Using both of Heathrow’s runways for take-off and landing and other shorter-term measures examined by the Airports Commission could boost the British economy by £206m a year from 2023, according to new research.
Adopting so-called “mixed mode” operations at Heathrow “appears likely to deliver the most significant GDP benefits” and would lead to the direct and indirect creation of 3,400 jobs, a report commissioned by the City of London Corporation and London First has found.
Currently, one Heathrow runway is used solely for arrivals, and the other for departures. [At any one time – both are used early in the morning, and then they switch at 3pm, keeping the same runway used for morning landings for the week].
Improving rail links to Gatwick and Stansted airports could also lead to journey time savings of £75.6m and £53.4m respectively, according to the research, which was undertaken by York Aviation.
Reducing delays at Heathrow by an average of 2 minutes would result in further savings of £125m. [ Really?? for 2 minutes for each person?]
The commission, which was set up by the Government in 2012 and led by Sir Howard Davies, released its interim report in December.
As well as short-listing a second runway at Gatwick and two options to expand Heathrow, it also looked [as it was tasked to do] at short and medium-terms options to make “the best use of existing airport capacity”.
While the introduction of a “mixed-mode” system was not recommended as a short-term measure, in part because of the increase in noise it would entail, the commission did not rule-out its adoption “as part of a transition to the preferred longer-term option”.
York Aviation looked at all of the options initially considered by Sir Howard, including the use of Northolt as a reliever airport, a proposal that the commission said was not “a realistic option for managing capacity at Heathrow”.
Gavin Hayes, director of aviation, [he is director of the Let Britain Fly campaign – which is dedicated to getting another runway built as soon as possible] said that while the research shows that short-term measures would be beneficial to the UK economy and increase airport capacity, they are nevertheless “quite limited”.
“What this demonstrates is that the Government really do need to get on with a long-term solution, because it’s the long-term solution that’s going to deliver the big economic benefits.”
The Department for Transport said: “The UK’s airport network is extremely well connected, both regionally and globally, but it is important that we look at the UK’s aviation needs both now and in the future. That is why that Airports Commission is looking at a long term solution for our airports. We are considering the Commission’s interim recommendations and expect to respond in the spring.”
[Heathrow airport is aware of the strength of feeling about retaining runway alternation. That is – in all probability – why Colin Matthews said, at the recent Runways UK conference, that they were not considering the Heathrow Hub northern runway option, as it would not allow for runway alternation and thus respite for those over flown on the approach flight paths over London. Videos from the Runways UK conference are at http://www.runwaysuk.com/postshow-resources/video ]
Only a 4-runway hub airport will do, says new study for Boris (done by York Aviation)
Criticisms by economists CE Delft of the exaggeration of benefits of the aviation industry by York Aviation:
|* York Aviation have been criticised recently by economists, CE Delft, (page 19 of The Economics of Airport Expansion, March 2013), who said: ..“Overestimation of positive effects
On the other hand, there is a tendency in the aviation industry to overestimate
the positive impacts of aviation. Many studies are based on the ACI-Europe
study kit which has been developed by York Aviation and is widely used by
airports and organisations like the Air Transport Action Group (York Aviation,
2004; ATAG, 2005).” .Also criticism of similar studies showing alleged airport expansion benefits on page 37.
York Aviation has repeatedly produced reports in favour of aviation expansion, which have been criticised as being very biased and unbalanced, excluding any inconvenient statistics and exaggerating others. See below
Scottish airports and York Aviation lobbying, yet again, for a cut in APD
Birmingham International airport runway study (by York Aviation) flawed, say opponents
International Airport’s runway extension will be outweighed by economic benefits
to the West Midlands has been condemned as seriously flawed.Friends of the Earth and Birmingham Airport Anti-Noise Group (BANG) say the study by consultants York Aviation fails to take properly into account issues relating to climate change.http://www.airportwatch.org.uk/?p=1274.