Warning - Pedant alert

[whole diary]

[Red Squirrel]

Just like London Southend Airport...

Airports are like that... Lulsgate Bottom International is hundreds of yards from Lulsgate Bottom.

[bobm]

Don't start me on London Oxford airport.... it isn't even in Oxford, let alone London.

[TonyK]

Don't start me on London Oxford airport.... it isn't even in Oxford, let alone London.

Nor London Stansted, London Luton, nor to the delight of the true pedant London Heathrow!

Airports are like that... Lulsgate Bottom International is hundreds of yards from Lulsgate Bottom.

I thought Lulsgate Bottom what was you got from eating out-of-date airline meals. Another terrible disease is Boxcar Willie, caught on freight trains in the USA...

[Chris from Nailsea]

Airports are like that... Lulsgate Bottom International is hundreds of yards from Lulsgate Bottom.

It's now Bristol Airport: we apparently dropped the International a few years ago: http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/Rebranded-Bristol-Airport-drops-International/story-11299139-detail/story.html 

[TonyK]

It's now Bristol Airport: we apparently dropped the International a couple of years ago: http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/Rebranded-Bristol-Airport-drops-International/story-11299139-detail/story.html 

It seems that once the foreign destinations served exceed a certain number, it is considered vulgar to retain the "International". That is left for the likes of Blackpool (4 non-seasonal overseas routes, or 5 if the Isle of Man counts), Leeds-Bradford (nearing the number for losing "International"), Exeter (2 non-seasonal overseas routes), and Norwich (also 2). Bournemouth non-International serves 8 permanent foreign destinations.

A similar principle can be seen in other contexts. Some schools of karate return to a white belt for the highest rank, usually held by one old man who can barely stand, but could still eviscerate an opponent with an eyelash. Doctors who achieve the exclusive height of membership or fellowship of the Royal College of Surgeons drop the title "Doctor" and become "Mister" (I'm not sure if this applies also to female fellows). In both cases, this is done to demonstrate to the lower orders that the master is no different to the pupil, merely vastly superior in ability, god-like stature, and salary.

[stuving]

Don't start me on London Oxford airport.... it isn't even in Oxford, let alone London.

Nor London Stansted, London Luton, nor to the delight of the true pedant London Heathrow!

But think about it - why on Earth would you want a major airport inside a city?

Heathrow is too close in as it is. Since huge numbers of aircraft have to take off or land over London, over thirty years or more there is a significant probability that a big one will fall out of the sky onto a densely populated bit. Followed by politicians and others blaming each other ("who ever thought that was a good idea - not me!").

And anyway ... how much of "London" is really in "London"?

[TonyK]

But think about it - why on Earth would you want a major airport inside a city?

Heathrow is too close in as it is. Since huge numbers of aircraft have to take off or land over London, over thirty years or more there is a significant probability that a big one will fall out of the sky onto a densely populated bit. Followed by politicians and others blaming each other ("who ever thought that was a good idea - not me!").

And anyway ... how much of "London" is really in "London"?

Come now, stuving, this is the pedant alert thread! Even London City airport isn't within the strict limits of London's square mile.

Your point about proximity and the chances of one "going in" is well made, yet seemingly insoluble without huge sums being expended. The major problem is that Heathrow was established to the west of London, with firstly one then two east / west runways (OK, I know this is the pedant alert thred, and there were actually six at one point after the concept of runways arrived, rather than just a big field with aircraft needing only a few hundred metres take-off roll into the wind, but I am talking Modern Age, Comet / 707 onwards), the prevailing wind being westerly in the winter / spring / autumn months and easterly in summer. Aircraft take off and land into the wind, which was not a big issue when most of the aircraft so taking off would have 10 minutes of flight over farmland before getting anywhere close to the Metrolopse. By the time this was an issue, caused by the several forces of larger aircraft, urban sprawl, and increased passenger numbers, it was too late to do much about it, except try to mitigate the risks. Paris has two major airports, one north, one south of the city, neither any further from the centre than Heathrow, but neither having flight paths over the Champs Elysee or the Tour d'Eiffel. Heathrow 27R passes over Windsor Castle within 2 minutes of departure if the aircraft does not turn (they do unless in bad weather, but still pass close at almost TOGA power), and 09L gives passengers a birds eye view of Hampton court Palace at low level before skirting the Houses of Parliament and Canary Wharf.

Had Norman MacMillan, in 1925, been forced down by mechanical problems at Cheshunt or Caterham, rather than Heathrow, we may have ended up with an alignment of runways / prevailing wind / capital on a par with Paris. But he wasn't, so we are stuck with it, and the perceived need for more capacity to boot. The first battle by locals against a third runway at Heathrow began before the second was finished. It is such a big issue that no government wants to tackle it, given there are only five years between elections. I think that as a country, we are getting better at super-massive infrastructure projects, but in the time it has taken to decide on a third reactor at Hinkley Point, for example, there have been three elections, and it could still be dumped by the next government if the Greens win. (Ladbrokes are offering generous odds). Heathrow's third runway has been an issue since 1946, and thus looks, possibly, to be the first major infrastructure to outlast three monarchs (four if you count the eponymous airline).

[JayMac]

As it's the pedant's thread I feel I should point out that plans for a third nuclear power station at Hinkley Point have been around for far longer than the last three elections. As early as 1981 the Central Electricity Generating Board were exploring options for a third site at Hinkley Point. In 1987 a planning application was submitted to Somerset County Council by the CEGB. A public inquiry was held in 1988. I remember the local news coverage well. And also debating the issues as part of my Personal & Social Development lessons at secondary school in Taunton. The CEGB obtained the planning permission in 1990 to build a Pressurised Water Reactor similar to that at Sizewell B. With Conservative plans to privatise the energy generation industries around the same time there was little firm commitment from central government to provide funds or underwrite the construction costs. Nobody wanted to buy the existing nuclear power stations when the Conservative government first attempted to sell them. The plan for Hinkley C was finally dropped following, at the second attempt, privatisation of the nuclear energy generation industry in the mid 1990s.

[TonyK]

As it's the pedant's thread I feel I should point out that plans for a third nuclear power station at Hinkley Point have been around for far longer than the last three elections.

I stand corrected, and am grateful, bnm. It has, therefore, bubbled on through three administrations, seven general elections,  five Prime Ministers, and Nick Clegg. Hinkley C will be built in spite of government, not because of it.

[TonyK]

I saw this sign in Nelson Street, Bristol.



I may be verging on the lunatic frtinge of true pedantry, but am I the only one to think that this is possibly the daftest sign ever created? How can cyclists use the "mandatory" cycle lane if they cannot enter it? That it is sited outside a cycling caf^ and workshop makes it dafter, and the gentleman pictured is far from the only person to not comply.

[JayMac]

Didn't notice that sign today as I wandering around that area (Long story to do with buses being snarled up following a bus/pedestrian RTC outside Debenhams in Broadmead).

What I did notice though was that the New Bridewell Police Station, a 1960s building even I, a lover of modernism, didn't really like, has been obliterated. All that was left today was the main stairwell/liftshaft.

The BiB are now in across the road in a building called The Bridewell Police Station. I find it mildly amusing that the Old Bridewell Police Station is still standing, the New Bridewell is gone, and Avon & Somerset Constabulary are now in building called The Bridewell. I wonder why the latest cop shop wasn't called The New New Bridewell? 

[TonyK]

[JayMac]

The Old Bridewell (more formally, Central Police Station) in Nelson St, Bristol:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Central_Police_Station_Bristol.jpg

What I love about that picture (not mine) is the parked cars featured. I'm assuming it's merely coincidence that it features four Ford Focus' (Foci? Focuses?). Not to forget one example of the Focus' predecessor - an Escort. Shame there's only one Escort. Plural for them is much easier.

[Cynthia]

Informal plural of focus is Focuses I believe; Foci being the formal form.  And yes, there is only ONE Escort - the Mark 1, that is!  (not pictured, unfortunately, as only spotted at classic car rallies these days) Those were the days! (Sigh)

[chrisr_75]

Informal plural of focus is Focuses I believe; Foci being the formal form.  And yes, there is only ONE Escort - the Mark 1, that is!  (not pictured, unfortunately, as only spotted at classic car rallies these days) Those were the days! (Sigh)

You might then be envious to know that there is a Mk1 Escort works rally car that lives in my neighbours garage, which I see from time to time, very nice (and expensive) it is too!