August 17, 2005 at 7:00 pm
Hi
Flicking through Roger Freemans book “Airfields of the 8th then and now” I gave Duxford a bit of a re-read, the book is mid 70s vintage, to see how things are now. It mentions that the future of the airfield was is (1975) under threat from the proposed new M11, all appeals and avenues were exhausted and the then minister gave the go-ahead for the motorway to slice through the Eastern end, near were the super hangar is now I believe. It obviousley did,nt happen, just wandered if anyone knows what created such an unusual “back down” in terms of road routing?
Cheers
By: Black Knight - 28th August 2005 at 01:49
During David Henchie’s time I thought there was a cunning plan to extend the runway to the west? That would be nice for the ‘suck and blow’ aircraft.
I had heard this from Mark Hanna as there was some concern over jet operations in the future.
By: Tbirdman - 20th August 2005 at 21:02
During David Henchie’s time I thought there was a cunning plan to extend the runway to the west? That would be nice for the ‘suck and blow’ aircraft.
By: JonathanF - 20th August 2005 at 20:33
When the M11 was built in the mid 1970’s, Duxford was not as significant or popular as it is today. I suspect that if the same thing happened now, the motorway would either be in a tunnel, or re-routed but I suppose it all depends on who is in Government at the time. :confused:
I can’t see that happening. They still haven’t sorted out the Stonehenge debacle, and I doubt a good enough argument could be made that Duxford as a heritage site justifies an expensive cut-and-cover tunnel or a less suitable (in planning terms) route.
Speaking of cut-and-cover tunnels, there’s that recent Tesco palava to consider!
By: mike currill - 20th August 2005 at 20:03
It always amazed me when they built the M11.
They have to dig a cutting into the ground to lay the motorway. Why did they not dig it that little bit deeper so that the runway could be connected up again, either by the means of a tunnel or a bridge?I mean the motorway through the tunnel not the runway through the tunnel.. you now what I mean…
😀 Novel idea, putting a runway through the tunnel, I think a few pilots would be rather miffed about that though, especially with high powered tail draggers.
By: Ewan Hoozarmy - 19th August 2005 at 22:24
When the M11 was built in the mid 1970’s, Duxford was not as significant or popular as it is today. I suspect that if the same thing happened now, the motorway would either be in a tunnel, or re-routed but I suppose it all depends on who is in Government at the time. :confused:
By: AndyG - 19th August 2005 at 21:03
I posted these a while back –
Thats quite ironic. The difference in length of the motorway route between a straight line and the slightly displaced but parallel section would be surprisingly small and extra volume of materials and work required small too. (from experience of subsea & pipeline and umbilical routing)
There must have been a road engineer with a large nose by going the name of Caesar in charge of the M11 route planning on the Duxford section……. 😀
By: PDS - 19th August 2005 at 20:00
Runway used top be over 2000m, its now just over 1500m
so around 1500ft.
Don’t Why they never put a bit extra over the other end to compensate a little, so any overruns would not get too near the M11
It always amazed me when they built the M11.
They have to dig a cutting into the ground to lay the motorway. Why did they not dig it that little bit deeper so that the runway could be connected up again, either by the means of a tunnel or a bridge?
I mean the motorway through the tunnel not the runway through the tunnel.. you now what I mean…
By: gordo - 19th August 2005 at 19:48
Runway used top be over 2000m, its now just over 1500m
so around 1500ft.
Don’t Why they never put a bit extra over the other end to compensate a little, so any overruns would not get too near the M11
By: Black Knight - 19th August 2005 at 18:50
For some reason I recall they chopped damn near 800ft off the runway?
I was told 1500
By: ZRX61 - 19th August 2005 at 16:52
For some reason I recall they chopped damn near 800ft off the runway?
By: 92fis - 17th August 2005 at 22:39
The decision was made to cut through the runway because it was still outside the wartime boundary of the airfield. At least it remained the full length to get concorde in, The B52 must have been quite a sight coming in over the M11.
By: JonathanF - 17th August 2005 at 21:05
Well obviously it cut the length significantly, and at least one fatal accident and two non-fatal ones have occurred that would have been far less serious had the M11 not been there.
I hope I’m wrong, but I suspect there have been more deaths on the road itself. Are these reason not to build motorways? Arguably, I suppose, but transport links east-west in the area are poor enough as it is without wishing the M11 away.
What happened to those flying cars they promised us?
By: 1 Group - 17th August 2005 at 19:18
Thanks for that, the book sais that should it happen then no flying would be able to take place, assumed the m/way had been slewed. Obviousley flying and m/way live side by side happily!!