London City Airport

[Graham Payne]

Hi Everybody
Has anyone else flew out off or into this Airport ? Personally I hate Airports but if I had to fly this would be the one I would choose, it's really small sited close to London slick and well managed, just a 20min drive from my house.

The downside, it was built on the old London Docks, King George V, Royal Albert, Victoria and the Tidal Basin, so many good times were had by many in that location but alas no more British Shipping around there now

[Tony Wilding]

Have never used that one, very handy where it is, use Heathrow mostly, Gatwick a few times, i think London City Airport is more for Medium and Short haul flights, so many airports call themselves london airport, Southend is known as Southend London Airport, craziest of all is Manston near Ramsgate, called Manston London, its miles away. i dont think the larger planes fly from London City.

[John Albert Evans]

Slightly going off course from the London City Airport thread.
London is clammouring for more airport space usage. I think that Boris has the right idea and build a new airport in the Thames Estuary. It was done in Hong Kong and I understand that was designed by a British Architect.
Just think of the employment it would generate and to the advantage to local people on the whole. I agree it would cost a lot of money but it would be money well spent for the future generations. I understand Boris has already had provisional plans drawn up which were published in a newspaper some weeks agoI saw them and they looked abosolutely fantastic.
As compared with that new train line from Birmingham to London which will eventually cost who knows what in order to save 10 minutes in travellig time, from Birmingham to London, which I think is a joke.
All the arguements re a third runway at Heathrow would be killed stone dead. It would also save the three year enquiry ordered by the our Prime Minister and the cost.( Remember no more quangos or needless enquiries)
The Lib Dems say it cannot be done because of the SS Richard Montgomery which sank in 1944 off Sheerness with 1500 tons of explosives on board. Mind you the Lib Dems always say no matter whatever it is it cannot be done to anything that they have thought up first and it benifits the country as a whole.(They are good at that)
To get the SS Richard Montgomery problem solved, to me it would be so simple and cost no money at all. Give the problem to our Royal Navy chaps as a training excersize. I am sure they would relish the idea ( They woiuld blow it up)and as they would be doing it during their normal duties where as against the extra cost that some private conpany which would charge millions for doing it, but i suppose that would be too easy an answer.
The people who advise government usually have a vested intrest somewhere down the line. (ie. making money for themselves.)
The Govenrment Ministers whichever lot are in power have no real idea of how the majority of the rest of the country lives.
Well thats my twopenceworth for what its worth.

John Albert Evans.

[vic mcclymont]

One slight problem that Boris and the designer of the proposed new airport have overlooked, is the sunken Liberty ship with over 7,000 tons of unexploded bombs onboard.
There are genuine concerns that if the proposed airport goes ahead, the vibration from the works could cause the ordnance to explode. If the ordnance did explode it would wipe out Southend and send a tidal wave through london.

[Captain Kong]

I think London has enough Air Ports.
It should be built up North, for International Flights, not europe, there is only Manchester. and even then we have to fly to London Heathrow for Australia . Far East, South America, and LA. Etc.
Which wastes a day and more expense with overnight stay in a hotel and an extra flight there and back to Heathrow.
It would also provide some Jobs, up North.
Brian.

[John Albert Evans]

One slight problem that Boris and the designer of the proposed new airport have overlooked, is the sunken Liberty ship with over 7,000 tons of unexploded bombs onboard.
There are genuine concerns that if the proposed airport goes ahead, the vibration from the works could cause the ordnance to explode. If the ordnance did explode it would wipe out Southend and send a tidal wave through london.

Thats what I said Vic.

Give the problem to the Royal Navy and the Royal Ordnance Department to sort it out. I'm sure we have enough experts within our armed services to blow up a ship even if it is loaded with bombs taking in to accoint all our experience in Afghanistan. I know someone will say its not the same thing but basically it is.
Give then a go at it even if only on paper as a feasibility study.
Nothing ventured nothing gained.
John.

[vic mcclymont]

John,
Apparently it is now to dangerous to do anything about the bombs, all they can do is monitor the ship which is on a yearly basis.

[Tony Morcom]

Not only does she have known 1500 tonnes of bombs on board, it is also suspected that she contains chemical based weapons of an unknown nature. Whilst the Government have to date denied this, they undoubtedly know more than we do in this case.

[John Albert Evans]

Someone must know what was on board but they (The government)are not telling us. Its too much to ask for the truth.
However doing nothing but a yearly check means that one day by the odds of 'Sods Law' means the whole lot will blow up and cause devastation, surely a controlled and contained explosion might be the better course of action.
I am speaking as a layman.
John Albert Evans

[Tony Wilding]

The Richard Montgomery cannot be detonated, that is the biggest fear, if it did explode Sheerness would disappear and maybe most of Southend, the cargo of bombs has become unstable through corrosion. as for the Boris Airport design, another crazy idea, Floating Runways, ? ? ? anything that floats need regular underwater maintenance, how do you dry dock a runway, /? insanity reigns supreme. ideas and designs of idiots.