London gets a new airport... 60 miles away in Oxford

"Hatunen" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 21:02:40 +0100, "tim....."
wrote:


"Hatunen" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 18:17:06 +0100, "nightjar" cpb@insert my
surname here.me.uk wrote:


"Hatunen" wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 08:36:50 +0100, "nightjar" cpb@insert my
surname here.me.uk wrote:


"H.E. President Alhaji Dr. Yahya A.J.J. Jammeh"

wrote in message
...
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa... rd/article.do

London gets a new airport... 60 miles away in Oxford
...

London Stansted airport, in Essex, is just over 40 miles from the
capital, while London Luton, in Bedfordshire, is 35 miles away.

Other airports in the region that use the name "London" include
City;
Gatwick (28 miles); Biggin Hill in Kent (15 miles); Southend in
Essex
(40 miles); and London Ashford airport in Lydd, Kent (56 miles).

Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted are the official airports. City and
Biggin
Hill are actually in London, while Southend has a long history of
being
London's main freight airport before Stansted opened. Renaming Lydd
was
criticised at the time as it has even worse communications with London
than
Oxford.

What makes those airports "official"?

The Government spent public money to develop them as airports to serve
the
Capital. .

So airports like City and Luton don't receive any government
money?

Colin's post used the past tense.

Airports haven't received Government money for ages (though some receive
local authority money)

Then that takes me back to my original question: what makes them
"official", but not City or Luton? Are they designated in some
offical way as THE London airports, or is it just a customary
recognition?

Colin's post did answer this

They are the ones, which at some time, were sponsored by the Government as
"London" airports. But they aren't sponsored by the Government any more

tim

On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 22:59:23 +0100, "tim....."
wrote:


"Hatunen" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 21:02:40 +0100, "tim....."
wrote:


"Hatunen" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 18:17:06 +0100, "nightjar" cpb@insert my
surname here.me.uk wrote:


"Hatunen" wrote in message
om...
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 08:36:50 +0100, "nightjar" cpb@insert my
surname here.me.uk wrote:


"H.E. President Alhaji Dr. Yahya A.J.J. Jammeh"

wrote in message
...
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa... rd/article.do

London gets a new airport... 60 miles away in Oxford
...

London Stansted airport, in Essex, is just over 40 miles from the
capital, while London Luton, in Bedfordshire, is 35 miles away.

Other airports in the region that use the name "London" include
City;
Gatwick (28 miles); Biggin Hill in Kent (15 miles); Southend in
Essex
(40 miles); and London Ashford airport in Lydd, Kent (56 miles).

Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted are the official airports. City and
Biggin
Hill are actually in London, while Southend has a long history of
being
London's main freight airport before Stansted opened. Renaming Lydd
was
criticised at the time as it has even worse communications with London
than
Oxford.

What makes those airports "official"?

The Government spent public money to develop them as airports to serve
the
Capital. .

So airports like City and Luton don't receive any government
money?

Colin's post used the past tense.

Airports haven't received Government money for ages (though some receive
local authority money)

Then that takes me back to my original question: what makes them
"official", but not City or Luton? Are they designated in some
offical way as THE London airports, or is it just a customary
recognition?

Colin's post did answer this

They are the ones, which at some time, were sponsored by the Government as
"London" airports. But they aren't sponsored by the Government any more

I'm sorry if I'm being a pest about this, but I really am
curious: how was "official" declared. What does "sponsored" mean?
Did government documents once say something explicit like
"Heathrow Airport shall be an offical airport for London?

I can see that if Heathrow were receiving local authority money
it would be sort of blessed as "official".

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

On Aug 20, 1:36*am, Hatunen wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 22:59:23 +0100, "tim....."



wrote:

"Hatunen" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 21:02:40 +0100, "tim....."
wrote:

"Hatunen" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 18:17:06 +0100, "nightjar" cpb@insert my
surname here.me.uk wrote:

"Hatunen" wrote in message
om...
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 08:36:50 +0100, "nightjar" cpb@insert my
surname here.me.uk wrote:

"H.E. President Alhaji Dr. Yahya A.J.J. Jammeh"

wrote in message
...
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...-details/Londo...

London gets a new airport... 60 miles away in Oxford
...

London Stansted airport, in Essex, is just over 40 miles from the
capital, while London Luton, in Bedfordshire, is 35 miles away.

Other airports in the region that use the name "London" include
City;
Gatwick (28 miles); Biggin Hill in Kent (15 miles); Southend in
Essex
(40 miles); and London Ashford airport in Lydd, Kent (56 miles).

Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted are the official airports. City and
Biggin
Hill are actually in London, while Southend has a long history of
being
London's main freight airport before Stansted opened. Renaming Lydd
was
criticised at the time as it has even worse communications with London
than
Oxford.

What makes those airports "official"?

The Government spent public money to develop them as airports to serve
the
Capital. .

So airports like City and Luton don't receive any government
money?

Colin's post used the past tense.

Airports haven't received Government money for ages (though some receive
local authority money)

Then that takes me back to my original question: what makes them
"official", but not City or Luton? Are they designated in some
offical way as THE London airports, or is it just a customary
recognition?

Colin's post did answer this

They are the ones, which at some time, were sponsored by the Government as
"London" airports. *But they aren't sponsored *by the Government any more

I'm sorry if I'm being a pest about this, but I really am
curious: how was "official" declared. What does "sponsored" mean?
Did government documents once say something explicit like
"Heathrow Airport shall be an offical airport for London?

I can see that if Heathrow were receiving local authority money
it would be sort of blessed as "official".

--
* ************** DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* ** * * * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * * * *
* ** My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

BAA was privatised some time ago

"Hatunen" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 22:59:23 +0100, "tim....."
wrote:


"Hatunen" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 21:02:40 +0100, "tim....."
wrote:


"Hatunen" wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 18:17:06 +0100, "nightjar" cpb@insert my
surname here.me.uk wrote:


"Hatunen" wrote in message
news:j2bo85lklf3kc6tosnr5sojgs6j7lgjv7a@4ax. com...
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 08:36:50 +0100, "nightjar" cpb@insert my
surname here.me.uk wrote:


"H.E. President Alhaji Dr. Yahya A.J.J. Jammeh"

wrote in message
...
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa... rd/article.do

London gets a new airport... 60 miles away in Oxford
...

London Stansted airport, in Essex, is just over 40 miles from the
capital, while London Luton, in Bedfordshire, is 35 miles away.

Other airports in the region that use the name "London" include
City;
Gatwick (28 miles); Biggin Hill in Kent (15 miles); Southend in
Essex
(40 miles); and London Ashford airport in Lydd, Kent (56 miles).

Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted are the official airports. City and
Biggin
Hill are actually in London, while Southend has a long history of
being
London's main freight airport before Stansted opened. Renaming Lydd
was
criticised at the time as it has even worse communications with
London
than
Oxford.

What makes those airports "official"?

The Government spent public money to develop them as airports to serve
the
Capital. .

So airports like City and Luton don't receive any government
money?

Colin's post used the past tense.

Airports haven't received Government money for ages (though some receive
local authority money)

Then that takes me back to my original question: what makes them
"official", but not City or Luton? Are they designated in some
offical way as THE London airports, or is it just a customary
recognition?

Colin's post did answer this

They are the ones, which at some time, were sponsored by the Government as
"London" airports. But they aren't sponsored by the Government any more

I'm sorry if I'm being a pest about this, but I really am
curious: how was "official" declared. What does "sponsored" mean?
Did government documents once say something explicit like
"Heathrow Airport shall be an offical airport for London?

I can see that if Heathrow were receiving local authority money
it would be sort of blessed as "official".

These days, it is custom and practice, although they also are the busiest by
far, but those three were specifically developed by the Government as
London's airports and run by the Government as such..The Air Ministry ran
them until the 1960s, when the British Airports Authority was set up as a
Government agency to run publically owned airports.

Between the wars, Croydon was London's main airport. In 1937, the Government
bought Heston and developed that as London's second airport. It is there
that Neville Chamberlain was photographed giving his peace for our time
speech.

During the war, the Air Ministry started to build a nine runway airfield for
Transport Command to the west of London. At the end of the war, only two
runways, part of a third and the central area, where all nine were to cross,
were complete. A Public Enquiry was convened and, in 45 minutes, resolved
that the new airfield, near the village of Heathrow, could be developed to
replace Heston, which was only just north of it, as an airport. The two long
hard runways were more suited to the jet age than the old grass fields at
Heston and Croydon. So, the government, at public expense, built Heathrow as
London airport and it was known as such for many years. Heston closed in
1947.

Gatwick was a pre-war airport that was retained in Government ownership
after the war. In the mid 1950s, the decision was taken to develop it as
London's second airport. Again, this was done by the Government, at public
expense. It was opened by the Queen in 1958 and Croydon closed the following
year.

Stansted was a former USAAF base and, in the 1960s, had the longest runway
in Britain. Growing demand for package holidays meant that Heathrow and
Gatwick were struggling to cope with the traffic and the Government spent a
long time trying to find a site for London's third airport. Several sites
were considered, but all met with considerable local opposition. Eventually,
economics meant that Stansted was the only viable option and, again, the
Government, in the form of the British Airports Authority, spent public
money to develop the airport.

London City was built by a Government Agency - the Docklands Development
Board, but it was not operated by BAA. All other airports in the London area
are private ventures.

Colin Bignell

"Hatunen" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 22:59:23 +0100, "tim....."
wrote:


They are the ones, which at some time, were sponsored by the Government as
"London" airports. But they aren't sponsored by the Government any more

I'm sorry if I'm being a pest about this, but I really am
curious: how was "official" declared. What does "sponsored" mean?
Did government documents once say something explicit like
"Heathrow Airport shall be an offical airport for London?

I can see that if Heathrow were receiving local authority money
it would be sort of blessed as "official".

I don't think the public care whether an airport is official or not; they
just use the most convenient one or the one with the cheapest flights.

Luton and Stansted are both about 30 miles/50km from central London by rail
(I don't know where those 35 and 40 miles came from).

--
Bart

"Hatunen" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 22:59:23 +0100, "tim....."
wrote:


"Hatunen" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 21:02:40 +0100, "tim....."
wrote:


"Hatunen" wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 18:17:06 +0100, "nightjar" cpb@insert my
surname here.me.uk wrote:


"Hatunen" wrote in message
news:j2bo85lklf3kc6tosnr5sojgs6j7lgjv7a@4ax. com...
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 08:36:50 +0100, "nightjar" cpb@insert my
surname here.me.uk wrote:


"H.E. President Alhaji Dr. Yahya A.J.J. Jammeh"

wrote in message
...
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa... rd/article.do

London gets a new airport... 60 miles away in Oxford
...

London Stansted airport, in Essex, is just over 40 miles from the
capital, while London Luton, in Bedfordshire, is 35 miles away.

Other airports in the region that use the name "London" include
City;
Gatwick (28 miles); Biggin Hill in Kent (15 miles); Southend in
Essex
(40 miles); and London Ashford airport in Lydd, Kent (56 miles).

Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted are the official airports. City and
Biggin
Hill are actually in London, while Southend has a long history of
being
London's main freight airport before Stansted opened. Renaming Lydd
was
criticised at the time as it has even worse communications with
London
than
Oxford.

What makes those airports "official"?

The Government spent public money to develop them as airports to serve
the
Capital. .

So airports like City and Luton don't receive any government
money?

Colin's post used the past tense.

Airports haven't received Government money for ages (though some receive
local authority money)

Then that takes me back to my original question: what makes them
"official", but not City or Luton? Are they designated in some
offical way as THE London airports, or is it just a customary
recognition?

Colin's post did answer this

They are the ones, which at some time, were sponsored by the Government as
"London" airports. But they aren't sponsored by the Government any more

I'm sorry if I'm being a pest about this, but I really am
curious: how was "official" declared. What does "sponsored" mean?

I was using the word loosely to mean "owned by". But I didn't say that
because I couldn't remember if BAA was privatised before STN was developed
into a major airport.

tim

"bartc" kirjoitti
dia.com...


Luton and Stansted are both about 30 miles/50km from central London by
rail (I don't know where those 35 and 40 miles came from).

By road it makes 35 miles from Stansted to Liverpool Street station. And
this location is on the same side with the airport relative to downtown
London. Distance between Victoria station and the airport is about 40 miles.
Both stations reside in "central London".

"H.E. President Alhaji Dr. Yahya A.J.J. Jammeh" a
écrit dans le message de
...
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa... rd/article.do

London gets a new airport... 60 miles away in Oxford
Ross Lydall
17.08.09

It is almost 60 miles from London, but managers at Oxford airport did
not let an inconvenient geographical fact stand in the way when they
renamed it.

The airport at Kidlington, just outside the university town, has been
rebranded London Oxford Airport, dismaying heritage campaigners.

The company was operating under its new name today with a headline on
its website proclaiming: “Welcome to London Oxford Airport.” It serves
business customers, private plane owners and a flying school and joins
a growing number of airports which use the capital in their name.

Ros Weatherall, of the Oxford Civic Society, said: “Good grief. Oxford
is a great place in its own right and I find it insulting it is being
considered just another offshoot of London. Trying to make Oxford seem
like a suburb of London is very misleading. This is an insult to the
major historical and cultural impact Oxford has had.”

The society's transport secretary David Townsend added: “It seems
rather silly. Oxford isn't a London airport and we wouldn't want it to
be. I find it amazing. Oxford is quite capable of standing on its own
feet.”

The airport is owned by billionaire brothers David and Simon Reuben
through a holding company, Aldersgate Investments. It denied the
change was to encourage charter flights to operate from Oxford.

The move also comes a month after revelations that the airport
operators were in talks with carriers about starting daily business
flights to European capitals, and weekly tourist charters.

James Dillon Godfray, marketing manager at the site, hopes to bring in
up to five more private business flights a day, on top of the current
10.

“We're not meaning to insult Oxford or play down its history,” he
said. “Oxford is probably the second best recognised city in the UK
throughout the entire world but people just don't realise how close it
is to London.

“This will help promote recognition of us globally to the overseas
business aviation sector, many of whom were not aware of the
availability of an airport to the north-west of London.”

The airport's proximity to London is a key theme on the site's front
page today. It read: “London Oxford Airport is the only commercial
airport between London Heathrow and Birmingham. Oxford lies just 40
miles to the north-west of the Greater London area, halfway to the
country's industrial heartland of the Midlands.”

London Stansted airport, in Essex, is just over 40 miles from the
capital, while London Luton, in Bedfordshire, is 35 miles away.

Other airports in the region that use the name “London” include City;
Gatwick (28 miles); Biggin Hill in Kent (15 miles); Southend in Essex
(40 miles); and London Ashford airport in Lydd, Kent (56 miles).

On Aug 17, 6:17*pm, "H.E. President Alhaji Dr. Yahya A.J.J. Jammeh"
wrote:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...-details/Londo...

London gets a new airport... 60 miles away in Oxford
Ross Lydall
17.08.09

It is almost 60 miles from London, but managers at Oxford airport did
not let an inconvenient geographical fact stand in the way when they
renamed it.

The airport at Kidlington, just outside the university town, has been
rebranded London Oxford Airport, dismaying heritage campaigners.

The company was operating under its new name today with a headline on
its website proclaiming: “Welcome to London Oxford Airport.” It serves
business customers, private plane owners and a flying school and joins
a growing number of airports which use the capital in their name.

Ros Weatherall, of the Oxford Civic Society, said: “Good grief. Oxford
is a great place in its own right and I find it insulting it is being
considered just another offshoot of London. Trying to make Oxford seem
like a suburb of London is very misleading. This is an insult to the
major historical and cultural impact Oxford has had.”

The society's transport secretary David Townsend added: “It seems
rather silly. Oxford isn't a London airport and we wouldn't want it to
be. I find it amazing. Oxford is quite capable of standing on its own
feet.”

The airport is owned by billionaire brothers David and Simon Reuben
through a holding company, Aldersgate Investments. It denied the
change was to encourage charter flights to operate from Oxford.

The move also comes a month after revelations that the airport
operators were in talks with carriers about starting daily business
flights to European capitals, and weekly tourist charters.

James Dillon Godfray, marketing manager at the site, hopes to bring in
up to five more private business flights a day, on top of the current
10.

“We're not meaning to insult Oxford or play down its history,” he
said. “Oxford is probably the second best recognised city in the UK
throughout the entire world but people just don't realise how close it
is to London.

“This will help promote recognition of us globally to the overseas
business aviation sector, many of whom were not aware of the
availability of an airport to the north-west of London.”

The airport's proximity to London is a key theme on the site's front
page today. It read: “London Oxford Airport is the only commercial
airport between London Heathrow and Birmingham. Oxford lies just 40
miles to the north-west of the Greater London area, halfway to the
country's industrial heartland of the Midlands.”

London Stansted airport, in Essex, is just over 40 miles from the
capital, while London Luton, in Bedfordshire, is 35 miles away.

Other airports in the region that use the name “London” include City;
Gatwick (28 miles); Biggin Hill in Kent (15 miles); Southend in Essex
(40 miles); and London Ashford airport in Lydd, Kent (56 miles).

"Markku Grönroos" wrote in message
...

"bartc" kirjoitti
dia.com...


Luton and Stansted are both about 30 miles/50km from central London by
rail (I don't know where those 35 and 40 miles came from).

By road it makes 35 miles from Stansted to Liverpool Street station. And
this location is on the same side with the airport relative to downtown
London. Distance between Victoria station and the airport is about 40
miles. Both stations reside in "central London".

Distances from 'London' should always relate to the original position of
Charring Cross - a site now occupied by an equestrian state of Charles I.

Colin Bignell