So, Heathrow may have a third runway. It won’t be built for some time and Tories say they’d scrap it. The argument, that somehow adding a third runway and a sixth terminal will make Heathrow more competitive, seems rather specious. Paris CDG, Amsterdam AMS and Frankfurt FRA all have more runways, more destinations and better terminal buildings than London LHR. An expanded Heathrow with three runways and six terminals (badly connected with one another) won’t match the facilities already existing at other airports. London has 6 runways (LHR 2, LGW 1, STN 1, LTN 1, LCY 1) at the moment so the city has enough capacity for those who want to come to London. The important thing is to concentrate the available capacity at one location for transfer passengers: the ‘Boris Island’ project, building a large airport in the Thames Estuary, seems a lot more sensible than expanding Heathrow (or any other London airport). Where could one build a fourth runway if that becomes necessary to keep up with the competitors and support British economy?
As if to add to the pointlessness of Heathrow expansion, Frankfurt has won a case at the Hessian administrative court to build a fourth runway and a third terminal. And work on the new runway will start in February.
I oppose Heathrow expansion: for environmental reasons but also for the complete lack of logic and long-term planning.