Places features

What do you think of the idea of more and bigger aeroplanes flying in to Gloucestershire airport? Tell us here:

Peter Fleming
I think expansion of Gloucestershire (M5) is a brilliant idea! The Airport serves; Herefordshire, South Worcestershire, South Warwickshire North Oxfordshire and of coures all of Gloucestershire and North Wiltshire. I think smaller, regional airlines like; Isles of Scilly Skybus and Highland Airways should start routes from the Airport.

Paul
What ignorant hypocrites these so-called environmentalists are. They should be permanently barred from ever taking a plane journey. We all know that the car is by far the worst polluter with the pollution from aircraft being relatively negligible in comparison. People who purchase houses next to airports and then try to limit what the airport does, and has done for many years before the houses were built, should be ignored. The airfield has been encroached over the years as have most in this country to the point that there is hardly any land around them that is not now developed. Why did the council allow them to build houses there which will increase the amount of traffic considerably. I would guess that in most cases the houses cause more pollution in energy consumption and traffic than ever the airport does.I would like to think that the airport will be a useful service for years to come. This is not really an expansion of the runway more a reclamation of many years of encroachment on it. I for one would like to fly from there and when I do I would like to do it as safely as possible. That is why I would support what the airport management are doing.

MARG
I'D LOVE TO BE ABLE TO FLY FROM GLOUCESTERSHIRE AIRPORT EVERYTIME I VISIT MY FAMILY ABROAD OR FOR HOLIDAYS

stuart
i live 5min away from the airport and i would have no problems with the volume of planes flying in/out & to/from. i would like 2 visit over places/cities abroad.

J. Garlick
Gari, the use of a mobile phone (even when you take into account the Co2 created in manufacturing the damned thing) pales in insignificance to the emissions created by expanding an airport. And I have never met an environmentalist who drives a "Chelsea Tractor"...the two positions are mutually exclusive. The fact is that by increasing capacity you increase demand, as made evident by the road building schemes of the 1980/90s. If we really wish to reduce CO2 emissions we have to tackle all aspects of our unsustainable lifestyles, particularly when it comes to flying which is one of the most CO2 intensive modes of travel.

Gari, Isle of Man
Did any environmentalist ever tell us just how much power mobile phones and 4x4 off-road 'gas guzzlers' consume?The answer is no because they phone around incessantly and often drive 2ltr and plus engine capacity Chelsea Tractors themselves.Suggestion: First limit mobile phone usage to emergencies and travelling employee contacts and tax 4x4s off the road and THEN we can talk about our contributions to CO2 reduction. Until then, we are talking about spitting in the Atlantic.Gari, Isle of ManPS Australian slang for 4x4s that never go off road is "w*nkatank" but I never understood the meaning ;-)

Mr Jackson
If someone wanted to extend the nearby Honda plant, no one would worry about the impact of green house gases all the new machinery would have. It would be hailed as a great opportunity for jobs in the county. This is no different then extending the airport. The main opposition is from the housing estate at the bottom of the main runway. All who purchased their houses with the airport already in place. Is this C02 driven or is it because house prices would rise if the airport is shut?

Mr Parker
Lets take the chance to secure the airports future and stop stalling. This is a great oppertunity to creat employment locally. The airport has unique potential with its location, close railway line and motorway access. The airport and areas close link with aviation has been been there since the early days of flying, we can't change history but we can shape the future.

Mr R Hill
I intend to keep enjoying my foreign holidays - whilst still being mindful of the environment. I don't own a car and I offset my Carbon when I fly. The fact that needs to be recognised is that people will still continue to fly. So if you live in Gloucestershire flying from Staverton is better than flying on a jet from Birmigham or Bristol. Modern regional airliners of the type that could use Staverton emit much less carbon. Sorry to be a geek(!) but the ATR72 emits 15% less CO2 per passenger over a typical 200 mile flight when compared against cars. The main source of damage is jets emitting in the upper atomsphere as opposed to propller aicraft which fly at low altitude. Flying is here to stay so rather than just oppose any flying at all isn't it more realistic to encourage change across the board rather than just say "no" to any expansion - even if expansion means it gives people a MORE environmentally friendly option?

Des Pondent
Why not just concrete over the whole country and have done with it?

Kevin Lister
Interesting comment from Darren Lewington, that the next weeks bookings into the airport include various business jets coming in for the Cheltenham Festival. This does not sound like business critical flights that Darren has claimed his airport is vital for, it simply sounds like people with too much money sticking their fingers up at those who are concern about climate change and the future of the planet.

B. Windsor (nurse)
Interesting remarks from Anne Talib. I agree that without the day to day protection we have enjoyed from RAF Innsworth a new airport may make us a target for terrorists and hells angels.

Matt M
If they build a housing estate there will be more pollution then a few more planes. It is also better for the enviroment if the expansion goes ahead because then local people dont have to drive as far to get to the airport.

Captain Green'er
I think g.ash is a muck spreader! Take a foreign holiday and don't come back!

Anne Talib
This will make terror bombs easier & local shoebombers will have less far to travel to create their mayhem. Now that the MOD is pulling out of neighbouring Innsworth, a new International Airport at Staverton is inviting terror outrages.

Simon Murphy
We may "have a beautiful area" at the moment, as Mark Ryan points out, but we won't have for long. The reason it is beautiful is that it isn't full of the many businesses and people that his expansion plans want to attract.

Nick Stedman (Dr)
Within 10 years aviation will be rationed. This will be imposed from outside the UK (USA/Europe)so any airport expansion must be seen as a very short term investment. In any case, not many people will be able to afford the cost of flying as the structure of family expenditure will radically alter over the next 20 years. Food, for example, will return to a level which will take up between 30% and 40% of the average family income. Fuel costs are more difficult to predict but are very unlikely to go down.

Bob Irving
And why should we subsidise more people to fly over our heads paying NO tax on the fuel in the plane? If there was a level landing field, perhaps the Hills might stay at home.....

g. ash
It's a little bit controversial but I think it's a magnificent idea. You can't do anything these days without upsetting the hair shirted commies so why not just ignore them. By and large they are hypocrites anyway. Did anyone see the footage of the Greenpeace protesters on Parliament? They were clutching their supermarket plastic bags I noticed rather than the reusable cloth ones they like to bang on about. My advice to mr hill is to ignore mr garlick and enjoy your foreign holidays. You can never keep some people happy.

Bob Irving
Can't see that enabling people to fly OUT of Staverton is going to produce much economic benefit to the area (unless you're counting the carparks). It's only going encourage people to take more flights, create more CO2 and clog the roads around the airport. Gloucestershire just does not understand global warming, even after last year's floods.....

John Heywood
J Garlick is quite right: aircraft emissions do much more harm because they are deposited higher up in the atmosphere. Cheltenham council is signed up to the Nottingham Declaration to reduce carbon emissions. The councillors should actually do what they have undertaken. And any way aviation will soon be priced out of our reach by rising oil prices. Let us set an example to the country by closing the airport which makes such small profits anyway.

Duke Theedam
PS: I rather think that Gloucester International has a nice ring to it...yes please.

Duke Theedam
well, I'd welcome it....I get so narked that everytime I want to go abroad somewhere...I have to travel to Brum or Bristol..why can't we fly out locally ?...pain in the rear...

Paul Smith
I’m a resident of the area, and I’m totally opposed to an increase in air traffic because I’m concerned about the future value of my property, if such an expansion should go ahead. I also think we have a duty to put the environment first over the desire to have more cheap flights. Do we really want this area to be industrialized even more? If the airport is expanded then local residents will be impacted by increased noise and air pollution. I also worry about safety as the number of flights increase. There will also be an increase in congestion because the existing infrastructure will not be able to cope, and any proposed plans to change the area will have a massive impact on the environment. Let’s preserve what we have rather than spoil it for short term gain.

Mr R. Hill
J Garlick - I suggest you read what I said - which was travelling to other airports and getting large jet aircraft is less environmentally friendly. If you travel to Staverton rather than Birmingham/Bristol you reduce your vehicle exhaust emissions. If you get a small regional airliner from Staverton rather than a jet airliner you will also save emissions. I didn't say they would be offset so please don't misrepresent my comments. I stand by what I said - if people are going to fly from the Gloucestershire area it is more environmentally friendly to fly from Staverton than from Birmingham or Bristol for the reasons I've explained (again!).

J. Garlick
Mr R. Hill, where do you get your information? The idea that the emissions from people driving to other airports could be offset by increasing services at Staverton is nothing short of preposterous. The emissions from planes are much greater than that of cars, and because plane emissions are made higher up in the atmosphere their warming impact is much greater.

Mr R. Hill
It is MUCH more environmentally friendly for Glos residents to travel to Staverton and get small regional airliners than travel to Birmingham or Bristol (increasing exhaust emissions) and get an Easyjet or Ryanair plane which emits more CO2 on take-off than small propellor planes emit in an entire flight. Gloucestershire needs direct air routes to create a dynamic economy -illustrated by the fact that councils all over Europe are subsidising airlines to come to their airports!

kevin hill
myself and my wife travel abroad 3 or 4 times a year local airport flights,would be fantastic,bigger the better,business would boom in glos and chelt,we have been waiting to long for his to happen quicker the better,forget bhx and bristol, staverton should be on the airport to the sun map,cant wait

Mrs J. James
Flights to Northern France would be an asset now there is only an overnight crossing from Portsmouth to Le Havre. Deauville has an Airport as has Le Havre

J. Garlick
At a time when the consensus of the scientific community is that we need to reduce our carbon dioxide emissions by 90% by 2050 to avoid catastrophic climate shift, any plans for airport expansion are absolute lunacy. Aviation is the fastest growing source of CO2 emissions, and this needs to be nipped in the bud before it causes endless problems. All airport expansion should be stopped, and there should definitely be no runway extension at Staverton.