Emas ‘has safety edge’ but is costly
Wednesday 23rd February 2011, 1:00PM GMT.
A TECHNICAL director for the independent consultant which produced a report on the options for the airport development has said that, in the event of an accident, Emas provided an advantage.
Graham Ruddock (pictured), who works for aviation planning at Mott MacDonald, said that both Public Services’ preferred option, which would shut La Mare Road, and that which would use Emas had pros and cons.
But he said that the arrestor bed system had much going for it.
‘If I was on a plane over-shooting the end of the runway, then I know what I’d rather have,’ he said.
- Read the full story in the Guernsey Press. See below for subscription details.
Island Life
All about Guernsey
Ambassador of the Year 2011
History & Heritage
Visitor Information
Guernsey's government
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
This is Guernsey
Guernsey Press
Useful Links
At last… someone is admitting that safety will be compromised without EMAS !
Even if its only a ‘little bit of safety’.
What price a plane load of souls ?
6 million quid by the look of it !
Report abuse
I can’t hear BtF? Are you in the States perhaps?
Report abuse
Why not make the runway long enough in the first place, then you would n’t overrun it! Simples !
Report abuse
With EMAS, not only costs about £6 million extra,
but doesn’t it have to be replaced every ten
years.
Why don’t the deputies stop messing about,
delaying matters and go ahead with the
original plans. Or cost us more money as
usual. No difference there then !!
Report abuse
Apparently one soul saved is an economic value add to Guernsey of £5m.
Don’t quote me on that.
Report abuse
Granville WEST
Who told you that?
It is guaranteed for 20, but may well last longer with good maintenance.
Report abuse
AJ, if the runway was longer it would require longer run off areas, or larger EMAS areas.
I’d rather be on a plane crashing into EMAS than onto a field. I’d get all muddy if I crashed into a field.
Report abuse
£6m – can this be relied on ?
What is it £6m more than ? The Airport 2040 display of the £80m project includes more than 20% described as “allowances, contingency, inflation and construction contingencies”. I thought the PSD are telling everyone they have received a preferred tender and, if work cannot start in October this would result in additional costs. If we have a contractor already waiting in the wings to start in october, why do we still have such a high level of contingencies in the budget. Sounds fishy to me.
Report abuse
@AJ. Truth is, Guernsey does not need – and the majority of residents do not want – a longer runway to bring in larger nosier more heavily polluting jet aircraft. Only ‘commerce’ and it’s limited supporters want it. It must not happen. Let the large airports of the UK and Europe take the huge jets. Guernsey does not need and does not want them on it’s tiny piece of land, not if Guernsey is to remain a pleasant and beautiful place for human beings to live. Simply maintain the current runway to a high standard and let that be an end to it.
Report abuse
Nevermind, States have made a decision to purchase the land. I don’t think it will be plain sailing for them however!
Report abuse