Comments on: Want to expand an airport? Think about mitigation, mitigation, mitigation. http://www.flightblogging.com/2007/06/17/want-to-expand-an-airport-think-about-mitigation-mitigation-mitigation/ Flights, airports and onward travel Mon, 15 Mar 2010 03:43:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 By: ja http://www.flightblogging.com/2007/06/17/want-to-expand-an-airport-think-about-mitigation-mitigation-mitigation/comment-page-1/#comment-117126 ja Tue, 25 Aug 2009 19:46:01 +0000 http://www.flightblogging.com/2007/06/17/want-to-expand-an-airport-think-about-mitigation-mitigation-mitigation/#comment-117126 The low flights you talk about were almost certainly going into Birmingham, which handles 9.6 million passengers per year, compared to Coventry's best ever year total of about 0.6. So Birmingham isn't greedy because it is owned by local councils? They are the ones who wanted to monopolise the local market - if you look at Coventry Airport's management over the last few years, disorganised would be a much more appropriate word to describe them than greedy. Far too many changes at the top, local powers that be didn't know who they were dealing with, local press speculation combined with a ridiculous suggestion of Coventry handling 9 million pax per year in the govbernment's own White Paper whipped up hysteria where none was due. As for green shoots, an airport is about as good as it will get, other suggested uses for the site have included gravel extraction and housing, both would generate far more traffic. The low flights you talk about were almost certainly going into Birmingham, which handles 9.6 million passengers per year, compared to Coventry’s best ever year total of about 0.6. So Birmingham isn’t greedy because it is owned by local councils? They are the ones who wanted to monopolise the local market - if you look at Coventry Airport’s management over the last few years, disorganised would be a much more appropriate word to describe them than greedy. Far too many changes at the top, local powers that be didn’t know who they were dealing with, local press speculation combined with a ridiculous suggestion of Coventry handling 9 million pax per year in the govbernment’s own White Paper whipped up hysteria where none was due.

As for green shoots, an airport is about as good as it will get, other suggested uses for the site have included gravel extraction and housing, both would generate far more traffic.

]]> By: Roger http://www.flightblogging.com/2007/06/17/want-to-expand-an-airport-think-about-mitigation-mitigation-mitigation/comment-page-1/#comment-115303 Roger Tue, 30 Jun 2009 20:07:54 +0000 http://www.flightblogging.com/2007/06/17/want-to-expand-an-airport-think-about-mitigation-mitigation-mitigation/#comment-115303 Thank goodness Coventry Airport seems to be in decline. The low flights over South Warwickshire have been both alarming and distressing for so many. There was simply no need for a new terminal catering for 2m people, fuelled simply by greedy property and business developers seeking to create a market where none previously existed. Let's hope the runways start to crumble and we see the first signs of green shoots coming through the tarmac before too long! Peace reigns again - we all want it to stay that way. It must stay that way - there's already enough noise from Bham airport, carrying way down to the northern Cotswolds. Thank goodness Coventry Airport seems to be in decline.
The low flights over South Warwickshire have been both alarming and distressing for so many. There was simply no need for a new terminal catering for 2m people, fuelled simply by greedy property and business developers seeking to create a market where none previously existed. Let’s hope the runways start to crumble and we see the first signs of green shoots coming through the tarmac before too long!
Peace reigns again - we all want it to stay that way. It must stay that way - there’s already enough noise from Bham airport, carrying way down to the northern Cotswolds.

]]>