all those selfish people causing problems and chaos at the airport how fucking stupid can these ppl be they dont realise how busy Heathrow is it can not handle the amount of air traffic and needs another runway in order to handle this
I have no respectto you people, you just think there will be more planes so more emmisions. Well if there was another runway there would be less aircraft in holding so there would be less fuel used so less emmisions. I might give you people some respect, if your crappy brains could back up your views with fact. You carry on thinking agh greenhouse gasses oh no! And "dannyboyme4" was right the first time. A new runway does not create more air traffic because they are not expanding the ramps.
I am terribly sorry if I overreacted in my last comments and using a bit of bad language and I am sorry if I offended anyone (I take those words back!). You protestors are not idiotic and I know why you are fighting. I hope solely because people are going to lose their homes, because if it is about the environment then stop going about it and read the middle of my second comment.
Why would a green protector protest public transportation that reduces green house gasses these are truly stupid people making decisions on no scientific evidence.
That bloody picnic would stop people getting to their planes and delaying them, so you are just putting them off the idea of no 3rd runway. That picnic is just so childish. It is like a child holding his breath until he gets want he wants!
(Carrying on because I ran out of space) Doesn't the airport deserve expansion? Since the late 20s (so it is a lot older than most of you idiotic activists) the airport has only expanded a tiny bit. And can you activists stop banging on about the environment. China are planned to open over 100 new whole airports in the next few years, so would one little runway do any different? NO!!!!!!!!!!!!! And by the way, ringing that bell and chanting 'no 3rd runway' won't stop it, so just give up!!!!!!!!!
These people always think they are going to win but they never do. Instead of possibly making riots about the 3rd runway, can't the activists (a.k.a idiots) just give up. All the other major European airports are expanding and nobody cares about them, so why do we have to put up with idiotic people like this? The 3rd runway will help reduce delays and people will get to their aircraft sooner.
@dannyboyme4 they also don't know that the third runway will actually help REDUCE EMISSIONS hahahah so they are against exactly what they believe. Because with the extra runway added, That means fewer aviation traffic. This means there is a far less fuel burn while the aircraft are not waiting at idle. this also decreases congestion, help improve the uk's economy with more passengers and trade. So greenpeace actually wants to stop that so they cannot progress. anti society basically.
I think on balance given the environmental impact and the possibility of malfunction or sabotage the way forward is to look at alternative solution to mass movement of people.
Flights from Heathrow's third runway will emit same greenhouse gas emissions as Kenya:
Flights from the new third runway at Heathrow will produce the same amount of greenhouse gas emissions as Kenya every year according to figures from the World Development Movement.
Some London residents fear that a third runway further increases the risk of a devastating terrorist attack by increasing the amount of air traffic over central London.
Ummh ( crashes this year ) Amsterdam Feb 25th Boeing 737 Turkish airlines Luxor Feb20th Antonov 12 Chanco Feb 15th 2009 Bell UH-1H New York Feb 12th Bombadier DHC=8-402 Manacapuru Feb 7th EMB-110P1 Trigoria Feb 7th Cessna 650 Citation Lubbock Jan 27th ATR-42 Gabon Jan 17th EC725 Cougar New York Jan15th Airbus A320 Caticlan Jan11th MA=60 In 2008 61 aircraft crashed.... This does not include near misses or "lucky" landings
The last major terrorist attack in London was on buses and tube trains....... Air transport is less likely to be successfully attacked because of the security measures in place. In light of this train of thought I propose people should fly instead of taking the bus or train until similar security measures are in place on these types of transport taking the bus or train increases the risk of a devastating terrorist attack - FACT!
When a car breaks down it usually stops. When a plane suffers a major failure it also stops then drops. I think its the last part that is of concern.
On terrorism
BBC Aug 2006
"A plot to blow up planes in flight from the UK to the US and commit "mass murder on an unimaginable scale" has been disrupted, Scotland Yard has said.
It is thought the plan was to detonate explosive devices smuggled in hand luggage on to as many as 10 aircraft".
If you happen to believe all this government 'terrorism threat' hokum, then so be it, but don't you realise a lot of it is total bo**ocks to justify anti-terror measures that include monitoring protests and a big brother state..? How many of these threats could have materialised, given the security you have to pass through to board a plane? the answer is 'none', you plane haters really have no valid or sensible arguments....
No one denies those events, but ask yourself why these terror threat stories are released so often, usually justifying yet more restrictions on long standing civil liberties. Why can't greenies protest on parliament square or stand outside Downing Street? Most active green campaigners are now in a national database, because they dared to protest, who can access this info - no-one but an elite few knows, but database linked blacklisting in the construction industry has recently been exposed....
Yes I read about those.....The Govt have this fixation that everyone is out to get them. Mind U at the moment that is possible.
Do you think there is any merit in trying to redistribute air traffic. Robin Hood is very under utilised and so is Coventry. Bristol as you comment is another.
Do you think the City will emerge from the current problems with the same credibility.
As it happens, yes, I do think there is huge merit in these schemes, most airports in Britain are woefully under-utilised, and they should be tied in to a high speed affordable rail network, it would bring huge regional benefits for the economy. As it stands though, with successive governments not realising there is a country outside of London, I can't see this happening:-( Incidentally, a decent rail network would render a third runway at Heathrow largely superfluous.
I was actually staggered at Doncaster. My plane was at 7:20 the next 10:30..
The long overdue rail network !! yes we desperately need that. That is of course the direction the Tories want to go in building a £20bn TGV-style high speed rail link between London, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds.
I see the that BBC are looking to relocate 1,500 staff to its new facility in Salford maybe other may follow.
The problem being that it will invariably happen under a private finance initiative, rather than government spending. As these PFI's need a rapid return on investment, the network will be tailored toward the most profitable end of the market, i.e: first class business travellers. As with the postal service, businesses will only cherry-pick the most profitable parts, and once again mass transit will be left in the cold:-(
Until the railways are nationalised again, this will continue, and rail travel will continue to price itself out of the mass market. Its a ridiculous situation when you see an intercity train with 4 half empty first class carriages, and people crowded into cattle class, like...well... cattle. small wonder, with this, and the expense of rail travel, that people choose to drive or fly, its cheaper, more comfortable and more convenient. The rail industry needs cross-subsidisation to work fully.
Sadly this cross subsidisation only occurs in London, which does have a generally excellent transport system (when I live in London, I just don't bother with a car). the rest of the country can go and swing, its amazing to think that travelling by train from say, Teesside to London to be there by 9am, is actually vastly more expensive than taking the BMI Baby flight from Teesside airport. If people were given a real solution, i.e: real low cost rail travel, the 'problem' would vanish
The rail ticket prices are a real enigma. I booked ahead and got a Ticket from Sheffield to London for £18 return. Out of curiosity I looked at the on the day charge it was a staggering £240.
Quite ridiculous! If you had had to travel at short notice, it would easily have been possible to do the same journey at less than 1/5 of the cost, by driving carefully. Even a Mercedes can do 800 miles on a tank if driven carefully. IMHO this is where both the government and Greenpeace drastically fail, they put forth and attack solutions without addressing the real problems as you've just illustrated. A serious campaign for cheap efficient rail travel would be supported by everyone.
Sept 2007 "terrorists planning a massacre in Germany on the anniversary of the September 11 attacks phoned British contacts as they plotted, it has emerged."
June 2008 "British 9/11 fears over private planes, Government terror adviser warns".
Aug 2006 "The British authorities thwarted a terrorist plot to launch a wave of attacks on airplanes flying between Britain and the United States that would have caused what one senior police officer called "mass murder on an unimaginable scale."
Because dressing up as edwardians is gonna stop climate change!! Funny as hell!! I'm probably right in saying that almost all of those passengers would have forgotten about the protest and the point they're trying to get across by the time they reached their aircraft!! So that was a complete waste of your time, but more importantly, precious police resources were taken off the streets of London to babysit a bunch of environmentalists!!!
"If a third runway is built without these conditions attached, European air quality standards will continue to be breached, noise pollution for households on flight paths will increase and a valuable opportunity will be missed to ensure the aviation industry prepares for a low carbon future".
The proposition is for a 2,200 meter runway to be built north of Heathrow by 2020. This would almost double the number of passengers passing through one of the world's largest airports and increase the number of flights from 470,000 to 700,000 a year.
Flights from Heathrow's third runway will emit same greenhouse gas emissions as Kenya:
Flights from the new third runway at Heathrow will produce the same amount of greenhouse gas emissions as Kenya every year according to figures from the World Development Movement.
Global warming is a scam to sell you on a global carbon tax. The sun is heating the solar system - not your SUVs. The sun went through a heating cycle, now it is going through a cooling cycle. The ice caps on Mars were receding, moons of Jupiter turned to liquid seas from ice.
The govt will regulate every aspect of your life if you don't stop the carbon tax. Your choice.
So true, there is even climate change on Pluto. The fact is there is no proof that CO2 causes climate change, this is merely a hypothesis being sold as proven fact. As such its a scam, ask any HONEST scientists they will say they don't know if CO2 is a cause or consequence of climate change. Even NASA admits that the study of CO2 and its effects is in its infancy, the spacecraft that blew up yesterday was only the second real attempt to study it.
The other point you've made is equally true. Every aspect of the governments climate change policy involves more bureacracy, more punitive taxes, and more restrictions on freedoms and civil liberties. Notice how every road toll system involves the govt tracking peoples movements. 'Terrorism' was one means of achieving the big brother state, climate change is just another excuse for the govt to expand on this. Sadly, the Conservatives, if elected will be just as bad:-(
Heathrow are saying that the air traffic will increase from 480,000 to 605,000 then 702,000 by 2030. Trouble is the Govt says one thing and then slowly the truth gets out when its all too late.
She is very lost in what she knows, greenpeace and such feed them lies in order to join and protest, a third runway is what we need and the pro's out number the con's.
Oh don't get me wrong, the government are the worst but we need a third runway to reduce emissions, aircraft don't need to circle and waste fuel and that helps a lot. It isn't for allowing more aircraft.
No its not, but yours might just be..... More runways = aircraft landing faster and holding less = less emissions. Surely even a 'retard' can see that (although in your case obviously not, I'm clearly not speaking to the brains trust here am I?)
Another tin foil agent living in cloud cuckoo land. Going by your crack-head logic; the more people who smoke are likely to die sooner from cancer, therefore there will be less people smoking.
All independent studies have shown that the third runway will vastly increase the the number a flights.
I've just seen that you do not believe in man made climate change. You on the Esso payroll?
Nope, I'm on the sensible, reading all the evidence and not just believing propaganda payroll. Bring me proof of AGW and not a hypothesis and I will change my tune, although I won't hold my breath. Heathrow is at 99% capacity now, its pretty evident more landing slots will reduce holding times ergo reduce emissions. If flights increase that merely proves demand is there, airlines aren't in the habit of giving away flights. Rather a 'tin foil agent' than a perpetuator of this colossal scam....
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.
The whole issue is not about building an airfield in some open ground. Villages and communities will be torn up. Planning laws are very much in favour of big business. All of those supporters of the project who get a nuclear power station, prison or wind turbines in their back garden have been warned...Don't you think people have a right to say hang on if there house is going to be destroyed ??
I've got a nuclear power station and the UK's three biggest wind turbines within three miles of my house. I don't care, like the third runway, the benefits far outweigh the negatives. The power station has created a lot of jobs, with many more to follow, so thats good. If I didn't like this, I could move...... The protestors at LHR are just a bunch of very selfish people who wish to impose their minority views on the vast majority.
Did you buy the house after the stations were built ??? would you have bought it under those circumstances ??? very easy to say you are not bothered when you have no choice...
Air traffic causes a lot of noise and pollution. I see the skies over my house in the midlands slowly cloud over in the day from vapour trails.
They also use collosal amounts of fuel. How is it selfish to complain about your village community and house being destroyed ???
Yes I bought the house well after the power station was built, it didn't bother me. The planned enlargement is going ahead now, I had no say, it doesn't bother me. Its good that several thousand jobs will be created. Same with the planned break up of the Clemenceau a couple of miles away. A few (about 5) selfish protestors are delaying that too, but it'll create a lot of jobs, so thats good too. The wind turbines, well, they're pretty cool, although they rarely work, so much for renewables.....
The people of Sipson have a right to protest, its their homes, but then they could have seen the enlargement of LHR coming, there has been an airport there since the 1920's, its not a recent thing, and its been in the pipeline for 10 years or more. 700 homes were demolished in my town recently (with CPO's), not for something useful like an airport, but to make way for a few luxury homes that locals can't afford (and presumably a nice kickback for local councillors), but not a greenie in sight.
What is annoying is the 'rentamob' like the woman in the video, invariably middle class busybodies with too much time to spare who feel they have the right to dictate to others. Is she creating employment opportunities (I doubt that)? Why shouldn't all people have the right to travel, have none of the plane stupid mob ever taken foreign holidays (I doubt that too). Its all hypocrisy at its finest from a bunch of middle class snobs who probably rue the day universal suffrage was granted...
One other point regards the so-called noise and pollution, its actually less than road traffic. I lived in Croydon, right under the flightpath for LHR runways 27L and R. The noise was barely noticeable, even when Concorde went over, certainly nothing compared to the road traffic. Even if you stand at the end of runway 27L, the plane noise is irrelevant compared to the noise of the dual carriageway (and the planes are more fun to watch than an artic......)
You raise some interesting points. Villages do provide employment from the village shop, church, the local window cleaner, tradesman etc. to the local pub. All that will be gone forever. I believe also the village itself has been there much longer than the airport which was built on agricultural land called "Heath Row"
The plane crash in the Hudson river and Concordes fate will raise awareness that the machines are not infallable and they are in many respects an accident waiting to happen.
Protests are almost always a minority of people - selfish people.
And to include children in protests is an immensely un-ethical and underhand tactic - children will say what their parents say without fully understanding the whole of the issue.
In conclusion - not expanding Heathrow will result in the expansion of other European Airports - The environment is a global issue!!
The right to protest is expressly mentioned in the convention of our human rights. Why is it selfish to want to draw government and national attention to issuest hataffect people living within the country?
How jolly nice and middle class, who said this isn't all about a few middle class know- it-all's trying to dictate to everyone else? All lies, there isn't a huge public outcry, its a very small, but vocal minority, like this, who want everyone else to do as they say, not as they do... Oh my, how they must hate seeing people with regional accents enjoying foreign holidays, oh well back off to private school now Tarquin.....
Wonder how all those people got to the airport, did they Walk? .... I doubt it! they probably jumped in Cars that do a hell of a lot more damage to the environment than a Planes.
How can Heathrow even consider having another runway, they can't look after the passengers' suitcases that they already have, never midn adding more!!!
god have these folks not got anything better to do than this ? Whilst the rest of us are in jobs working away trying to save the economy this lot are pissing about.
Notice their all well spoken posh types, they are not in touch with reality and the working classes. They need to understand the benefits of building the runwaway first before they start all this nonsense.
yea i dont agree with the argument for a 3rd runway. but it will be built regardless of buying land the gov has powers to do a forced sale or even take the land. i rekon its too late global warmning is happen no stopping it. any measures to combat it will always be too little too late. mankind only doing what it does best fucking things up sad but true
what does the future hold for us all anyway, just let them build a bigger airport, in 100 years from now how do u think heathrow will look, u cant fight it just accept it
they all need to get in the REAL world and accept the inevitable its going to happen, it needs to happen to sustain a viable economy. This country has already lost so much in industry since the 1980s and no business would ever want to invest in a country with a 1960's style airport structure. If these nutters are allowed to continue we will all end up back in the dark ages.
As much as it worries the nation - i think they'd be in line to agree. However the aerospace are currently in developments - I look forward to the return of the turbo-prop. It could and is being trialed.
yes calvinjones but then at least we will have a first class airport to compete with europe instead of the crazy political doctrine that has kept this country non competitive for generations. Just look at our railway network, aged and decrepit but still expensive funny how europe scores so much better with theirs and and a fraction of the cost to the traveller isnt it? listen to greenpeace and their cronies for too much longer and we will all be back on horse and cart soon. Moral : move forward.
Greenpeace are advocating better railways. Last year Spain opened its new ultra high speed rail link from Malaga to Cordoba...Paid for by the EU..lets looka t all options first before destroying villages...Interesting episode in the Hudson river say the same thing happens at Heathrow..
A third runway would speed up turnaround and ease air traffic and anyway I don't know why they are protesting because they are not going to win so they can just forget about the fact that the runway won't be built because it will. And any way it's not runways that need to be cut down it's factories and coal and other fossil fuel power plants.
No I think the girl meant it was irrelevant that they were making a point to short haul passengers - they were all there to protest against the subject of 3rd runway, not this. I don't think they completely oppose flying - but certainly hate mr and mrs nesbit taking short haul flights to cheap spanish towns to fill their fat arses with paella(which for the record is a disgrace to real spanish food).
i agree on you with that, but what for business passengers who need to get to where they are going quickly and efficiently. i agree on you with me and mrs nesbit lol, after all, they can buy paella in tesco now for god sake
Stupid ignorant posh woman who is probably a complete snob.
the working masses support the new runway.
I support the third runway as its very important the the economy and will create thousands of jobs for our ailing economy.
I dont care about a few houses being knocked down belonging to idiots who buy houses next to a huge airport then complan about the noise.
I cant wait until 2015 when this stupid coalition gets kicked out and the runway is finally approved!!!!!!!!!
pabloduvias 2 months ago
YES TO THE THRID RUNWAY. FUCK THE HATERZZZZZZZZZZ
cpdp999 5 months ago 2
heathrow is overstressed with two runways it NEEDS expansion
roryj123ok 1 year ago
Stupid bitch bringing her children.
PhluXx1 1 year ago 2
hippys!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Aviationnation10 1 year ago 2
some people are so up their own arses. i bet u stil go on holiday 4 times a year.
92gabzy 1 year ago
I hope they will make a 2nd runway in Stansted
michelexyz 1 year ago
@michelexyz they dont need one
roryj123ok 1 year ago
all those selfish people causing problems and chaos at the airport how fucking stupid can these ppl be they dont realise how busy Heathrow is it can not handle the amount of air traffic and needs another runway in order to handle this
charlieiscool1000 1 year ago
I have no respectto you people, you just think there will be more planes so more emmisions. Well if there was another runway there would be less aircraft in holding so there would be less fuel used so less emmisions. I might give you people some respect, if your crappy brains could back up your views with fact. You carry on thinking agh greenhouse gasses oh no! And "dannyboyme4" was right the first time. A new runway does not create more air traffic because they are not expanding the ramps.
brit4evr123 2 years ago
I am terribly sorry if I overreacted in my last comments and using a bit of bad language and I am sorry if I offended anyone (I take those words back!). You protestors are not idiotic and I know why you are fighting. I hope solely because people are going to lose their homes, because if it is about the environment then stop going about it and read the middle of my second comment.
dannyboyme4 2 years ago
Why would a green protector protest public transportation that reduces green house gasses these are truly stupid people making decisions on no scientific evidence.
BEN1969350 2 years ago
That bloody picnic would stop people getting to their planes and delaying them, so you are just putting them off the idea of no 3rd runway. That picnic is just so childish. It is like a child holding his breath until he gets want he wants!
dannyboyme4 2 years ago
(Carrying on because I ran out of space) Doesn't the airport deserve expansion? Since the late 20s (so it is a lot older than most of you idiotic activists) the airport has only expanded a tiny bit. And can you activists stop banging on about the environment. China are planned to open over 100 new whole airports in the next few years, so would one little runway do any different? NO!!!!!!!!!!!!! And by the way, ringing that bell and chanting 'no 3rd runway' won't stop it, so just give up!!!!!!!!!
dannyboyme4 2 years ago
These people always think they are going to win but they never do. Instead of possibly making riots about the 3rd runway, can't the activists (a.k.a idiots) just give up. All the other major European airports are expanding and nobody cares about them, so why do we have to put up with idiotic people like this? The 3rd runway will help reduce delays and people will get to their aircraft sooner.
dannyboyme4 2 years ago
@dannyboyme4 they also don't know that the third runway will actually help REDUCE EMISSIONS hahahah so they are against exactly what they believe. Because with the extra runway added, That means fewer aviation traffic. This means there is a far less fuel burn while the aircraft are not waiting at idle. this also decreases congestion, help improve the uk's economy with more passengers and trade. So greenpeace actually wants to stop that so they cannot progress. anti society basically.
EpiDemic117 1 year ago
@EpiDemic117 Not sure I understand the logic their.
mcwolfus 10 months ago
Whatever their motives I think the fact that such an imaginative protest as this has been organized and carried out gives me faith in human nature.
dunctonhoney 2 years ago
I think on balance given the environmental impact and the possibility of malfunction or sabotage the way forward is to look at alternative solution to mass movement of people.
brokenbriton 3 years ago
WDM 15 Jan 2009:
Flights from Heathrow's third runway will emit same greenhouse gas emissions as Kenya:
Flights from the new third runway at Heathrow will produce the same amount of greenhouse gas emissions as Kenya every year according to figures from the World Development Movement.
mixmatosis 3 years ago
Some London residents fear that a third runway further increases the risk of a devastating terrorist attack by increasing the amount of air traffic over central London.
mixmatosis 3 years ago
brokenbriton 3 years ago
How many cars crashed, trains crashed, ships sank or cyclists were killed? How many walkers were attacked or murdered?
CaptainSlackbladder5 3 years ago
The last major terrorist attack in London was on buses and tube trains....... Air transport is less likely to be successfully attacked because of the security measures in place. In light of this train of thought I propose people should fly instead of taking the bus or train until similar security measures are in place on these types of transport taking the bus or train increases the risk of a devastating terrorist attack - FACT!
CaptainSlackbladder5 3 years ago
Hang on.
When a car breaks down it usually stops. When a plane suffers a major failure it also stops then drops. I think its the last part that is of concern.
On terrorism
BBC Aug 2006
"A plot to blow up planes in flight from the UK to the US and commit "mass murder on an unimaginable scale" has been disrupted, Scotland Yard has said.
It is thought the plan was to detonate explosive devices smuggled in hand luggage on to as many as 10 aircraft".
Do you believe these threats have gone away ?
brokenbriton 3 years ago
If you happen to believe all this government 'terrorism threat' hokum, then so be it, but don't you realise a lot of it is total bo**ocks to justify anti-terror measures that include monitoring protests and a big brother state..? How many of these threats could have materialised, given the security you have to pass through to board a plane? the answer is 'none', you plane haters really have no valid or sensible arguments....
CaptainSlackbladder5 3 years ago
Tell that to those in the underground and in the twin towers.
I'm not a plane hater its just on balance before villages are trashed I want to know the full reasons why.
What happens when this terminal is full ???
brokenbriton 3 years ago
No one denies those events, but ask yourself why these terror threat stories are released so often, usually justifying yet more restrictions on long standing civil liberties. Why can't greenies protest on parliament square or stand outside Downing Street? Most active green campaigners are now in a national database, because they dared to protest, who can access this info - no-one but an elite few knows, but database linked blacklisting in the construction industry has recently been exposed....
CaptainSlackbladder5 3 years ago
Yes I read about those.....The Govt have this fixation that everyone is out to get them. Mind U at the moment that is possible.
Do you think there is any merit in trying to redistribute air traffic. Robin Hood is very under utilised and so is Coventry. Bristol as you comment is another.
Do you think the City will emerge from the current problems with the same credibility.
brokenbriton 3 years ago
As it happens, yes, I do think there is huge merit in these schemes, most airports in Britain are woefully under-utilised, and they should be tied in to a high speed affordable rail network, it would bring huge regional benefits for the economy. As it stands though, with successive governments not realising there is a country outside of London, I can't see this happening:-( Incidentally, a decent rail network would render a third runway at Heathrow largely superfluous.
CaptainSlackbladder5 3 years ago
I was actually staggered at Doncaster. My plane was at 7:20 the next 10:30..
The long overdue rail network !! yes we desperately need that. That is of course the direction the Tories want to go in building a £20bn TGV-style high speed rail link between London, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds.
I see the that BBC are looking to relocate 1,500 staff to its new facility in Salford maybe other may follow.
brokenbriton 3 years ago
The problem being that it will invariably happen under a private finance initiative, rather than government spending. As these PFI's need a rapid return on investment, the network will be tailored toward the most profitable end of the market, i.e: first class business travellers. As with the postal service, businesses will only cherry-pick the most profitable parts, and once again mass transit will be left in the cold:-(
CaptainSlackbladder5 3 years ago
Until the railways are nationalised again, this will continue, and rail travel will continue to price itself out of the mass market. Its a ridiculous situation when you see an intercity train with 4 half empty first class carriages, and people crowded into cattle class, like...well... cattle. small wonder, with this, and the expense of rail travel, that people choose to drive or fly, its cheaper, more comfortable and more convenient. The rail industry needs cross-subsidisation to work fully.
CaptainSlackbladder5 3 years ago
Sadly this cross subsidisation only occurs in London, which does have a generally excellent transport system (when I live in London, I just don't bother with a car). the rest of the country can go and swing, its amazing to think that travelling by train from say, Teesside to London to be there by 9am, is actually vastly more expensive than taking the BMI Baby flight from Teesside airport. If people were given a real solution, i.e: real low cost rail travel, the 'problem' would vanish
CaptainSlackbladder5 3 years ago
The rail ticket prices are a real enigma. I booked ahead and got a Ticket from Sheffield to London for £18 return. Out of curiosity I looked at the on the day charge it was a staggering £240.
brokenbriton 3 years ago
Quite ridiculous! If you had had to travel at short notice, it would easily have been possible to do the same journey at less than 1/5 of the cost, by driving carefully. Even a Mercedes can do 800 miles on a tank if driven carefully. IMHO this is where both the government and Greenpeace drastically fail, they put forth and attack solutions without addressing the real problems as you've just illustrated. A serious campaign for cheap efficient rail travel would be supported by everyone.
CaptainSlackbladder5 3 years ago
Sept 2007 "terrorists planning a massacre in Germany on the anniversary of the September 11 attacks phoned British contacts as they plotted, it has emerged."
June 2008 "British 9/11 fears over private planes, Government terror adviser warns".
Aug 2006 "The British authorities thwarted a terrorist plot to launch a wave of attacks on airplanes flying between Britain and the United States that would have caused what one senior police officer called "mass murder on an unimaginable scale."
mixmatosis 3 years ago
Because dressing up as edwardians is gonna stop climate change!! Funny as hell!! I'm probably right in saying that almost all of those passengers would have forgotten about the protest and the point they're trying to get across by the time they reached their aircraft!! So that was a complete waste of your time, but more importantly, precious police resources were taken off the streets of London to babysit a bunch of environmentalists!!!
FlyGuy824 3 years ago
Institute of Public Policy Research:
"If a third runway is built without these conditions attached, European air quality standards will continue to be breached, noise pollution for households on flight paths will increase and a valuable opportunity will be missed to ensure the aviation industry prepares for a low carbon future".
mixmatosis 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I Love this!
Also check my You Tube site on how to receive FREE Gift Cards!
XenoAlex2222 3 years ago
CNN:
The proposition is for a 2,200 meter runway to be built north of Heathrow by 2020. This would almost double the number of passengers passing through one of the world's largest airports and increase the number of flights from 470,000 to 700,000 a year.
mixmatosis 3 years ago
WDM 15 Jan 2009:
Flights from Heathrow's third runway will emit same greenhouse gas emissions as Kenya:
Flights from the new third runway at Heathrow will produce the same amount of greenhouse gas emissions as Kenya every year according to figures from the World Development Movement.
mixmatosis 3 years ago
Global warming is a scam to sell you on a global carbon tax. The sun is heating the solar system - not your SUVs. The sun went through a heating cycle, now it is going through a cooling cycle. The ice caps on Mars were receding, moons of Jupiter turned to liquid seas from ice.
The govt will regulate every aspect of your life if you don't stop the carbon tax. Your choice.
BankScamTakeover 3 years ago
So true, there is even climate change on Pluto. The fact is there is no proof that CO2 causes climate change, this is merely a hypothesis being sold as proven fact. As such its a scam, ask any HONEST scientists they will say they don't know if CO2 is a cause or consequence of climate change. Even NASA admits that the study of CO2 and its effects is in its infancy, the spacecraft that blew up yesterday was only the second real attempt to study it.
CaptainSlackbladder5 3 years ago
The other point you've made is equally true. Every aspect of the governments climate change policy involves more bureacracy, more punitive taxes, and more restrictions on freedoms and civil liberties. Notice how every road toll system involves the govt tracking peoples movements. 'Terrorism' was one means of achieving the big brother state, climate change is just another excuse for the govt to expand on this. Sadly, the Conservatives, if elected will be just as bad:-(
CaptainSlackbladder5 3 years ago
The third runway is never going to happen.
mixmatosis 3 years ago
Dudish
Thanks for your post.
Heathrow are saying that the air traffic will increase from 480,000 to 605,000 then 702,000 by 2030. Trouble is the Govt says one thing and then slowly the truth gets out when its all too late.
brokenbriton 3 years ago
She is very lost in what she knows, greenpeace and such feed them lies in order to join and protest, a third runway is what we need and the pro's out number the con's.
DudishDanny 3 years ago
Oh and the Govt wouldn't lie then ???
On what basis are you saying we need a 3rd runway..
brokenbriton 3 years ago
Oh don't get me wrong, the government are the worst but we need a third runway to reduce emissions, aircraft don't need to circle and waste fuel and that helps a lot. It isn't for allowing more aircraft.
DudishDanny 3 years ago
"we need a third runway to reduce emissions".
That's the most retarded comment I've ever seen on youtube.
mixmatosis 3 years ago
No its not, but yours might just be..... More runways = aircraft landing faster and holding less = less emissions. Surely even a 'retard' can see that (although in your case obviously not, I'm clearly not speaking to the brains trust here am I?)
CaptainSlackbladder5 3 years ago
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.
brokenbriton 3 years ago
Another tin foil agent living in cloud cuckoo land. Going by your crack-head logic; the more people who smoke are likely to die sooner from cancer, therefore there will be less people smoking.
All independent studies have shown that the third runway will vastly increase the the number a flights.
I've just seen that you do not believe in man made climate change. You on the Esso payroll?
mixmatosis 3 years ago
Nope, I'm on the sensible, reading all the evidence and not just believing propaganda payroll. Bring me proof of AGW and not a hypothesis and I will change my tune, although I won't hold my breath. Heathrow is at 99% capacity now, its pretty evident more landing slots will reduce holding times ergo reduce emissions. If flights increase that merely proves demand is there, airlines aren't in the habit of giving away flights. Rather a 'tin foil agent' than a perpetuator of this colossal scam....
CaptainSlackbladder5 3 years ago
Well, they've lied about so called man made climate change, presenting a theory as a fact, so why not lie about everything else as well.....
CaptainSlackbladder5 3 years ago
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.
brokenbriton 3 years ago
EPIC FAIL. It's being built and that's cool.
quwers 3 years ago
my house is getting knocked down.
joel9 3 years ago
How is she going to be able to take Little Jocasta & Tarquin abroad without a third runway? :-)
TheGreatSteve 3 years ago
The whole issue is not about building an airfield in some open ground. Villages and communities will be torn up. Planning laws are very much in favour of big business. All of those supporters of the project who get a nuclear power station, prison or wind turbines in their back garden have been warned...Don't you think people have a right to say hang on if there house is going to be destroyed ??
brokenbriton 3 years ago
I've got a nuclear power station and the UK's three biggest wind turbines within three miles of my house. I don't care, like the third runway, the benefits far outweigh the negatives. The power station has created a lot of jobs, with many more to follow, so thats good. If I didn't like this, I could move...... The protestors at LHR are just a bunch of very selfish people who wish to impose their minority views on the vast majority.
fantastic7897 3 years ago
Did you buy the house after the stations were built ??? would you have bought it under those circumstances ??? very easy to say you are not bothered when you have no choice...
Air traffic causes a lot of noise and pollution. I see the skies over my house in the midlands slowly cloud over in the day from vapour trails.
They also use collosal amounts of fuel. How is it selfish to complain about your village community and house being destroyed ???
brokenbriton 3 years ago
Yes I bought the house well after the power station was built, it didn't bother me. The planned enlargement is going ahead now, I had no say, it doesn't bother me. Its good that several thousand jobs will be created. Same with the planned break up of the Clemenceau a couple of miles away. A few (about 5) selfish protestors are delaying that too, but it'll create a lot of jobs, so thats good too. The wind turbines, well, they're pretty cool, although they rarely work, so much for renewables.....
fantastic7897 3 years ago
The people of Sipson have a right to protest, its their homes, but then they could have seen the enlargement of LHR coming, there has been an airport there since the 1920's, its not a recent thing, and its been in the pipeline for 10 years or more. 700 homes were demolished in my town recently (with CPO's), not for something useful like an airport, but to make way for a few luxury homes that locals can't afford (and presumably a nice kickback for local councillors), but not a greenie in sight.
fantastic7897 3 years ago
What is annoying is the 'rentamob' like the woman in the video, invariably middle class busybodies with too much time to spare who feel they have the right to dictate to others. Is she creating employment opportunities (I doubt that)? Why shouldn't all people have the right to travel, have none of the plane stupid mob ever taken foreign holidays (I doubt that too). Its all hypocrisy at its finest from a bunch of middle class snobs who probably rue the day universal suffrage was granted...
fantastic7897 3 years ago
One other point regards the so-called noise and pollution, its actually less than road traffic. I lived in Croydon, right under the flightpath for LHR runways 27L and R. The noise was barely noticeable, even when Concorde went over, certainly nothing compared to the road traffic. Even if you stand at the end of runway 27L, the plane noise is irrelevant compared to the noise of the dual carriageway (and the planes are more fun to watch than an artic......)
fantastic7897 3 years ago
You raise some interesting points. Villages do provide employment from the village shop, church, the local window cleaner, tradesman etc. to the local pub. All that will be gone forever. I believe also the village itself has been there much longer than the airport which was built on agricultural land called "Heath Row"
The plane crash in the Hudson river and Concordes fate will raise awareness that the machines are not infallable and they are in many respects an accident waiting to happen.
brokenbriton 3 years ago
Protests are almost always a minority of people - selfish people.
And to include children in protests is an immensely un-ethical and underhand tactic - children will say what their parents say without fully understanding the whole of the issue.
In conclusion - not expanding Heathrow will result in the expansion of other European Airports - The environment is a global issue!!
donaldinho25 3 years ago
The right to protest is expressly mentioned in the convention of our human rights. Why is it selfish to want to draw government and national attention to issuest hataffect people living within the country?
Tashadragon 3 years ago
How jolly nice and middle class, who said this isn't all about a few middle class know- it-all's trying to dictate to everyone else? All lies, there isn't a huge public outcry, its a very small, but vocal minority, like this, who want everyone else to do as they say, not as they do... Oh my, how they must hate seeing people with regional accents enjoying foreign holidays, oh well back off to private school now Tarquin.....
Fantastic7896 3 years ago
Wonder how all those people got to the airport, did they Walk? .... I doubt it! they probably jumped in Cars that do a hell of a lot more damage to the environment than a Planes.
kriscurtis 3 years ago
what a waste of time...sad losers...
Wak0zak0 3 years ago
hmmm...those 60,000 jobs sure would be a benefit at a time like this.
jkerrigan1990 3 years ago
God I so hope they will build this 3rd runway
Patrick1Bateman 3 years ago
lol one runway out of the 100's of runways in the globe. look at amsterdam
paddyen4 3 years ago
"here are my kids learning how to have exercise"
those kids should be outside playing not sat in an airport crying about a runway. I love the fact that those kids will never go on a plane ...
RapedYaDad 3 years ago
please, please...... get something better to do with your life
RapedYaDad 3 years ago
tree hugging twats with nothing better to do
kev211987 3 years ago
the planned third runway can fuck-off...but it's not doing your cause any good by making it a middle class issue
9thprotocol 3 years ago
How can Heathrow even consider having another runway, they can't look after the passengers' suitcases that they already have, never midn adding more!!!
emslalom 3 years ago
god have these folks not got anything better to do than this ? Whilst the rest of us are in jobs working away trying to save the economy this lot are pissing about.
Notice their all well spoken posh types, they are not in touch with reality and the working classes. They need to understand the benefits of building the runwaway first before they start all this nonsense.
texaspete66 3 years ago
Let me tell you how to reduce your carbon footprint. Don't have children. Simple.
The Earth is a self correcting system.
Over population is the biggest threat to mankind. Forget carbon emissions, that's the least of your worries.
RedSkyHorizon 3 years ago
It is middle class people like this that go skiing every year and take multiple holidays make me sick when they tell the rest of us what to do.
markusx22 3 years ago
God, these protesters are gonna ruin a lot of people's day.
davedude2040 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
want 2 SEE THE BEST VIDEO ON YOUTUBE?
I'M NOT KIDDING IT REALLY IS
CLICK ON MY NAME & WATCH MY SHIFT HAPPENS
billbobblybottoms 3 years ago
bloody treehuggers
kenny2kk 3 years ago
Green issues or not we need to fight to keep England a green and pleasant land....
Rise England Rise
brokenbriton 3 years ago 3
nothing you will do will change their minds! third runway FTW!!!
slipersox 3 years ago
slipersox
NEVER underestimate the power of the people...The combined will of the depositors of Northern Rock brought that company to its knees.
brokenbriton 3 years ago 2
yea i dont agree with the argument for a 3rd runway. but it will be built regardless of buying land the gov has powers to do a forced sale or even take the land. i rekon its too late global warmning is happen no stopping it. any measures to combat it will always be too little too late. mankind only doing what it does best fucking things up sad but true
scotland2019 3 years ago
The Communist-Labour party has aproved of it.
ukburger 3 years ago
the building starts in 2015.which means that it will still be ready before the 2012 olympics
ellisqpr86 3 years ago 2
NO government will EVER listen to the people the runway will go ahead it wont be the last one
The system is here to RULE the people not to serve.
1peoplesun 3 years ago
thee will be a third runway, you cant beat the goverment, dj poverello poltergiest, the one with thescariest dance track ever!
djskillmaster 3 years ago
what does the future hold for us all anyway, just let them build a bigger airport, in 100 years from now how do u think heathrow will look, u cant fight it just accept it
coolfukindude 3 years ago
beam me up snotty ,ow do you spell arrods ?
renegadetvip 3 years ago 2
some planes at heathrow fly empty just to keep there landing slots,Think how much fuel gets burnt for nothing.
spiralisedcat 3 years ago
sorry - can you just elaborate on this please...i've not heard this one before. thanks.
bertyUK 3 years ago
sorry i couldnt be there, but it looked good...heathrow has been having a tough time recently, long may that last!
calvinjones 3 years ago
When we get there we're going to have a picnic.
wolfy18 3 years ago
they all need to get in the REAL world and accept the inevitable its going to happen, it needs to happen to sustain a viable economy. This country has already lost so much in industry since the 1980s and no business would ever want to invest in a country with a 1960's style airport structure. If these nutters are allowed to continue we will all end up back in the dark ages.
rodjames98 3 years ago 3
yup, lets all be fatalists and accept flawed arguments :-) that will be fun.
calvinjones 3 years ago
As much as it worries the nation - i think they'd be in line to agree. However the aerospace are currently in developments - I look forward to the return of the turbo-prop. It could and is being trialed.
bertyUK 3 years ago
yes calvinjones but then at least we will have a first class airport to compete with europe instead of the crazy political doctrine that has kept this country non competitive for generations. Just look at our railway network, aged and decrepit but still expensive funny how europe scores so much better with theirs and and a fraction of the cost to the traveller isnt it? listen to greenpeace and their cronies for too much longer and we will all be back on horse and cart soon. Moral : move forward.
rodjames98 3 years ago
Rod
Greenpeace are advocating better railways. Last year Spain opened its new ultra high speed rail link from Malaga to Cordoba...Paid for by the EU..lets looka t all options first before destroying villages...Interesting episode in the Hudson river say the same thing happens at Heathrow..
brokenbriton 3 years ago
Marv, there is the Medway, Thames and North Sea. Its all water.
dunandidit 3 years ago
A third runway would speed up turnaround and ease air traffic and anyway I don't know why they are protesting because they are not going to win so they can just forget about the fact that the runway won't be built because it will. And any way it's not runways that need to be cut down it's factories and coal and other fossil fuel power plants.
KingRaptor22 3 years ago
i want a third run way i love planes and airport ecxpesialy heathrow
sezjackproductions 3 years ago
HOW IS GOING ON SHORT HAUL FLIGHT UNNECESSARY?
its cheaper than the train, shorter than the train, and more fun than the train
that annoys me so much
drowzy721 3 years ago 3
No I think the girl meant it was irrelevant that they were making a point to short haul passengers - they were all there to protest against the subject of 3rd runway, not this. I don't think they completely oppose flying - but certainly hate mr and mrs nesbit taking short haul flights to cheap spanish towns to fill their fat arses with paella(which for the record is a disgrace to real spanish food).
bertyUK 3 years ago
i agree on you with that, but what for business passengers who need to get to where they are going quickly and efficiently. i agree on you with me and mrs nesbit lol, after all, they can buy paella in tesco now for god sake
drowzy721 3 years ago
no no no to any more fucking runways,, they become lanes for the demons,,, trust me,,,, check out my clip "Mad Micky" fr my credentials
mcevoy31 3 years ago
idk
Its a complicated matter...
I am a real aviation Fan and I sort of think it is cool there will be another runway. But at the same time... Is it necessary?
:S
~ Jose (Im 12)
WildskaterboyJose 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
woot first view lolz
WildskaterboyJose 3 years ago