If it’s in the Master Plan, it must be right. Right?

If only! Even the Department for Transport says that airport Master Plans tend to be so over-optimistic about future passenger numbers that it applies its own “pinch of salt” discount when it produces its national forecasts.

For example: in 1991 Manchester Airport wanted to build a second runway, and promised this would create 50,000 direct, indirect and induced jobs.

The runway opened in 2001, and by 2006 there were 4,000 additional jobs at the airport. Even allowing for another 2,000 indirect and induced jobs, the promise of 50,000 extra jobs was just a flight of fancy.

Comments

[Don]

Still banging the same drum.

[HBM]

It's a sound drum!

[Dave]

Over at London Southend Airport, the new Easyjet opertation to provide 800,000 passengers per year on 70 flights a week to various European destinations is resulting in 150 new Easyjet jobs at the airport, many of which will be transfers from Stanstead. The airport itself is recruiting 60. Add in a handful of new taxi drivers and 20 or so staff at a soon to be built new hotel and you may get to 300 new jobs to the area.

It's also interesting that the owners of the airport (since 2008) have not passed the begging bowl to government to expand their airport and have been able to provide a new railway station from their own capital program. Having attracted a major player other airlines are also in the pipeline.

[The equalizer]

So Dave...do you live under the flight path? I think not!.

Will your home be devalued...I think not

Will your sleep be deprived...I think not.

Then whats in it for you eh?

Please answer as Im coming to the conclusion that you work for infratil or you are totally misguided as to what this airport will bring. You talk about not going to the government for money yet if these successive governments had actually put money into this area people like yourself would not be so desperate for some tinpot airport.