HEATHROW
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BREXIT is not going to change much, be honest, the sky will not fall in.
Nothing will become clear until the dust settles on the Tory leadership vote and Boris has been stabbed by Gove today and looks less likely.
Nothing will become clear until the dust settles on the Tory leadership vote and Boris has been stabbed by Gove today and looks less likely.
DaveReidUK said:
I don't think it is obvious:
Both airports now operating at or near capacity?
Look at what happens operationally to either if anything (even relatively minor, like strong winds dictating greater separation) affects the arr/dep rate?
Neither airport would contemplate building a new runway if they knew the competition was also doing so, for obvious reasons.
Both airports now operating at or near capacity?
Look at what happens operationally to either if anything (even relatively minor, like strong winds dictating greater separation) affects the arr/dep rate?
But think about it. An additional runway, at either airport, only makes business sense if a decent ROI can be achieved, in other words if you can utilise it adequately by attracting sufficient new traffic. That's a lot easier to do if the other guy is still capacity-constrained.
If both airports were foolish enough to go ahead simultaneously with a new runway, they would be slugging it out for many years to come in competition with each other and both would struggle to get an adequate return on investment.
Both Gatwick and Heathrow CEOs have said as much in the past. You could argue that that's just posturing, but they aren't stupid.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well another day.
We will soon be in "failed state" territory at this rate.
Presume Gatwick CEO put that Champagne back on ice after the Johnson debacle.
And LHR re entered the fray with this interesting comment.
And at a time of uncertainty, a Ł16bn privately funded infrastructure investment will create jobs and growth across the UK."
Well bit late in the day but appears Heathrow CEO now indicating they pay for supporting infastructure themselves or has price of the runway gone up 4bn ?
I'm sure it was lower than this !
...hope sombody told the shareholders !
We will soon be in "failed state" territory at this rate.
Presume Gatwick CEO put that Champagne back on ice after the Johnson debacle.
And LHR re entered the fray with this interesting comment.
And at a time of uncertainty, a Ł16bn privately funded infrastructure investment will create jobs and growth across the UK."
Well bit late in the day but appears Heathrow CEO now indicating they pay for supporting infastructure themselves or has price of the runway gone up 4bn ?
I'm sure it was lower than this !
...hope sombody told the shareholders !
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bagso
The Dutch PM has already alluded to such a proposition.
Mussolini: said a fish rots frm the head down and in a political sense we are already chewing on last years tail. (Sorry Mods no offence )
Mussolini: said a fish rots frm the head down and in a political sense we are already chewing on last years tail. (Sorry Mods no offence )
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rumours circulating Westminster that Transport Sec will announce PM has passed Heathrow decision to new leader.
They both need new runways
Neither airport would contemplate building a new runway if they knew the competition was also doing so, for obvious reasons.
Though that's academic, as it's the one scenario that Davies specifically ruled out.
Though that's academic, as it's the one scenario that Davies specifically ruled out.
If both airports were allowed to build rwys, and amongst leadership candidates only Andrea Ledsom has suggested this, it's likely that LHR would start building immediately.
LGW would have to cope with the potential emptying of the "waiting room", with U2 starting an operation at LHR possibly at the cost of LGW expansion, and the possibility of BA and VS concentrating most (BA) or all (VS) of their operations at LHR.
DR,
It's not academic. Davies no more has the power to 'rule anything out' than you or I.
Govt can ignore him completely if they decide to.
It's not academic. Davies no more has the power to 'rule anything out' than you or I.
Govt can ignore him completely if they decide to.
Cameron should clear LHR R3 as a parting gift. Would be a good legacy.
I don't think it is obvious:
Both airports now operating at or near capacity?
Look at what happens operationally to either if anything (even relatively minor, like strong winds dictating greater separation) affects the arr/dep rate?
Both airports now operating at or near capacity?
Look at what happens operationally to either if anything (even relatively minor, like strong winds dictating greater separation) affects the arr/dep rate?
All of those comments are perfectly correct.
But think about it. An additional runway, at either airport, only makes business sense if a decent ROI can be achieved, in other words if you can utilise it adequately by attracting sufficient new traffic. That's a lot easier to do if the other guy is still capacity-constrained.
If both airports were foolish enough to go ahead simultaneously with a new runway, they would be slugging it out for many years to come in competition with each other and both would struggle to get an adequate return on investment.
Both Gatwick and Heathrow CEOs have said as much in the past. You could argue that that's just posturing, but they aren't stupid.
But think about it. An additional runway, at either airport, only makes business sense if a decent ROI can be achieved, in other words if you can utilise it adequately by attracting sufficient new traffic. That's a lot easier to do if the other guy is still capacity-constrained.
If both airports were foolish enough to go ahead simultaneously with a new runway, they would be slugging it out for many years to come in competition with each other and both would struggle to get an adequate return on investment.
Both Gatwick and Heathrow CEOs have said as much in the past. You could argue that that's just posturing, but they aren't stupid.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Southampton
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fairdealfrank
'They have some 40 carriers waiting for slots'
That was said before the likes of Avianca, Garuda Indonesian, Philippines Airlines and Vietnam Airlines gained slots at LHR!
I personally can't see how another 36 airlines are waiting for slots at LHR, maybe more like 10 at least.
'They have some 40 carriers waiting for slots'
That was said before the likes of Avianca, Garuda Indonesian, Philippines Airlines and Vietnam Airlines gained slots at LHR!
I personally can't see how another 36 airlines are waiting for slots at LHR, maybe more like 10 at least.
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Leeds
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fairdealfrank
'They have some 40 carriers waiting for slots'
That was said before the likes of Avianca, Garuda Indonesian, Philippines Airlines and Vietnam Airlines gained slots at LHR!
I personally can't see how another 36 airlines are waiting for slots at LHR, maybe more like 10 at least.
'They have some 40 carriers waiting for slots'
That was said before the likes of Avianca, Garuda Indonesian, Philippines Airlines and Vietnam Airlines gained slots at LHR!
I personally can't see how another 36 airlines are waiting for slots at LHR, maybe more like 10 at least.
....Easy for sure, and Flybe (they have both said they would come if Rwy 3 is built).
As for LGW, MAN built a second runway off the back of half the pax/movements that LGW currently handles. Being "the worlds busiest single runway Airport" cannot last forever. Not if they are serious about their position as the UK's no. 2.
As for LGW, MAN built a second runway off the back of half the pax/movements that LGW currently handles. Being "the worlds busiest single runway Airport" cannot last forever. Not if they are serious about their position as the UK's no. 2.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But if EZY, MON,FLYBE etc etc Move to Heathrow, Gatwick won't need a second runway. ...
Infact it won't even need one... surely all airlines would move over en mass.
It's USP as a charter/ overflow disappears in an instant!
Infact it won't even need one... surely all airlines would move over en mass.
It's USP as a charter/ overflow disappears in an instant!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heathrow remains a fairly pricey airport to use, LGW could complete on price but they've spent a small fortune on improvements themselves that need a decent ROI.
easyJet have already checked out T4 at LHR but they have their own issues to deal with with #brexit meaning G- aircraft based overseas won't be as er, easy as before.
easyJet have already checked out T4 at LHR but they have their own issues to deal with with #brexit meaning G- aircraft based overseas won't be as er, easy as before.
But if EZY, MON,FLYBE etc etc Move to Heathrow, Gatwick won't need a second runway. ...
Meanwhile, I expect Boris feels like being on an "island" far away right now.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
....Easy for sure, and Flybe (they have both said they would come if Rwy 3 is built).
BE requested permission for operations from NHT, which was refused, in the interim, or maybe permanently (hedging bets?).
BE could be ideally suited to provide feeder flights for the thin routes which need smaller aircraft than those owned by BA, U2, etc.. Could also see BD regional returning to LHR to undertake this function.
As for LGW, MAN built a second runway off the back of half the pax/movements that LGW currently handles. Being "the worlds busiest single runway Airport" cannot last forever. Not if they are serious about their position as the UK's no. 2.
Hardly an accolade is it?!
But if EZY, MON,FLYBE etc etc Move to Heathrow, Gatwick won't need a second runway. ...
Infact it won't even need one... surely all airlines would move over en mass.
It's USP as a charter/ overflow disappears in an instant!
Infact it won't even need one... surely all airlines would move over en mass.
It's USP as a charter/ overflow disappears in an instant!
Seriously, carriers that don't need to move accross, such as point-to-point leisure flights, charter ops, no frills, etc., would remain. Some carriers would do both airports. There could also be movement from LTN and/or STN, unless, of course, LGW wacks up its charges. LGW has form on this, hence BE's departure from there a couple of years ago, all that's left of BE is a PSO route (NQY).
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The point about BEE was more about introduction of new service.
Yes they would be well suited to domestic thin routes but if they kicked LGW in touch based on its charges 2 years ago there is not a cat in hells chance of them being at a level that would attract them to LHR in 10 years time.....!
The taxes alone are likely to be 4 times BEEs cheapest fair NOW ...!
Yes they would be well suited to domestic thin routes but if they kicked LGW in touch based on its charges 2 years ago there is not a cat in hells chance of them being at a level that would attract them to LHR in 10 years time.....!
The taxes alone are likely to be 4 times BEEs cheapest fair NOW ...!
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK (reluctantly)
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UK manufacturers support expansion at Heathrow
UK's EEF The Manufacturers Organisation responded (30-Jun-2016) to the government's deferral of a decision for capacity expansion in the South East. EEF research found:
78% of manufacturers with a business need for air freight access say that expansion of Heathrow would best support their company’s export ambitions;
53% of all manufacturers think that additional capacity at Heathrow would deliver the best economic benefits to the wider UK – compared to 13% saying the same of Gatwick;
Manufacturers also rate Heathrow more highly than Gatwick for its ability to attract airlines offering the best business connectivity to both traditional and emerging markets.
78% of manufacturers with a business need for air freight access say that expansion of Heathrow would best support their company’s export ambitions;
53% of all manufacturers think that additional capacity at Heathrow would deliver the best economic benefits to the wider UK – compared to 13% saying the same of Gatwick;
Manufacturers also rate Heathrow more highly than Gatwick for its ability to attract airlines offering the best business connectivity to both traditional and emerging markets.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: London
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The EEF are a laughing joke of a trade association - they have about three members and with the exception of Terry Scuoler (of Feranti origin) my cat knows more about manufacturing- The rest of the executive team are bankers and the usual multiple boardroom members from the merger take over and asset stripping 30% equity venture capitalists companies including Capita.
They know nought about actually making tangible things (other than personal wealth) and probably know where Mansion House is , however less so Erdington or Trafford Park
Their endorsement is the usual London centric focus and most certainly unrepresentative of any specific regional industry support they claim to represent.
They know nought about actually making tangible things (other than personal wealth) and probably know where Mansion House is , however less so Erdington or Trafford Park
Their endorsement is the usual London centric focus and most certainly unrepresentative of any specific regional industry support they claim to represent.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK (reluctantly)
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts