I made hundreds of landing at this airport as a pilot and passenger. What I believe shutting down such a valuable asset is total waste of money. Berlin is such a lovely city. Think about London, Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansed, Lutton and many more GA fields. Seeing this action shutting down an airport other than major safety issues always makes me feel someone is shutting down my home. Think about LTBA in Istanbul. Protect TXL airport.
Antonio wrote:
Grand total of 54 supporters for the SaveTegel initiative in the first 24hrs, half of them Spanish.What can we do to get more support amongst Germans? Any ideas?
As a first step, one would promote it on German aviation sites, but to garner real numbers you need to reach the general public and maybe contact major German / Berlin newspapers, who still have significant influence on public opinion. Mind you, keeping Tegel open had considerable local support outside the areas immediately adjacent to it, although I guess many of those supporters won’t see the point if they can’t fly (no CAT).
Currently at 78 and counting. I am thinking 100 is enough to send the letter. Thousands would be better, but that would need a major public awareness action.
Can any of you help post on German aviation sites (or anywhere else for that matter)?
I did address Des Spiegel, but received no feedback.
CAT is an interesting and controversial topic. The higher-level topic is keeping it open as an aIrfield, for whatever use, to preserve associated rights. From that point of view, GA use is easier than CAT use.
I view the CAT vs no CAT discussion as a secondary one, since once the airport has been shut-down for good, it is irrelevant: there is no way back.The only way it is relevant is if CAT is the only way to keep it open. I don’t see why it would be.
My point is that keeping it open MAY allow future aircraft use that the city would decide in the future. That may involve CAT or not, may involve electric airborne city-taxies or not, may involve environmentally-friendly city-to-space transportation, or not, or whatever other use that requires airport-like facilities in the future.
Shutting it down ENSURES no future use as an airport.
The long-focused decision is obvious, even if there is uncertainty as to the type of use. As discussed short-sightedness is however predominant and more pressing. The problem is now an expectation of a big short-term economical profit has been generated.
Hence the need for actions to raise awareness as to the long-term consequences, with minimal price (cost, environmental or otherwise) in the short-term, and for that, GA and emergency services is ideal (minimum land use, infrastructure change cost, and environmental impact).
Antonio wrote:
I view the CAT vs no CAT discussion as a secondary one, since once the airport has been shut-down for good, it is irrelevant: there is no way back.The only way it is relevant is if CAT is the only way to keep it open. I don’t see why it would be.
My point is that keeping it open MAY allow future aircraft use that the city would decide in the future. That may involve CAT or not, may involve electric airborne city-taxies or not, may involve environmentally-friendly city-to-space transportation, or not, or whatever other use that requires airport-like facilities in the future.
Shutting it down ENSURES no future use as an airport.
Just for the record, I fully agree with you on this!
TBH I’m fairly happy with EDAY (VFR) and EDAZ (IFR) for accessing Berlin. Much better than Munich (to name but one other major city).
The terminals in Tegel are way too big for a GA activity. It would cost a fortune to re-purpose. With proper management CAT and GA can cohabit though.
If anything I’d much rather ditch Tegel and re-open Tempelhof for GA only (even if I know that will never happen).
HI Arne.
The plan for Berlin Tegel is already to reconvert tghe terminals for residential, educational, research and business needs:
All that is required for the airport to remain open for aircraft use is a relatively minor change in the current plan in order to maintain one of the runways open and a fraction of the current aeronautical infrastructure.
It is the same reason why, despite pressing housing needs, we preserve green zones in the middle of our cities: because we know it is good for our future and once we change use to housing, it cannot go back to parks.
What would you think if cities solved their housing needs by eliminating from their planning rules the need to preserve green zones in city centres?
The world would probably not notice if that happened in Padova, Münster, Sheffield or Zaragoza. But what about London, Paris, Dublin or, yes, Berlin?
It is a symbol at European and worldwide level. It can either be a symbol that:
-We care about making our cities accessible to multiple private and collective transportation means in the future while minimizing environmental impact. We care about preserving valuable resources for emergency services and disaster relief, orotherwise
-We only care about immediate housing and business needs.
It is the same reason why some South African – American entrepreneur is investing in something that may likely not occur in his lifetime: changing humanity into a multi-planetary species by providing routine access to transportation between Earth and Mars. Instead of simply solving more immediate problems or simply investing on his personal future.
We care about our future and what legacy we leave to those following. We spend our whole life battling our immediate needs in favor of the bigger picture. If we show the world we are not myopic and we can also do it with visible projects like TXL, it provides valuable inspiration and hope to all: those in power and those in need.
Arne wrote:
With proper management CAT and GA can cohabit though.
…the operative word being “with proper management”
A lot of things need to change for that to happen in Europe (as it does in the USA). A lot of inspiration is required to motivate such a change, the kind of inspiration which is killed by the current plan for changing the use of Tegel to exclusively non-aeronautical use.
