jetmorgan Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 While personally I'm ambivilant about the 3rd runway the BBC news report has some very worrying news http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37773052 Planes taking off from a bridge and ramp over the M25??? that won't be distracting at all!!! As for it being cheaper than planes taking off in a tunnel....me thinks the government needs to have a chat to the designer...I don't think he's thought things through properly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetmorgan Posted October 26, 2016 Author Share Posted October 26, 2016 Actually ignore me just re-read the article and the tunnel will be for the M25...but that wasn't what they annouced on Radio 4 news!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Kazmierczak Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 What'll be the railway implications for this? Extending HX and/or HC to a new terminal (6?) or some form of west-facing junction with a loop off the GWML? Or a connection from the south around Staines? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zomboid Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 At least there's a decision. I don't have a horse in the race, but endless inquiries and reviews do no one any good. Looks like it'll cut of the end of the colnbrook branch - if it demolishes the stone terminal there will be no need for the line anyhow. As for the various new links, they would seem more likely to go ahead with the expanded airport. I doubt design of those is sufficiently advanced that it'll cause an issue, and it would have been forseen anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted October 26, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 26, 2016 I don't think there's an additional terminal involved (yet) and interestingly according to the links above the third runway seems to have moved from where Heathrow Ltd were last week saying it was going to be to where it was originally going to be but where nobody wants it to be. Rather strangely the revised flight path thingy shown on the BBC link above removes most of the flights over Mrs May's house (and mine too as it happens) so I don't believe a word of it - especially as the existing flight paths are not exactly correct anyway (or maybe the aircraft don't follow them?). Overall I'm more inclined to take Boris's view than anybody else's and seriously doubt if the runway will ever be built. In fact if Gatwick have any sebnse they should get on and build theirs because I reckon it would be in use before teh arguing over the LHR one is finished. Incidentally one inconsistency appears through all of this - HS2 will have an interchange at Old Oak to enable passengers from the airport to access it but part of the reason cited for building the third runway is to enable LHR to handle many more connecting flights from UK airports. Is this a fancy idea of improving consumer choice or does someone talk with forked tongue? Incidentally I understand some aspects of planning for the western rail access to LHR - with a junction off the GWML just east of Langley - are fairly well advanced. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pacific231G Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 While personally I'm ambivilant about the 3rd runway the BBC news report has some very worrying news http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37773052 Planes taking off from a bridge and ramp over the M25??? that won't be distracting at all!!! As for it being cheaper than planes taking off in a tunnel....me thinks the government needs to have a chat to the designer...I don't think he's thought things through properly. Probably less of a distraction than the existing situation where aircraft cross the M25 low on final approach though that will of course continue. There are a number of airports around the world where runways cross motorways on bridges and it's not unusual for runways to have a slight slope. The idea of relocating a particularly congested part of the M25 would lead to years of disruption though building a bridge across the existing motorway will be bad enough (will it be wide enough to allow more lanes to be built) Between the M3 and the M40 the M25 is a daily nightmare already. Personally I think Heathrow has always been in the wrong location but that was never discussed. Its original establishment was based on a fraud that Harold Balfour the wartime air minister admitted in 1973 in his memoirs. He persuaded the War Cabinet that a wartime RAF base was needed on Hounslow Heath. He knew perfectly well that he was really pushing through plans for a post-war civilian airport that the rest of the cabinet might very well have resisted; the Ministry of Agriculture in particular would have been likely to object to the loss of so much prime farmland. By pretending it was going to be an RAF base he was also able to use wartime powers to requisition Fairey Aviation's small Great West Airfeld on the site along with surrounding land (the small village of Heathrow was demolished) and this also of course meant that there was no question of a planning enquiry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 There are a number of airports around the world where this happens and it's not unusual for runways to have a slight slope. .... ...or, like Luton, to be laid on higher ground than the built-up area which may be near it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zomboid Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 Incidentally I understand some aspects of planning for the western rail access to LHR - with a junction off the GWML just east of Langley - are fairly well advanced. The western access plans I've seen in modern railways (I think) suggest it'll just dive into a tunnel at the junction, so shouldn't be a major problem there.I can't imagine for a nanosecond that they didn't account for a new runway in the with they've done so far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pacific231G Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 ...or, like Luton, to be laid on higher ground than the built-up area which may be near it. I assume the reason why Croydon was abandoned was because the plateau it was built on was simply too small for the longer runways needed by post war aircraft. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 I assume the reason why Croydon was abandoned was because the plateau it was built on was simply too small for the longer runways needed by post war aircraft. Seems so Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 Probably less of a distraction than the existing situation where aircraft cross the M25 low on final approach though that will of course continue. Heathrow already has a dual carriageway under the North runway (and a single carriageway road under the south) so this is nothing especially new, even for Heathrow. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold BMacdermott Posted October 26, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 26, 2016 Hello Stationmaster All flights out of Heathrow - unless specified by Air Traffic Control (ATC) - will follow what are called Standard Instrument Departures (SIDs). Pilots cannot simply 'go where they feel like going'. Once airborne and at about 2000ft, Heathrow Tower ATC will hand off the aircraft to one of the London area controllers (Swanwick) who might leave the aircraft 'as routed' or perhaps re-direct it (slightly) for operational safety if that is needed. Similarly, inbounds pass through one of four 'holds' around London (Bovingdon, Lambourne, Biggin Hill and Ockham). These are handed off to Heathrow Director on a specified frequency, who 'merges' the flows from the two north holds with the two flows from the south. As planes are now in a straight line, Director will hand off to Heathrow Tower to land them on one of the current two runways. The 'flight paths' in the diagram are confusing in that they show 'current' westbound departures but 'proposed' eastbound! (Or is that the link doesn't work properly?) Direction is determined by wind direction as planes (generally) have to land 'into wind'. Heathrow is about seven days out of ten landing into a westerly wind (ie they come in over London to Heathrow and take off over Windsor) and about three days easterly. The whole report is rather like when we - as 'railway aficionados' - see a rather different picture than 'the average viewer' when we watch a programme that involves railways! The actors in a film might be travelling from London to Scotland in 1947 but the director cuts in a shot of an EMU departing Waterloo in what cannot be earlier than 1957! The short film about landing at Heathrow is peppered with the word 'over'. That is never used in commercial flying (but is in military). Brian Macdermott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Mike Bellamy Posted October 26, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 26, 2016 The 'flight paths' in the diagram are confusing in that they show 'current' westbound departures but 'proposed' eastbound! (Or is that the link doesn't work properly?) Brian - if you mean the diagram in this link http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37760187 then there is a slider arrow in the middle which you can move left or right to show the existing and proposed east and west flight paths. Hope that helps Mike . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
two tone green Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 The out of work fog engineers will be looking in the papers for news on jobs to support the new runway. Unless they give their go ahead having assessed the area for dense fog giving rise to maximum distraction then it won't happen. Airports are only ever built where there is fog and if there is no fog around the area where the new runway will be then it's off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 ......the BBC news report has some very worrying news http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37773052 Planes taking off from a bridge and ramp over the M25??? ...... The BBC have got this from one of todays newspapers, who have run a story that has completely got the wrong end of the stick. One typically ignorant newspaper journalist, said on TV last night, that the runway was going to be built on "stilts", 8 metres up in the air. What utter tosh !!! All that is happening, is that to avoid having to divert the M25 and build a cut and cover tunnel, the overhaul elevation of the new runway will be raised (more earthworks to regrade the site) and the M25 will be crossed with a wide bridge instead. What'll be the railway implications for this? Extending HX and/or HC to a new terminal (6?) or some form of west-facing junction with a loop off the GWML? Or a connection from the south around Staines? The western rail access is already going ahead, regardless of whether the runway is built. That project is underway, but has been delayed by 2 years because of the bottleneck in NR projects and the need for a further round of consultation. Proposals are back on the table for a southern rail link, but this time towards the SWML, rather than the previous AirTrack proposal to Waterloo. ....Looks like it'll cut of the end of the colnbrook branch ..... It looks inevitable. I don't think there's an additional terminal involved (yet) and interestingly according to the links above the third runway seems to have moved from where Heathrow Ltd were last week saying it was going to be to where it was originally going to be but where nobody wants it to be. .... There is a new terminal involved. The working title continues to be Terminal 6, even though there will only be 4 terminals when all the work is completed. There's more terminal development on top of that though. The uncertainty over the runway has held up the construction of the the new T2 phase 2 and the subsequent demolition of T3 and redevelopment of the Central Area. If the new runway is going ahead, then this work can progress, so there will be 2 new terminals and one terminal replaced. As for images and diagrams in the press or on TV, forget it. Previous designs seem to have been wheeled out, as well as various made up diagrams. Rather strangely the revised flight path thingy shown on the BBC link above removes most of the flights over Mrs May's house (and mine too as it happens) so I don't believe a word of it - especially as the existing flight paths are not exactly correct anyway (or maybe the aircraft don't follow them?).... Don't pay any attention to those "flight path" diagrams. Some are made up and others are just schematic examples for PR purposes. Incidentally I understand some aspects of planning for the western rail access to LHR - with a junction off the GWML just east of Langley - are fairly well advanced. The western rail link is underway, but delayed by 2 years due to the overload of NR projects and the need to extend the consultation period. First pre-construction site preparation work was due to commence in April next year, only 6 months from now, but is now put back. ....There are a number of airports around the world where runways cross motorways on bridges and it's not unusual for runways to have a slight slope. The idea of relocating a particularly congested part of the M25 would lead to years of disruption though building a bridge across the existing motorway will be bad enough (will it be wide enough to allow more lanes to be built) Between the M3 and the M40 the M25 is a daily nightmare already....... Indeed, airport runways and taxiways crossing roads and highways is a fairly typical sight at numerous airports around the world. I believe there is talk of improvements to the M25 being made on this section, to provide separate bypass lanes for through traffic not routing to/from Heathrow, or switching to/from the M4. That could mean another 3 lanes each way (it's already 5 and 6 lanes each way at the moment). The western access plans I've seen in modern railways (I think) suggest it'll just dive into a tunnel at the junction, so shouldn't be a major problem there. I can't imagine for a nanosecond that they didn't account for a new runway in the with they've done so far. I was thinking about the western access plans with regard to these proposals, only the other week. The new line is planned to be in a cut and cover tunnel on the section between the M25 and Terminal 5. Exactly where the new terminal (T6?) is planned to go. On the face of it, it looks like neither party (NR or HAL) have taken each others projects into account. The new terminal will require major new earthworks and deep foundations, so does this mean the rail link will need a redesign? . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 WIth it seemingly needing the closure of the Colnbrook rail terminal, I wonder if there is the possibility of creating a new rail freight terminal along what I presume is a new A4 alignment along the top of the site - ideally also linked to the 'western access' link at Langley? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 Brian - if you mean the diagram in this link http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37760187 then there is a slider arrow in the middle which you can move left or right to show the existing and proposed east and west flight paths. Brian can answer for himself, but yes that diagram is just a schematic and not terribly representative or accurate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold BMacdermott Posted October 26, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 26, 2016 Many thanks Mike I was thinking it was a 'click' button! Slider now works and I can see that they seem to be showing inbound and outbound - all very confusing for many! Brian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted October 26, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 26, 2016 No new terminal? With a projected increase in flights of almost 50% and larger planes leading to an increase in passenger numbers in excess of that figure, Heathrow will become even more of a hell-hole than it is already. They'll also (presumably) need to increase car parking capacity by 50% and I hope they leave enough room under the "flyover" for the extra lanes they'll need to add to the M25 but I bet they won't....... Personally, I'm thankful that it'll all be happening somewhere I take steps to avoid being. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim H Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 What, we're not going to get a Ballykelly-style level crossing with the Colnbrook branch? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetmorgan Posted October 26, 2016 Author Share Posted October 26, 2016 First views of the test model for new Heathrow third runway Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Kazmierczak Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 Martyn makes an interesting point about freight. This seems to have been a neglected aspect of the whole development at LHR. Everytime I drive around the area there appear to be lorries parked-up in all available laybyes. A driver who was interviewed on Radio 4 stated there were few places to await unloading/loading of their waggons. Is this an opportunity for rail to capture some of the road-bound cargo traffic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted October 26, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 26, 2016 First views of the test model for new Heathrow third runway Will they be using it for landing, too? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted October 26, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 26, 2016 Brian - if you mean the diagram in this link http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37760187 then there is a slider arrow in the middle which you can move left or right to show the existing and proposed east and west flight paths. Hope that helps Mike . That's the one I was referring to, thanks. There are in fact quite considerable variations off those tracks for inbound flights due to the need to achieve the correct separations between successive aircraft thus we will frequently see smaller aircraft turning inside while some of the larger types turn roughly on the track while others turn outside - all depending on traffic density. And of course in addition at the busiest times the turning points move further out - thus for example the southern east-west approach which turns onto a landing heading over Reading can move 10 miles or more (at ground level) depending on traffic density. Quite honestly I can't see the addition of a third runway changing those approach tracks because although the 'proposed' shows them turning in much earlier even if aircraft are landing in two parallel streams they will still need to be put into those streams at a suitable distance from the runway threshold (or maybe their angles of descent are going to be changed as well?). We get them over us when 09L is used for landings so even if 09centre and 09L are used in future the two streams will have to form in a roughly similar place to get the correct separations (or am I missing something?) however if the 'new' 09L and 09R are used for landings while the centre runway is used for takeoffs that would definitely reduce the number of incoming aircraft passing over us as the incoming streams could be divided and approach the turning point completely separately. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold BMacdermott Posted October 26, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 26, 2016 Don't pay any attention to those "flight path" diagrams. Some are made up and others are just schematic examples for PR purposes. Hello Ron Ron Ron Fully agree with you there. There isn't room here to go into detail, but if you go into Flightradar and watch a typical days landings at Heathrow, they won't be very much like as shown. The diagram is one of those used to 'clarify' but actually confuses! I also agree with Peter K (#22) that the freight side of things is critical. Brian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.