3 ms·
What I don't get is that the government now says it wants a 3rd runway (this has been debated for 30 years). Why add a 3rd runway, costing billions and taking d
by nickdothutton 2y ago
What I don't get is that the government now says it wants a 3rd runway (this has been debated for 30 years). Why add a 3rd runway, costing billions and taking decades, to an airport that can't use it 24-7 due to noise restrictions, and doesn't even have resilient power from the grid. Heathrow should have been bulldozed years ago and replaced with housing, and the estuary airport built. Or the Maplin Sands project 50 years before that.
- Etheryte 2y agoAdding a runway to an existing airport is relatively low risk and comparatively cheaper than building a new major airport altogether. Anyone considering the latter will surely look at the Berlin Brandenburg Airport [0], which ran roughly €4 billion over budget and opened nine years behind schedule. Given the dire financial situation of the United Kingdom right now, I would wager this is an incredibly hard sell. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Brandenburg_Airport https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Brandenburg_Airport
- nickdothutton 2y agoCheaper and lower risk still just to abolish the noise restrictions on the existing airport, allowing it to run 24-7.