Letters to the Editor, September 27, 2014
I refer to Peter Lok's letter in which he writes that there is a requirement for a 2,000-metre separation between two in-line runways.

If the proposal for Heathrow was also adopted for Chek Lap Kok, one north runway would be used for landing and the other for departures. There would be a similar arrangement for two runways on the south side.
How is it possible for the reclamation to be cut back to land only required for third and fourth runways? Simply because the new passenger terminal shown on the website of the Airport Authority is no longer required. The additional capacity generated by the new runways is already provided for by the two new terminals currently under construction as the Midfield Development and West Apron Expansion. These two new terminals together almost double the existing capacity.
Before committing to expenditure of HK$130 billion on a scheme that will only result in one runway and a reclamation that is significantly larger than justified, the Airport Authority really should have a rethink about cheaper and more attractive alternatives.
R. J. F. Brothers, Sai Kung