on opening day, 1 June 1939 The first proposals to use Gardermoen as a new main airport was launched by the local newspaper
Romerikes Blad in 1946, who argued that Fornebu would cost too much to expand. Gardermoen also had access to the railway. Also
Ludvig G. Braathen, founder of
Braathens SAFE, was an early proponent of having Gardermoen as a main airport. His company had its technical base at Gardermoen from it was founded in 1946 until 1948, but had to move due to the cold climate. During the 1940s, Fornebu was regularity troubled with fog, and Gardermoen became the default reserve airport for Oslo. From 1946 to 1951, all
transatlantic flights were flown from Gardermoen, which was also used by a limited number of European airlines. In 1950, the
Ministry of Transport and Communications (Norway) launched a report which discussed the possibility of making Gardermoen an international airport. While construction at Gardermoen would be cheaper and allow more expansion, the distance from Oslo was a hindrance. It recommended that intercontinental flights could use Gardermoen, while domestic and European flights use Fornebu. However, from 1952, all traffic was transferred to Fornebu. The first scheduled jet services to Norway were introduced by
British European Airways in 1960, when their service from
Stockholm via Oslo to
London started using
deHavilland Comets. The following year, SAS started their route from Gardermoen to New York, but it was soon terminated. In 1962, the runway at Fornebu was extended to and two years later a new terminal opened. This allowed jet aircraft to use the airport, and SAS started
Copenhagen and
Bodø flights using
Sud Aviation Caravelles. On 12 June 1970, the Tufte-Johansen Committee launched a proposal to build a new main airport for Oslo at one of five locations: Gardermoen, Hurum Municipality,
Askim Municipality,
Nesodden Municipality or
Ås Municipality. This was based on surveys of seventeen locations. A new main airport was planned to have three parallel runways. The second part of their report was launched on 7 June 1971, when the Lund Committee suggested building an airport at Hobøl, with a minority wanting it to be located at Ås; Gardermoen was proposed as the third-best solution. In 1972, all charter flights, except those operated by SAS and Braathens SAFE, were transferred from Fornebu to Gardermoen. An old hangar was rebuilt to become a terminal building, and the Norwegian Civil Aviation Administration moved its administration to Gardermoen. The airport also had general aviation, and was training base for the main airlines. In 1973, the estimates for traffic at a main airport at Hobøl in 2000 was 16 million passengers. Estimates for Gardermoen as a supplement to Fornebu were at most estimated to 14 million passengers in 1993. Estimates from the 1970s for traffic in 2000 varied from 5 to 24 million, and were made at a time when passenger numbers were at 2 million. The high estimates were therefore not taken seriously among politicians and the media. In 1980, the government made a report where they recommended that the divided solution remain, and that Fornebu be expanded. During the 1980s, a new, multi-story parking house was built, and the terminal expanded a third story and with three satellites, one for SAS, one for Braathens SAFE and one for international flights. The international section also received bridges to the airlines. With the large increase of air traffic during the 1980s, politicians began to realize that a new main airport would have to be opened some time during the 1990s, or more traffic be moved to Gardermoen. When
Johan J. Jacobsen from the
Centre Party was appointed minister of transport in 1983, he tried to change the situation so the divided solution would remain permanent. He wanted the traffic at Fornebu to have a regulated peak of 5.5 million passengers per year. He also proposed that all international traffic be transferred to Gardermoen in 1988 and a new terminal be built to handle 3.5 million passengers annually. This was supported by parliament on 10 May 1984. Due to this, the areas at Hobøl were freed up.
Hurum selected In 1984, after many years of stable air traffic ridership, numbers increased in 1984, and the debate took off again. Because the areas for an airport in Hobøl was just freed up, it was considered politically impossible to regulate them again, since it would be considered a restriction on local democracy. The proposal to build at Hurum was launched again, and this time new explosive techniques would make Hurum much cheaper. The Civil Airport Administration launched a report in 1986, and recommended Hurum as the best location. The Ministry of Transport instead wanted to expand the existing runway at Fornebu, and build a second, parallel one. However, this would create much
noise pollution, and although the cheapest solution, was politically impossible. Most of the right-winged parties and commercial interests had Hurum as their preferred location. This was due to the large increase of commerce and population around the
Oslo Fjord, and that this should be stimulated rather than discouraged. The Labor Party wanted to have an airport at Gardermoen, and stated that this would give a better balance in investments throughout Eastern Norway, and eliminate some of the commuting from
Oppland and Hedmark to Oslo and Akershus. The domestic airlines all wanted to have an airport south and west of Oslo (i.e. either Hobøl or Hurum) which would be closest to the population centers. They also stated that the worst possible solution would be to keep two airports, which would split the company's hubs in two. In 1986, the Labour Party was reinstated in government, and
Kjell Borgen from Hedmark was appointed minister of transport. He launched a report to parliament on 8 May 1986 that recommended building a new airport at Gardermoen. The report had both administrative and political deficiencies, and was rejected by parliament, in part due to a lack of covering the needs of the Air Force. The political debate soon proved to split most of the parties, with politicians focusing on geography rather than ideology. Proponents of Hurum stated that the government was making regional politics way heavier than commercial and transporteconomical needs. Meteorological surveys showed bad weather conditions at Hurum, while geological surveys showed poor ground conditions at Gardermoen. Borgen made a proposal in parliament to build a new airport at Gardermoen. On 8 June 1988, parliament instead voted to build a new airport at Hurum. Fourteen members of the Labor Party voted against their own minister, the first time members of the party had voted against a proposal from their own government. The lack of party loyalty may have been aggravated the day before, when the government had to withdraw a proposal to make all limousines for the members of government permitted to use
bus lanes and equip them with emergency lights. On the day of the airport voting, it was ahead of time clear that some Labor Party members would vote against Gardermoen, but that the number was not known to anyone. Members from the Conservative and Christian Democratic Party, who were in favor of a Hurum location, encouraged each Labor Party member who was in favor of Hurum to make a public statement. By the time the Labor Partys parliamentary leader
Einar Førde started having an individual meeting with each of the dissidents, it was too late to change their minds. Parliament voted with 81 against 76 votes to build at Hurum. Borgen quit his position on 13 June.
Weather conditions Borgen's successor,
William Engseth, started the planning of a new airport at Hurum. New meteorological surveys launched in 1989 again stated that Hurum was not suited as a site for the airport. This was because of low clouds combined with heavy side wind. But it soon became clear that there were disagreements within the
Norwegian Meteorological Service (DNMI), and pilots from SAS and Braathens SAFE stated that the reports had created artificial problems and they were not believable. A state committee, led by
Ole-Anders Hafsnor, director in
Det Norske Veritas, and committee members representing SAS, Braathens SAFE, the
Swedish Civil Aviation Administration and the DNMI looked into the meteorological findings, without finding anything wrong. The committee was criticized for having the leader of the organization which was to be controlled, in it. The Hafsnor report was presented in 1990. The report was criticized by the trade unions representing the pilots and air controllers, who both stated that the reports from DNMI did not give any finding that would make Hurum unsuitable for an airport. An independent report was launched by Jan Wiborg, which stated that the surveys had been manipulated. The ministry then appointed a new committee with members from the
University of Trondheim, Rakel Surlien, Erik Jersin and Aage J. Thunem, to look into the findings. After the process was finished, it turned out that DNMI did not claim authorship to the weather data used in the final report from the Ministry of Transport, and that these had been compiled by the ministry from various sources. Following the findings that Hurum was unsuitable, both of the two large airlines felt that they needed to pressure politicians to not end up with a divided solution. In addition to the fear of a divided hub, the two incumbents knew that the domestic airline industry would be liberalized in the 1990s, and any airline could fly any route. This would require additional capacity at Oslo Airport. Top management in SAS, Braathens SAFE and Widerøe decided that they would all support a Gardermoen alternative fully. In 1990, the government, with Minister of Transport
Lars Gunnar Lie from the
Christian Democratic Party, proposed having a new round of committees and evaluation to decide between the divided solution and a new airport at Gardermoen. But in parliament, the Labor and Conservative parties, who held a majority, voted to only consider Gardermoen as an alternative.
Final decision When the decision was to be finalized in parliament on 8 October 1992, there was a majority, consisting of the Labor and Conservative parties, that wanted a new main airport. The Labor Party wanted Gardermoen, while the Conservative Party wanted it to be located at Hobøl. The Center Party and Christian Democratic Party wanted to continue with the divided solution, since they were principally opposed to investments that would give growth opportunities in Eastern Norway. The
Socialist Left Party (SV) was concerned about how they could reduce the amount of air traffic, because of its pollution and energy inefficiency. Instead, SV wanted to build
high-speed railways. The
Progress Party was indifferent to the location, but stated that if a new airport should be built, it should be built, owned and operate by the private sector. The uncertainty before the voting was related to if the Labor Party and the Conservative Party could reach agreement. They had no prior agreement, but the Conservative Party's primary wish was to get a majority to support a two-year delay to make a new consideration of the Hobøl-alternative. It turned out that the order of voting would become critical; the Conservative Party wanted to first have a vote about a delay, and then about whether to build at Gardermoen or not. This would force the Christian Democrats and the Center Party to vote for the delay (which would then have a majority) and then only the Labor Party would in the end vote for Gardermoen. To counteract this, the Labour Party made a secret, two-point agreement with the Christian Democratic and Center parties the night before the vote. All three parties, who had a majority in parliament, would vote against the Hobøl-proposal from the Conservatives. In exchange, the Christian Democratic Party was to support the construction of the
Gardermoen Line, a high-speed railway which would connect
Oslo Central Station to Gardermoen in 19 minutes. If the Gardermoen proposal was rejected, the Labor Party obliged to vote in favor of a divided solution. Both Johan J. Jacobsen of the Centre Party and
Kjell Magne Bondevik of the Christian Democratic Party felt that this agreement would create a majority for a divided solution, since they were confident that the Conservatives would stick to their support of Hobøl. On the other hand, the Conservative Party had a group meeting prior to the debate where they agreed that the importance of building a new main airport was more important that where it was located. The group decided that they would discard the delay-suggestion for Hobøl and instead support Gardermoen. To keep this strategy tight, they decided to not notify the Center Party and the Christian Democratic Party. The vote ended with the Labor Party and the Conservative Party voting in favor of Gardermoen, with the proposal to vote for a delay never being made. ==Alternatives==