Thousands say NO to a 3rd runway

[hawker800FO]

the busiest international airport in the world with over 1900 daily arrivals will get a 3rd runway its just been delayed. pearson has 5 seattle has 3 its coming you dumb greenpeace fuckers

[zeesham13]

Thousands say NO, but millions say YES.

[ROBLOXROX007]

Fuck you Green Peace, Heathrow need it because of more traffic. If you do not allow this third runway @ Heathrow, you will prevent millions of people from seeing their friends and family all over the world.

[treezergood]

Great news - well done everyone!

[treezergood]

To the wonderful people of Sipson and everyone else who is opposed to airport expansion madness and other environmental injustice - well done! Fantastic news. Don't let anyone tell you campaigning doesn't work. It does.

[GreenpeaceUK]

Fantastic news - climate-wrecking plans for a third runway at Heathrow airport have been axed!

The new Cameron/Clegg government has confirmed that it will not only scrap the third runway at Heathrow, but also refuse additional runways at Gatwick and Stansted. So all our campaigning has finally won out - and a huge thank you is due to everyone who's written to their MP or taken part in one of the many protests demanding that the plan be shelved.

We won!

[ROBLOXROX007]

@GreenpeaceUK - Think about it this way. Heathrow is getting more crammed ever year. No Third runway = More Delays and cancelled flights = Less people going on Flights = Aircraft Bankruptcy = Airports close down = Friends and families scattered all over the world lost and hopless to get home. I mean, this is what you DON'T want to happen, isn't it?

[billiepipersteeth]

This sort of crap really pisses me off. I'm fed up of environMENTALIST hippies with no scientific background or understanding preaching to me about how I should not fly due to its environmental impacts. Before you stop people in town centres, airports, shopping malls or wherever pitching your misguided views please at least try to be open minded to a person's individual personal circumstances...

[billiepipersteeth]

....I for example, don't run a car, so if I wish to jet off to far off lands 2 or 3 times a year I shall do so with a smile on my face and no guilt whatsoever.

Also, consider the natural beauty of air travel - it allows talented engineers and scientists to put food on the table for their children and propagate their superior minds through the generations.

[slowdazzles]

hmm, it's BECAUSE the scientific evidence is so strong that we all have to find less carbon intensive ways to live. 300,000 people a year are already dying from consequences of climate change, and the poles are melting. If you have kids, you should at least care about that.

[billiepipersteeth]

I don't have kids of my own and to be honest I don't really care about the future of anyone else's. My gripe is with these "not on my doorstep" self-serving idiots - I saw this protest first hand, many of them drove there in gas guzzling 4x4s - a cause of the ills you speak off that renders any damage by air travel insignificant. I have booked my xmas flight, and will look out of the window of my 747 at the engine farting out C02 and smile at it's scientific wonder with a very clean conscience.

[simontimon2]

100,000,000 people per year die from poverty that could be prevented through industrialisation.

yet green peace does want that to happen because that would produce more carbone dioxide.

[RioGiovanni]

by your logic we'll all be dead in 2 months.

[simontimon2]

The amount of people that died from poverty in the last 2 months was 17 million.

You must be a very stupid treehugger

[RioGiovanni]

I may be stupid, but I'm not a treehugger.

[tcx23f]

YES!

[DerPilotMann]

Wow, after seeing this video and the Heathrow terminal vid, I am absolutely sure you guys just don't understand the efficiency of flight over a car. If 400 drove 1000 miles it would be far more polluting than putting that same 400 on a 747 for a 3000 mile trip. Why don't you try to make people stop driving too?

[slowdazzles]

Please take the trouble to inform yourself about this issue. 75% of the traffic for the new 3rd Runway at Heathrow would be short-haul - to places like Glasgow, Paris and Newcastle - which are easily reached by train. Aviation is the fastest growing source of CO2 emissions which, remember, we have to cut by 80% by 2050 to minimise climate change. And yes, you are right - we're gonna have to cut back on fossil-fuel powered driving too...

[OoOJakeOoO]

Thats a nice NO, but I'd still like a runway >:)

[qunniq]

i vote for the runway

[lionessimba]

yep, another thing your ignoring is that their is a high speed train service to those destinations[does it go to Ireland?]

[exist2kill]

the expansion of airports is hardly a plot. I suggest that if greenpeace have a problem they can swim across the atlantic next time they want to visit america and save the rainforests in brazil

[brokenbriton]

Quote

"It's no coincidence that in no known language does the phrase "As pretty as an airport" appear.

- Douglas Adams "

[Amitabh197802]

Nor does 'as pretty as a wind turbine' or 'as lovely as a solar panel':-)

[brokenbriton]

True, Man made things can rarely have the same beauty and purpose as natures creations.

[pajammin]

disagreed on so many levels. pyramids? great wall of china? dang even manhattan is beautiful in it's own right.

[brokenbriton]

Ok

but we have hundreds of airports but only one great wall and manhattan...

the novelty and attraction of an airport has long since diminshed. The village it replaces is a lovely place also.

We are really talking polution, environmental impact and need here. The recession and currency exchange has caused a marked fall off in demand in fact Coventy is closing to passenger flights...

[pajammin]

i do not understand how a town like any other is more or less beautiful than a place that allows human beings to fly

[brokenbriton]

really... l living vibrant community . Its birds butterflies and tranquil way of life...

replaced by a precession of jets pouring out fumes and noise..... ???

are u 4 real ??

[pajammin]

i guess it's just differing ideas of beauty. obviously an airport isn't that aesthetically beautiful but equally the entire concept of humans flying could be perceived as beautiful surely?

[brokenbriton]

I'm not disagreeing with your point , as an achievement by man but there is a time and a PLACE for everything.

Please remember also where does it stop..??

[brokenbriton]

You will also realise aircraft carriers use the same principle..Its basically how the wings work.

If you've read How Airplanes Work, you know that an airplane has to get a lot of air moving over its wings to generate lift. To make takeoff a little easier, carriers can get additional airflow over the flight deck by speeding through the ocean, into the wind, in the direction of takeoff. This air moving over the wings lowers the plane's minimum takeoff speed.

using your theories it wouldn't matter

[CaptainSlackbladder5]

Its not a theory, it happens every day of every week at Heathrow, go down there and watch it if you don't believe me. At 3pm prompt, the traffic does an about turn, and the direction of take-off and landings are alternated (except in the very rare instances where weather like dense fog precludes this....). Thats why Heathrow's runways are much longer than is strictly necessary, so aircraft can take off out of wind....

[CaptainSlackbladder5]

The title of this video is highly misleading... there clearly were not 'thousands' in this protest, a few hundred-yes, maybe a thousand, being generous lets say two thousand (although it stretches credibility to say that). but certainly not 'thousands' which gives the impressions there were more than a couple of thousand..........

[GreenpeaceUK]

actually there were between 3,500 and 4,000 people there - just fyi

[mixmatosis]

Despite the ever-growing number of flights, Heathrow does not necessarily need a third runway. The problem could be solved with better air traffic management on the two existing runways, and by high-speed rail links between British cities. These measures would also ease gridlock on the roads around Heathrow.

[igniswizzard]

The Cranford Agreement, which currently sees the runways used as one for landing and the other for takeoffs prevents the maximum potential of the runways. However, the gates are used at more than 100% design efficiency. This is why the 6th terminal and 3rd runway is needed.

[CaptainSlackbladder5]

Can you explain the 'better air traffic management' theme in more detail, I'm sure NATS would be interested in this.... They do a very fine job in getting aircraft down as quickly and safely as possible, but clearly some environmentalists know better..... Or could this just be a case of a layman greenie talking out of his proverbial as per usual...........

[mixmatosis]

The third runway will worsen air quality over London. The Environment Agency maintains that the added nitrogen dioxide pollution from a third runway is likely to breach EU regulations. Furthermore, added noise pollution will affect the millions of Londoners who live below flight paths.

[igniswizzard]

Thousands say NO! Millions say YES!

[mixmatosis]

A survey by pollsters Mori found that just 18% of people wanted to expand Heathrow, while 74% agreed that high speed rail was a better option. The poll coincides with the release of the Heathrow consultation responses: almost 90% of people opposed expansion.

[whiteho2]

Average hold time for planes landing at Heathrow is 10-15mins each....3rd runway would reduce this saving fuel burning time and hence being better for the environment.

Its great that all of you anti-plane supporters have such a great knowledge of aviation and how it works, you may actually be able to help yourselves if you had an ounce of common sense!!

[motherlodeuk]

If I were you I'd do the research before shooting my mouth off about 'common sense' - you're conveniently ignoring the fact that the 3rd runway will add additional 900 flights a day over London - almost 70 per cent more than current levels - which means big increases in CO2 emissions. Its take off and landing slots will quickly fill up, leaving Heathrow almost back where it started in terms of the 'hold time' you talk about.

[motherlodeuk]

And after that we have the 20 other airports around the UK with expansion plans, plus in 10 years time new demands at Heathrow for runways 4 and 5 etc...

[igniswizzard]

For the busiest intl airport in the world, Heathrow is a small airport - other airports such as Atlanta and O'Hare have 5 or 6 runways. So stop complaining. This country is just full of annoying little demonstrators who are hugely the minority :)

If Heathrow doesnt expand, Schiphol, CDG and Frankfurt will instead, resulting in no "environmental gain". It is especially what is needed when the world comes out of the current recession.

Furthermore, climate change is BARELY human induced. fact!

[CaptainSlackbladder5]

They really don't get this, let me help. less planes holding = less fuel burn = less emissions. More landing slots = more straight in approaches = less fuel burn. heathrow is at 99% capacity now, hence hold times are often 45 minutes at peak times. A thrid runway will prevent this, its in no-ones interests to see aircraft holding (except the oil companies). Whether the extra flights will happen is debatable, I tend to think not, given the economic situation and high landing fees at Heathrow....

[brokenbriton]

Its you that doesn't get it

Please give data to support your assertions. You have the same logic as Hoon. Also the prevailing wind in London is westerly. Aircraft have to land into wind; so all those massive beasts (and they are getting bigger every year) have to turn in right over Central London. The noise they cause means only a limited number of flights can land before 6am or after 11.30pm.

[CaptainSlackbladder5]

No, its definitely you, not me, you clearly know less than zilch about aviation. Every afternoon the aircraft taking off and landing at Heathrow switch runways, this happens at 3pm prompt. If runway 27R was used for landings in the first half of the day, then runway 90L is used in the latter half. Go down to Heathrow and watch this... does the wind change direction at 3om prompt too? Or maybe aircraft don't have to land in the prevailing wind and you need to do some research?

[brokenbriton]

OK lets see what Bristol Airport say

Why do aircraft take off and land in a

particular direction?

Aircraft generally (but not always) takeoff

and land into the prevailing wind. This

helps to generate more lift from the

wings and makes the engines more

efficient.

[CaptainSlackbladder5]

Correct, but the alternating traffic system at Heathrow exists specifically so traffic doesn't pass over one area continuously, not an issue at a quiet airport like Bristol.

[CaptainSlackbladder5]

Also, how are the aircraft getting bigger? Do they grow a few inches, like a toddler? last I saw the aircraft in use were largely the same (but quieter), than those in use 5 years ago. have you ever been to central London? When was the last time you could actually hear an aircraft above the traffic noise and general commotion, its a city ergo its noisy. Do the cyclists waiting at lights next to a stinky noisy old bus look up and say 'damn, that plane noise is really irking me'? No, mefinks......

[brokenbriton]

You stand in Kew gardens or stay at my sister in laws address in Clapham. You can hear and see them turning all the time.

I was in London last week.

[CaptainSlackbladder5]

Correct again, but I bet you can barely hear them, and if you're stood on Clapham high street, it'll be the numerous double-deckers and the hundreds of trains from Clapham Junction that you'll hear, the planes are at about 4000ft there, prior to turn in for approach over Battersea...

[mattymDADYM]

YES YES YES YES

[brokenbriton]

Another day another emergency landing

[CaptainSlackbladder5]

And your point is.........?

[brokenbriton]

What goes up must come down. somethimes not how or where you intended.

[tommyA350]

The problem is getting the real facts and truth out. On one side you have BAA and the goverment and on the other side you have the "green partys" and both twist and skew facts to support their own theory's and cause's.

You cant believe anyone these days

[brokenbriton]

Ok well look at some facts

A 747 uses on take off ( when most fuel is used )

at flap setting 10

5,633 lbs (2,555) kgs of fuel

at flap setting 20

5,772llb (2,618)kgs of fuel

by 2030 this will equate to over 2million tonnes of fuel just on takeoffs or 616 million gallons of fuel.

Freighters use more than this.

Thats a lot of emissions... Dont forget cars have CATS fitted etc. So you cant compare the emissions v consumption. These emission levels will breach the EU criteria....

[tommyA350]

I would like to see the formula you used to make your calculations.

For a start I would imagine those figures are for fully loaded 747's. Many of the 747's that fly out of Heathrow are not fully loaded so would not use as much fuel on takeoff.

Also the 747-400 is a 20 year old aircraft that will be replaced by much more efficient aircraft in the coming years so to calculate data for the next 20 years using the 747 is misleading.

[brokenbriton]

So what figure do you come up with...I've used the aviation industries own data including the weight of aviation fuel....

If as you state many of the planes would not be fully loaded why do we need extra capacity ??

I'll tell you one thing for certain there wont be any electric hybrid versions of aircraft. If car technology continues its current progress the plane will stick out like a sore thumb as an environmental disaster.

[tommyA350]

What I mean by not fully loaded extends not only to passengers but fuel weight. What I mean is that the figures you give are for a fully loaded 747 with its full tanks full. Some 747's will be full with passengers but will only have for example a 6-7 hour flight so will carry and burn a lot less fuel.

Im not nesscercarily for Heathrow expansion,all I am saying it is not as "black and white " as many people seem to think.

Aviation currently acounts for 6% of Uk co2 emmisions.

[brokenbriton]

I know what you mean and an exact figure is impossible to know at this stage. so I just looked at the figures that the aviation industry provide as a base line. I appreciate it could be + or minus that figure by quite a margin.

Please consider also that aircraft emit NOx, HC, CO as well CO2

As cars improve the % figure will rise if aircraft engine design cannot advance in the same way which is highly improbable.

I also have concerns over the number of aircraft crashing near airports.

[CaptainSlackbladder5]

There isn't any reason why aircraft won't be hugely more efficient in the future, tecnologies like ducted and open rotor fans offer a quantum leap in efficiency. Don't forget also that jet engines can run on a wide variety of fuels, including biofuels, which will happen increasingly in the next 2-3 years....

[brokenbriton]

Rolls Royce Current developments are focused on the new two-shaft RB.282 family.

After 15 yers of development the engines you refer to can at best offer around a 16-20% efficency saving and the generation after that ??? Do you think that the older aircraft will stop flying at that point because I dont.

[CaptainSlackbladder5]

Well I hope the older aircraft will continue to fly, because they're great to watch and fly in.... In reality they will only stop flying when they have reached the end of their useful life, which is how it should be.

The next-gen of airliners (after A350, 787, et al), will be 60-80% more efficient, using new engine tech, blended wings, etc. Its simple economics, check out the Easyjet and Finnair concept aircraft.

[brokenbriton]

Boeing Commercial Airplanes Chief Scott Carson is a bit more sceptical than you about time scale and developing the units.He also said open-rotor technology engines are noisier than standard jet engines.

Tom Williams from airbus has added there are trade-offs in speed, noise, emissions and reliability to be considered.

I'm not saying it isn't a distant possibility. I would add that neither Easyjet or Finnair are plane makers.

[CaptainSlackbladder5]

Thats a given, although noise is hardly an issue, what Scott Carson doesn't say is that the main hold up is the fear that passengers won't like sitting 80 abreast in a blended wing aircraft. If the will is there, a next-gen aircraft could be flying in 3-4 years, and in service in 6. Its the lack of will to do these things which are easily attainable that leads me to believe things aren't as straightforward with 'AGW' as the propagandists would have you believe....

[brokenbriton]

The blended wing idea has been knocking around since the end of WW2. Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought Boeing had dropped the idea in 2006 for the very reasons you had mentioned. The military as after WW2 still consider the idea for refueling platforms. If successful it will be 2022 before one is commissioned.

[CaptainSlackbladder5]

No, I know Easyjet and Finnair aren't constructors, but the airlines have been showing the constructors what they want from, and what is technically feasible. Worth remebering that easyjet is one of, if not the largest Airbus customer. Their opinions are of huge importance. aslo, regards the speeds, the average speed is steadily falling anyway, after reaching a peak while Concorde was around, the 747 is now the fastest airliner(!). Airbuses are considerably slower than that.......

[BSTconnor]

fantastic7896 i dont think u could have put it in better words good on ya

[brokenbriton]

The United Nations has released a report stating that aviation is responsible for over half of the pollution caused by transportation. In comparison to ground transportation with its millions upon millions of vehicles, there are surprisingly few aircraft (34,444 US-civil, 5,778 US-commercial). Thus, one can only imagine the massive amounts of pollution they emit. A loaded jumbo 747, for instance, uses tens of thousands of pounds of fuel on merely take-off.

[Amitabh197802]

I too am against the third runway. Its bad enough at 3pm now, when they change the active runway. As an aviation photographer, this means having to pack my stuff up and move a mile or more to the runway now in use before I can resume photographing the airliners... this is a nuisance! With three runways this will be even worse and I won't know which runway to head to.... most annoying!

[brokenbriton]

Amitabh

You may lose out twice then under this Govt. They are determined to make illegal photography in public places under terrorism legislation.

I live in the midlands and by around 2 o clock on a fine day the sky will be heavily covered in vapour trails containing who knows what....

[Insanindemembrane]

I read that the Airplot idea was first conceived in a pub. Is that where Greenpeace make all their important business decisions? Cos where I work even the non-important decisions are made at the office with no alcohol involved.

[CaptainSlackbladder5]

Going by their policies, the lies they put forth, and their hypocrisy, the probable answer to your question is yes....

[Insanindemembrane]

testing

[mvpjesuslovesu]

are you serious?!!!!

this so funny!

who wastes there time doing this?

oh wait i forgot eco nutters love dedicating their lives to the worlds most pointless protests.

[grahamcoles1966]

just land them on the thames

[Fantastic7896]

These Greenie eco-fascists are planning to hold a climate camp soon, lets hope someone drops a large bomb on these scum whilst they're all together. This is a very tiny minority trying to dictate to an overwhelming majority how they should run their lives. These rules don't apply of course to Greenies, who are free to fly off on their do-gooder projects and gap year travels.....

[crossler5200]

Dream on,dream on.

[goone1987]

do u watch the news they r buildin it end of

[crossler5200]

Well hey! lets fuck the planet so you and your dim mates can go to Benidorm.And the government will be stopped,since the Tories will win the next election

[CaptainSlackbladder5]

You may not like him and his 'dim' mates going to Benidorm but I daresay it won't stop you and your little private school chums going on a very important gap year trip around the world....... 'Global warming' is purely class warfare, the disenfranchised middle class trying to reassert its traditional status within society via cynical scam.....

[1peoplesun]

Nothing will stop the ruling class

blood will spill on this one

our 'GOVERNment' is not here to serve but to dictate and thats what we live under.

Sorry England :(

[goone1987]

what if the people who protest want to go on holiday and heathrow is the only airport open and only rwy 27r and l are shut and the third one is only open then they wont go so they shuld shut the fuck up and build it after all it is good for british economy

[crossler5200]

You can go on Holiday without flying,the way it used to be done.Stop talking nonsense,I almost never fly,all of Europe is available by Rail travel.

[mvpjesuslovesu]

id like to c u go to the north pole on a train to save all ur precious polar bears.

[crossler5200]

I would like to see you live under the the flightpath in Hayes and have a taste of your own medicine.

[mvpjesuslovesu]

what did you expect living next to Britains biggest airport. did you think miraculously no planes would go over your head? or are you that dopey that you thought it would never have to expand? don't start crying about flights over your head when your the one who CHOSE to live there.

[crossler5200]

Actually I do not live there,but people who chose to live there were repeatedly LIED to by BAA,given false promises about future expansion.What about the millions of people on the flightpath?Putney for instance?Are they not entitled to a bit of sleep.

[mvpjesuslovesu]

Why are you arguing for the people that do live there? Have the nominated you to? Its the modern world, expect noise, expect lies, nothing is ever gonna be perfect. Get over it and stop wasting your life moaning about every little problem, Specially on behalf on someone else...

[crossler5200]

Why not get on with your life and stop posting ignorant pointless comments?I have no interest in any of them,Goodbye.

[crossler5200]

Your a boring little twat.

[karcusprankster]

its not only green piece, there houses are going to be knocked down!

[GreenpeaceUK]

Want to help bring the government's plans for a 3rd runway at Heathrow to a grinding halt? We've bought a piece of land slap bang in the middle of the proposed 3rd runway site. We're not going to let the runway get built and we need your help. Sign up to get your piece of the plot and updates about the campaign to stop airport expansion at greenpeace(dot)org (dot)uk(forward slash)airplot.

[mgsmgs2]

that's so cool..

[sulz132]

oh well, looks like there WILL be a 3rd runway and hopefully a 4th one in a few years!

[nickpn23]

Thanks for your comment. Sometimes - depending on whether I am on the wave of alienation that fits your interpretation - I agree with you. When I examine myself though, I conclude that it is probably a bit simplistic. I mean, they aren't all Middle Class and I never met one named Tarquin. Who could reasonably protest, if whoever takes the position of protester is subject to this type of analysis? I mean this question seriously; I'm not trying to flame anything here.

[wepmob2002]

Some valid questions (seeing as my previous comments have been removed and I was barred from comment here....Why are the greens so keen to supress any debate on the topic of AGW? (A perfect example is the comments to this video). If their case is so good, why try so fervently to extinguish other points of view? There is a disturbingly religious zeal in the attempts to silence critics and portray them as the moral equivalent of holocaust deniers.

[adamu000]

Thanks for your comment. Sometimes - depending on whether I am on the wave of alienation that fits your interpretation - I agree with you. When I examine myself though, I conclude that it is probably a bit simplistic. I mean, they aren't all Middle Class and I never met one named Tarquin. Who could reasonably protest, if whoever takes the position of protester is subject to this type of analysis? I mean this question seriously; I'm not trying to flame anything here.

[nickpn23]

Apologies to adumu000. I accidently posted the above under your account at a certain cyber cafe in North London. The comment is mine and I meant it as an answer to Wepmob2001below.

[hathome]

ON?

[nickpn23]

I don't know about GW. I just don't want the country to be nothing more than a concrete apron. I also resent these big organisations throwing their weight around regardless of others' wishes. I can see why people might disagree with the protesters but some of the abuse on this site seems disproportianate and makes me feel that there is another issue here. Perhaps classism against perceived middleclass activists, perhaps dumb-arse pubby nonsense. Either way it stinks of hatred rather than reason.

[dipw33]

Well the way the country going to the dogs - thanks to the government!we wont have to worry anyway -

[wepmob2000]

The obvious answer to Airport congestion is to build bigger and better airports, a third and then a fourth runway at Heathrow would be a good start.

Nobody should listen to the hypocritical idiots of Greenpeace and Plane Stupid, what they are against is cheap air travel, not air travel per se. These middle class tarquins hate the fact that ordinary joes can drive cars and fly places. Its nothing to do with environmentalism, its all to do with snobbery and keeping plebs in their proper place

[SiLeNtPuNk1]

I was there wooo!

[callmewilson]

I agree, no thrid runway. The planet only has about 50 years left before it burns up unless action is taken. At the end of the day though if the British Government want a third runway that is what will happen, no protest will stop it.

[simonbasil]

im sorry but where is your proof that the planet will burn up in 50 years?

[motherlodeuk]

OK so 50 years may be pushing it a bit, but the general principle is correct, according to the climatologists. The climate change we're experiencing now is being heightened by CO2 we pumped into the atmosphere 50 years ago. We have to cut down very rapidly to stop things spiralling out of control. Cutting back on unnecessary air travel seems like an obvious place to start - fortunately it looks like rising oil prices are pushing up air travel costs & helping us to do the right thing...