Discover Hertford Online Forum

Archived Topic

Topic ID 5312

25/05/2010 by Ewoowar

Plans for the 2nd runway at Stansted withdrawn.

I'm not sure if this would have resulted in an increase in flights over Hertford but confess to relief that plans for a second runway have been shelved. http://www.stanstedairport.com/portal/page/Stansted%5EGeneral%5EAbout%20Stansted%20Airport%5EMedia%20centre%5ENews%20releases%5EResults/358779f1259c8210VgnVCM20000039821c0a____/a22889d8759a0010VgnVCM200000357e120a____/


0 replies

Archived Replies

Reply ID 74570

26/05/2010 by dennismoore

Great news on many fronts. [:)]


Reply ID 74573

26/05/2010 by buzz

And how many of the objectors happily use Stansted when they go on holiday??


Reply ID 74574

26/05/2010 by Victor Meldrew

quote:
Originally posted by buzz
And how many of the objectors happily use Stansted when they go on holiday??
Surely all of the objectors do not use air travel [;)]


Reply ID 74575

26/05/2010 by Steve

At risk of playing devil's advocate here, but aren't "the objectors" objecting to a second runway, rather than the existing facilities. They are not necessarily anti-airport, just against the expansion of the airport. It seems perfectly legitimate to fly from Stansted whilst objecting to airport expansion. I could object to major housing development in Hertford, but that doesn't mean I object to existing developments, nor does it mean that I can't take that position whilst living in and benefiting from an existing development in the town.


Reply ID 74578

26/05/2010 by Victor Meldrew

Hypothetically speaking in 5 years time when you may fancy a trip to NY and the cheapest option was to fly from Stansted, you would of course still jump in your car and drive around the M25 to LHR or LGW rather than a nice poodle up the road to Stansted. The same could be said for finding you next step up in the housing ladder on the very same developement you originally objected to. The same can be said when Arsenal fans berated Sol Campbell whilst at Spurs ect, ect ect.


Reply ID 74580

26/05/2010 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by Steve
At risk of playing devil's advocate here, but aren't "the objectors" objecting to a second runway, rather than the existing facilities. They are not necessarily anti-airport, just against the expansion of the airport. It seems perfectly legitimate to fly from Stansted whilst objecting to airport expansion. I could object to major housing development in Hertford, but that doesn't mean I object to existing developments, nor does it mean that I can't take that position whilst living in and benefiting from an existing development in the town.
But if in future you wish to fly from Stansted, but can't get a flight because there are not enough slots with existing runway, how would you feel? I am in favour of an extra runway and just can't understand the Luddite attitude of some people.


Reply ID 74595

27/05/2010 by carlos fandango

Perhaps some of us think it's good news because: a) We don't think covering ever greater parts of the countryside with concrete so a certain Irish airline can keep on expanding is a good idea. b) Would rather not have the skies crowded with ever more planes with the resultant noise and pollution. c) Note that the rapid rise in air travel could well be a bubble, and we all know what happens to those.


Reply ID 74596

27/05/2010 by ian.ball

quote:
Originally posted by buzz But if in future you wish to fly from Stansted, but can't get a flight because there are not enough slots with existing runway, how would you feel? I am in favour of an extra runway and just can't understand the Luddite attitude of some people.
It's worth considering the alternatives - I've changed my mode of travel over the past few years and now use rail much more and it's much less hassle than either air travel or the car. For example the last time I went to Paris I got the train direct from St Pancras to the centre of Paris and it took 4 hours and was a heck of a lot nicer than air travel. I'm going up to Edinburgh soon and it was cheaper than air travel, takes only 4 hours and takes me to the city centre. Add to that it's not affected by the volcanic ash and I see no reason to even consider air travel unless I can't do it by train in the future. I shall certainly be reducing my air travel over the next few years so you can have my slots [:D], plus the ones BA will free up once they go to the wall! Of course you can't cut out all air travel and nobody is suggesting that, but I suggest a lot of people don't need to *increase* the number of times they fly when there are better alternatives which is what this is all about!


Reply ID 74603

27/05/2010 by Leo Densian

quote:
Originally posted by buzz But if in future you wish to fly from Stansted, but can't get a flight because there are not enough slots with existing runway, how would you feel? I am in favour of an extra runway and just can't understand the Luddite attitude of some people.
Would you feel the same though if the airport was not at Stansted but Stanstead Abotts say?


Reply ID 75364

05/07/2010 by Kitty Kat

Why if the second runway has been withdrawn are Kier construction contracted to build it?!


Reply ID 75365

05/07/2010 by Steve

quote:
Originally posted by Kitty Kat
Why if the second runway has been withdrawn are Kier construction contracted to build it?!
I don't think they have. What is the source of your information? [:)] Kier is one of BAA's Commodity Build Framework contractors and work with them on a variety of building and refurbishment projects, but this contract is only for 5 years.


Reply ID 75366

05/07/2010 by Kitty Kat

If I told you I'd have to kill you ha ha ha haha ha (manic laughter) They are likely to be working at Stansted for a lot longer than 5 years [8D]


Reply ID 75367

05/07/2010 by Ewoowar

Perhaps this site would be of use...... http://www.publictenders.net/tender/52409


Reply ID 75369

05/07/2010 by Steve

quote:
Originally posted by Ewoowar
Perhaps this site would be of use...... http://www.publictenders.net/tender/52409
Thanks Ewoowar. This is just for airport buildings, not a runway. It's just a general construction contact and only runs until the end of March 2011. In addition, it only covers projects of less that £5m. A new runway and/or terminal buildings would cost slightly more than that! There's always building work going on somewhere at the airport and Kier are BAA's current contractors.


Reply ID 75370

05/07/2010 by Kitty Kat

believe what you choose to believe ....................


Reply ID 75372

05/07/2010 by Donostia

quote:
Originally posted by Kitty Kat
If I told you I'd have to kill you ha ha ha haha ha (manic laughter)
As the runway decision was made in Downing Street and not by BAA or Kier , im very impressed by the level of your source . [:D]


Reply ID 75374

05/07/2010 by Kitty Kat

When did anything decided in Downing Street ever ring true - broken promises and all that


Reply ID 75376

05/07/2010 by Steve

Some facts: Planning permission has not been granted for a second runway There is no planning application for a second runway BAA has no [formal/announced] plans to submit a planning application for a second runway Expanding Stansted [or any other] airport is no longer government policy I am not aware of any pressure to build a second runway at Stansted and in the light of the above facts and the current economic climate I cannot see the circumstances under which one would be built. If you choose not to believe BAA and/or the current government and have something substantive to support that view then that is your prerogative (this is not having a go at any one particular individual by-the-way, just general comment). Personally, even before the recent change of government, I was of the opinion that despite the plans, it would be a generation before a second runway would be a reality and now I think it's even further off. Uttlesford District Council would almost certainly turn the plans down and there would doubtless be a long public enquiry. In the meantime, BAA's future ownership of the airport is questionable, if not doubtful. Whoever owns the airport is going to have to find an awful lot of dosh to fund the project at a time when money's a little on the tight side. Unfortunately chinese whispers on emotive subjects can lead to all sorts of misinformation circulating. [:)]


Reply ID 75378

05/07/2010 by Donostia

quote:
Originally posted by Steve BAA's future ownership of the airport is questionable, if not doubtful. Whoever owns the airport is going to have to find an awful lot of dosh to fund the project at a time when money's a little on the tight side.
Spot on , that is probably a bigger obstacle to a 2nd runway than the lack of planning permission. Also Stansted's single runway can handle 32 million passengers a year , i think they peaked at about 24 million and are now going backwards .


Reply ID 75381

05/07/2010 by Steve

quote:
Originally posted by Kitty Kat
quote:
Originally posted by Steve
quote:
Originally posted by Kitty Kat
Why if the second runway has been withdrawn are Kier construction contracted to build it?!
What is the source of your information? [:)]
If I told you I'd have to kill you ha ha ha haha ha (manic laughter)
Would this be the same source that told you Nandos were coming to Hertford? [:p]


Reply ID 75388

05/07/2010 by Kitty Kat

Lighten up you lot - it's summer [:)]


Reply ID 75390

05/07/2010 by Billywindsock

Nando's are coming to Hertford . . . . . . . well I never. . . . . :-)


Reply ID 75419

07/07/2010 by Capitalist piglet

quote:
Originally posted by Billywindsock
Nando's are coming to Hertford . . . . . . . well I never. . . . . :-)
No, Nandos are going to Stansted (source - High Level[;)])


Reply ID 75420

07/07/2010 by codek2

shouldnt that be "sauce" :)


24 replies