I don't think Dover can afford to be smug in the point scoring and foot shooting stakes..........
Paul Watkins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 9 Nov 2011
- Posts: 2,226
Indeed Bern we cannot but Thanet & Manston have so much invested in the East Kent brand that it needs pointing out.
A new business marketing campaign for East Kent is about to start.
Whilst Dover can & will move on because of its physical location , the peripheryof our District [Sandwich corridor] is associated with Thanet.
Watty
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
OKAY so we have the bigger debate on how the expansion on manston may or may not affect the locality.
it may also be fair to say a number of people may well have lived in there homes a large part of there lives rather than just moved there.
of course we have the argument of job creation against more extra planes flying overnight, the affects that has on the community.
I have no idea of the reasons for thanet councils decision, but interesting that in this instance its fine for paulw's laura to not support the manston expansion
interesting indeed,,,,, one to remember
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
So......how long has the airport been there? And do we have to come down to personal jibes again
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
had it been gwyn prosser making the same decision as mp then im sure lots of conservatives would have been on here
realise you dont like the fairness and saying it how it is bern
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Don't assume to know what like. I have no idea what you meant by that last sentence - and the shade of politics makes no difference to me. A stupid decision is a stupid decision whoever makes it.
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
I must admit I would not like a 747 over my garden at 3 AM in the morning
Given that that is unlikely to happen and you have not chosen to live near an airport, the chances are remote.
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
Air carafe descend from around 40 to 50 miles,
towns in the area would be affected from air craft sound in the right conditions.
You could have aircraft at 5000 ft over Dover,
In bad whether there engines would be cranked right up
I am for expansion but there are other things to consider, that's just good planning
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
It doesn't make sense to me. Many of those who suggest that the decision is a stupid one are the same who believe in man-made global warming and presumably consider air travel a bad thing.
Can someone explain this oddity?
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Philip, to me it seems Thanet's decision is in line with national carbon emission laws, that require a reduction in emissions of you know what, chemicals and all that.
Also in response to residents' concerns that their children will be woken up at night by roaring jet engines at 140 decibels, and would fall asleep at school as a result.
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
I'm so pleased to see that responses from less than 1% of the eligible population, and only 73% of that less than 1% who responded, is a sufficiently high number to be representative of the community as a whole as to determine the outcome of local government policy decisions over infrastructure development. Also pleased to see that you, Alex support this view as well. I look forward to your fulsome support of the community decision that was made by a much higher proportion of the eligible population and which is actively supported by a higher proportion (and growing) in our own town.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Sigh.
Neil, there are carbon emission objectives established by Law in British Parliament, also as part of international obligations. Local councils are expected to be part of the Government's delivery arm under the new Localism Bill.
Carbon emissions have to be considerably reduced, not increased.
Is it just me?
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Alex...my point had nothing to do with the carbon emissions issue as well you know.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
There's been an airport there long before most people who currently live there, so they knew when they moved there, there was an airport and expansion plans have been in place for years.
This is simply a bad decision - for the whole of East Kent and wider.
Roger
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Apparently there appears to be a sutle difference between a Tiger Moth and a 747.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
reg,a 747 is an updated version of the tiger moth,and a darn site quiter.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
Keithb
your point appears to have got missed
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
#50. Try another tune.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
quite good E I THINK(BERN) LOL
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS