Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why EDI isn't getting bigger- blame the tories.

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Ren Frew
    Taxi Rank User
    • Jan 2000
    • 11826

    Why EDI isn't getting bigger- blame the tories.

    Taken from The Herald, it seems vested interests are everywhere...?

    http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/33023.html
    Go n-ithe an cat th, is go n-ithe an diabhal an cat !
  • Silver Snapper
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • May 2004
    • 1391

    #2
    Originally posted by Ren Frew
    Taken from The Herald, it seems vested interests are everywhere...?

    http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/33023.html
    One must remember that EDI is in the stockbroker belt,
    a vast area that traditionally votes Tory, these NIMBY's held back EDI's development for years. In fact they successfully managed to prevent the airport's 24 hour status for decades.

    Even the new runway at EDI had to be realigned to suit them, in fact current noise abatement measures only apply
    to aircraft taking-off over Tory-held Cramond. Aircraft taking off over non-Tory Newbridge/Broxburn/Livingston are not subject to noise abatement.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/joecurry1/

    Comment

    • RIPConcorde
      EGPH
      • Feb 2004
      • 3192

      #3
      The building of a second runway at Edinburgh Airport would force the RHAS to move from its headquarters at Ingliston
      Is it not the terminal expansion which would cause this scenario? With the proposed second runway being situated on the other side of the airport, thus why parts of Kirkliston will be banished? Although I'd expect major terminal expansion to come before a second runway.

      Comment

      • Silver Snapper
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • May 2004
        • 1391

        #4
        Originally posted by RIPConcorde
        Is it not the terminal expansion which would cause this scenario? With the proposed second runway being situated on the other side of the airport, thus why parts of Kirkliston will be banished? Although I'd expect major terminal expansion to come before a second runway.
        The proposed second runway will be shorter than the original and in a position that would take aircraft away from Cramond.

        The positioning would be South of Kirkliston and that village would not suffer any increase in aircraft noise than it does at present.

        Indeed the current runway would be used for take-offs and
        the new one for landing.

        Noise therefore would be at the same level as it is today.

        New generation aircraft such as the 7E7/A350 would
        certainly further reduce noise.
        http://www.flickr.com/photos/joecurry1/

        Comment

        Unconfigured Ad Widget

        Collapse

         

        Working...
        X