can finally break a decades-long impasse and reap the benefits of airport expansion.

The letter sets out ten key questions at the heart of the expansion debate from speed of delivery, cost of construction, to the environmental impacts, all of which Gatwick is the clear winner.

Gatwick Chief Executive Stewart Wingate said:

“The Government has an important decision before it. There is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to support Gatwick’s plan which can actually be delivered.

“Successive Governments have tried and failed to expand Heathrow and given the insurmountable noise and air quality it faces, a decision for Heathrow will inevitably lead to more delays and stalled growth.

“With Gatwick, for the first time, there is now a real and credible alternative on the table which can deliver for Britain.

“After years of delay only by backing Gatwick can we build a new runway faster, at half the cost, delivering similar economic benefits, all at a dramatically lower environmental cost meaning we can finally reap the benefits of additional runway capacity and demonstrate to the world Britain truly remains open for business.”

The full text of Stewart Wingate’s letter is below:

Dear Member of Parliament,

A decision on airport expansion is fast approaching. If this situation feels familiar, it’s because it is: we’ve had decades of delay during which successive Governments have tried and failed to expand Heathrow. For the first time, though, Gatwick means that there is a real and credible alternative on the table. Given the history of this debate there are real questions that need to be answered and there is a real choice to be made:

1. Do we want to choose a runway that history shows us can’t be built, or do we want to choose a runway that can?

2. Do we want to choose a runway with astronomic costs whose delivery can’t be guaranteed, or do we want to choose a runway that could be in action within ten years?

3. Do we want to choose a runway that needs anywhere between five and twenty billion pounds of taxpayer subsidy, or one that requires no public funding?

4. Do we want to choose a runway that recreates the old airports monopoly, or one that promotes competition with more choice, lower fares and more resilience for the UK airport system?

5. Do we want to choose a runway that will limit long haul growth at the airports of our nations and regions, or a runway that will support balanced growth across the UK?

6. Do we want to choose a runway that Treasury analysis says will generate lower net economic benefits for the UK, or one that will give Britain the growth it needs?

7. Do we want to choose a runway where the financial risk will simply be passed directly to passengers and the taxpayer, or one whose risk will substantially be borne by its owners?

8. Do we want to choose a runway whose construction, were it possible, would mean demolishing a village with 1,000 homes, and mean tunnelling under, diverting, or bridging the M25, ensuring at least 10 years of crippling roadworks, or do we want to choose a runway that can be built with relatively little disruption, because of the safeguarded land it would sit on?

9. Do we want to choose a runway that would mean hundreds of thousands of extra planes flying over Central London, inflicting serious levels of noise pollution on around a million people, or a runway that would affect around 5% of that number?

10. Do we want to choose a runway that will increase the air pollution around Heathrow, which is already way above legal limits, or do we want to choose a runway that will continue Gatwick’s record of never having breached air quality limits?

Ten questions, with only one answer.

Certainty has never been more important. Britain can’t afford another false start. We all want Britain to grow so I hope you will agree that means choosing Gatwick.

Yours sincerely,

Stewart Wingate

Chief Executive Officer, Gatwick Airport

PRESS RELEASE

 

[Jerry]

Here's what I can't understand but why can't Gatwick have a third runway built as well as a third LHR runway? Surely it could be done as a seaparate infrastructure project? Why does it have to be only 1 that can have a third runway? Why not both?

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Here's what I can't understand but why can't Gatwick have a third runway built as well as a third LHR runway? Surely it could be done as a seaparate infrastructure project? Why does it have to be only 1 that can have a third runway? Why not both?

Some press reports suggest that both airports will be given the green light for an additional runway. How much public funding would apply to LHR and LGW is open to question.

A decision to build a third runway at LHR will be met with legal challenges and a likely internecine war in the Conservative party, not to mention opposition from those parts of the aviation industry that have other priorities, from environmental groups, from individuals passionately against further major expansion of the UK aviation capability to mention just a few.