• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

Activists cut through airport fence

#5
I do hope they took their shoes off going through security..... What's the point in jumping through hoops and having to put a 0.5 ml eyedrop medication into plastic bags, when some long haired greasy hygeine-dodgers can chain themselves to a plane without so much as a dog hanging off of them?
 

the_boy_syrup

LE
Book Reviewer
#8
A chance for the RAF Reg to win a legitamite battle honour and their not there
A fleet of empty Wmmiks sitting outside duty free would have "secured" and "dominated" the area like they seem to "secure" every other airfield in the world
 
#11
Billy_Boogers said:
sazzz said:
polar69 said:
I had to google "arm tube lock on"

Annnnnnnnnnnnnnd found this brothers !!

http://www.eco-action.org/rr/ch12.html
f*cking hell, their rescoursefull, thease hippies!
Oh my, Im pretty sure a portable masonry or chop saw applied at the shoulder or anywhere along the "tube" will do the trick. A bit messy I'm sure, but nothing that couldn't be cleaned up with a firehose....
That'd ruin your day out messing about on airfields eh.
 
#13
StickyEnd said:
OTOH, why do we need to increase freight capacity by air? Surely as a general rule, sea passage is a better way of moving bulky stuff around.
Unless Manchester has a much bigger demand for increased airfreight :?

Surely there must be justification for these developments.
 
#14
beemer007 said:
StickyEnd said:
OTOH, why do we need to increase freight capacity by air? Surely as a general rule, sea passage is a better way of moving bulky stuff around.
Unless Manchester has a much bigger demand for increased airfreight :?

Surely there must be justification for these developments.
Maybe, I don't know. Sometimes though I think new developments could be used to pocket public money. There is a bloody great sea port in Liverpool and a motorway and a ship canal connecting it to Manchester.

I am not condoning plane stupids activity here, but I do question the need to constantly expand airports. Personally, I am glad the new government has chopped Heathrow's 3rd runway. What a difference it made when the volcanic ash closed it (Heathrow) down. The great park was actually rather peacefull.
 
#15
StickyEnd said:
beemer007 said:
StickyEnd said:
OTOH, why do we need to increase freight capacity by air? Surely as a general rule, sea passage is a better way of moving bulky stuff around.
Unless Manchester has a much bigger demand for increased airfreight :?

Surely there must be justification for these developments.
Maybe, I don't know. Sometimes though I think new developments could be used to pocket public money. There is a bloody great sea port in Liverpool and a motorway and a ship canal connecting it to Manchester.

I am not condoning plane stupids activity here, but I do question the need to constantly expand airports. Personally, I am glad the new government has chopped Heathrow's 3rd runway. What a difference it made when the volcanic ash closed it (Heathrow) down. The great park was actually rather peacefull.
I know where your coming from & fully understand, however it's the business & Industry leaders that will weigh up the logistical economics pro's & Con's and of which need to be convinced,

And I know many years ago it would have been the norm to use canal's up & down and using Liverpool etc (for example coal ) but as they old saying goes:

Time is money :wink:
 
#16
beemer007 said:
StickyEnd said:
beemer007 said:
StickyEnd said:
OTOH, why do we need to increase freight capacity by air? Surely as a general rule, sea passage is a better way of moving bulky stuff around.
Unless Manchester has a much bigger demand for increased airfreight :?

Surely there must be justification for these developments.
Maybe, I don't know. Sometimes though I think new developments could be used to pocket public money. There is a bloody great sea port in Liverpool and a motorway and a ship canal connecting it to Manchester.

I am not condoning plane stupids activity here, but I do question the need to constantly expand airports. Personally, I am glad the new government has chopped Heathrow's 3rd runway. What a difference it made when the volcanic ash closed it (Heathrow) down. The great park was actually rather peacefull.
I know where your coming from & fully understand, however it's the business & Industry leaders that will weigh up the logistical economics pro's & Con's and of which need to be convinced,

And I know many years ago it would have been the norm to use canal's up & down and using Liverpool etc (for example coal ) but as they old saying goes:

Time is money :wink:
Aparantly freight at Manchester has reduced over the last few years.

22.10.2009

Lib Dem Councillor and Wythenshawe Parliamentary Candidate Martin Eakins joined local residents in celebrating the rejection of Manchester Airport's air freight expansion plans on Thursday 22nd October.

The plan to double air freight capacity at the expense of the historic and important ecological site at Hasty Lane was unanimously rejected due to economic and environmental concerns.

Air freight has halved in two years, and has suffered a constant decline in the last 15 months as the recession shows no sign of recovery in aviation.

Cllr Eakins said: “I appreciate that Manchester Airport does, and will continue to play a crucial part in our regional economic success – but it must take into account recent legislation passed which will force the aviation industry to reduce carbon emission to 95% of 2005 levels by 2012. As air freight has halved in the last two years, it makes no economic sense to double the capacity when the Airport will never get to use it! Two beautiful family homes and an ecological paradise at the edge of the Airport would be bulldozed if this had gone ahead, and I'm delighted the Wythenshawe Area Committee have seen sense and rejected it.”

The plans will now go to the main Manchester Planning committee which will have the final say in November.
 
#17
StickyEnd said:
beemer007 said:
StickyEnd said:
beemer007 said:
StickyEnd said:
OTOH, why do we need to increase freight capacity by air? Surely as a general rule, sea passage is a better way of moving bulky stuff around.
Unless Manchester has a much bigger demand for increased airfreight :?

Surely there must be justification for these developments.
Maybe, I don't know. Sometimes though I think new developments could be used to pocket public money. There is a bloody great sea port in Liverpool and a motorway and a ship canal connecting it to Manchester.

I am not condoning plane stupids activity here, but I do question the need to constantly expand airports. Personally, I am glad the new government has chopped Heathrow's 3rd runway. What a difference it made when the volcanic ash closed it (Heathrow) down. The great park was actually rather peacefull.
I know where your coming from & fully understand, however it's the business & Industry leaders that will weigh up the logistical economics pro's & Con's and of which need to be convinced,

And I know many years ago it would have been the norm to use canal's up & down and using Liverpool etc (for example coal ) but as they old saying goes:

Time is money :wink:
Aparantly freight at Manchester has reduced over the last few years.

22.10.2009

Lib Dem Councillor and Wythenshawe Parliamentary Candidate Martin Eakins joined local residents in celebrating the rejection of Manchester Airport's air freight expansion plans on Thursday 22nd October.

The plan to double air freight capacity at the expense of the historic and important ecological site at Hasty Lane was unanimously rejected due to economic and environmental concerns.

Air freight has halved in two years, and has suffered a constant decline in the last 15 months as the recession shows no sign of recovery in aviation.

Cllr Eakins said: “I appreciate that Manchester Airport does, and will continue to play a crucial part in our regional economic success – but it must take into account recent legislation passed which will force the aviation industry to reduce carbon emission to 95% of 2005 levels by 2012. As air freight has halved in the last two years, it makes no economic sense to double the capacity when the Airport will never get to use it! Two beautiful family homes and an ecological paradise at the edge of the Airport would be bulldozed if this had gone ahead, and I'm delighted the Wythenshawe Area Committee have seen sense and rejected it.”

The plans will now go to the main Manchester Planning committee which will have the final say in November.
Without researching further into this issue I suspect 'other' airports will/may be a consideration instead of Manchester?

Mind you plane-stupid will no doubt be showing up on the radar again sometime soon when they decide another such brainstorming un-authorised entry is on their hitlist,

Would'nt be surpised if some of their members are disgruntled BA crew

edited for sarcasm.
 
#19
I wonder what they said to their boss to get the day off to go trespassing? Or even if they have jobs? How about we protest in their front garden about their zero, or even minus contribution to society?
 

Latest Threads

New Posts