Booker site 'too small' for new airport plan (From Bucks Free Press)
Send your news, photos and videos by texting bucksfreepress to 80360 or email
Booker site 'too small' for new airport plan
11:30am Friday 14th September 2012 in News By Dave Peters
Booker site 'too small' for new airport plan
BOOKER airfield is too small to be considered as a potential site for a proposed new four-runway airport west of Heathrow say local aviation experts.
An Independent on Sunday exclusive claims a £60bn British business consortium with Chinese backing is eyeing-up potential sites 30 minutes to the west of London to rival or even replace Heathrow.
But David Phillips, managing director of Booker Aircraft Operations, says Booker or neighbouring White Waltham won’t be on their radar – because they are too small.
He said: “For something to happen on the scale that’s being talked about you would need somewhere at least four times the size of us.
“We have a 700m runway here and it has to be 3,000metres long. “We are talking about something the size of a town. We are talking about a bit of real estate the size of High Wycombe itself.
“It’s not a business aspiration of ours and I think it’s pie in the sky.
Booker Aircraft Operations lease the site from Wycombe District Council and are hoping to renew it when the current lease expires in 2014.
He added: “From our perspective if anyone is thinking about it, it is the first we know about it.”
Meanwhile, Mike Post, a former airline pilot from Marlow says that even if Booker was big enough the typography would rule it out.
He said: “It’s too hilly.”
The airport hunters’ criteria state that they want a flat site, accessible by road and rail and within half an hour of London.
Both he and Mr Phillips suspect Greenham Common, the site for the peace camps in the 1980s, is most like to be considered along with Upper Heyford, the former military base near Bicester, for any ‘new Heathrow’.
But ex-pilot Mr Post believes the best solution of all would be to resurrect the plans for a third runway at Heathrow, which the Conservatives opposed in 2010 but are considering again now. He said: “My view is that the third runway at Heathrow ought to go ahead. There’s room for it there and it was going to happen there for years and years.
“If you started from scratch you wouldn’t choose Heathrow but it is already there and West London and the Heathrow corridor relies on it being there.”
And he says putting it there would only have minimal impact here because the proposal is for a northerly runway.
Comments(10)
church11
says...
12:29pm Fri 14 Sep 12
Dr Truth
says...
12:33pm Fri 14 Sep 12
thethe
says...
2:04pm Fri 14 Sep 12
realist_highwycombe
says...
2:10pm Fri 14 Sep 12
Anyone with a brain cell would know that Booker is too small for almost anything!
It's a great little site which does well for the purpose it serves but anything else is laughable!
Darren Hayday
says...
2:33pm Fri 14 Sep 12
J B Blackett
says...
8:23pm Fri 14 Sep 12
realist_highwycombe wrote:Did you know there used to be a Little Booker and a Great Booker., but Little Booker did disappear about the time of the Black Death.
I did laugh when I saw this headline - seriously BFP what is all this nonsense about!?
Anyone with a brain cell would know that Booker is too small for almost anything!
It's a great little site which does well for the purpose it serves but anything else is laughable!
.
And over the years the 'Great' disappeared as it wasn't needed as there was nothing Little to compare it to.
.
However although Great Booker Airport sounds good , it's not viable , not financially sound or even practical.
BOOKERite
says...
10:17pm Fri 14 Sep 12
YorksDavey
says...
10:40pm Sat 15 Sep 12
TheHorsesMouth
says...
10:31am Mon 17 Sep 12
...
I'll leave that one for re-use on April 1st,....
Mutley says...
12:12pm Fri 14 Sep 12
The typography eh? Is Booker in the wrong typeface? Is the linespacing incorrect? Does the general design of the printed page fail BAE's criteria for a new airport.
I think the word you're looking for is "topography". But your proofreaders probably knew that!