Originally Posted by
North West
But if MAN isn't a substitute market, then why are you worried about LHR expanding. You clearly see it as a threat even though you appear to agree that the markets are separate.
MAN isn't a 'waiting room' for LHR.
The proposal ia a threat because:
1. It is obvious that an expanded Heathrow will be pushed as "the" gateway for the UK at the expense of ALL regional airports. The idea of
expanded connections from regional airports to feed LHR services, regardless of the fact that both business and leisure travellers would prefer
non stop flights from a more local departure point, gives the game away.
2. The plan is predicated on a massive expenditure which, given a legion of previous examples, will be an underestimate of the final cost.
3. Whilst HAL maybe a private company it cannot be seen to fail, thus if more money is needed, government will step in.
4. There is a subliminal bias in the Home Counties based decision influencers and decision makers to ensure the success of the project whatever
form it takes. History shows this means some form of "protection" for the project. This would impact on the regions' airports and economy. If
the UK leaves the EU the protections against unfair competition and even deregulation could be severely cut back or removed.
Transfers at Heathrow are currently a nightmare. I live in Ireland and regularly travel to Houston. I can get to IAH from Shannon only by changing somewhere en route and the timings and costs are not as good for my purposes changing in BOS, JFK or ORD as travelling over LHR. Ireland and the UK have basically a common border for their citizens. A transfer from the new T2 to T5 involves travelling up and down escalators or lifts, a bus journey, more escalators or lifts then a diluted form of immigration control even though I'm in transit, followed by the the "fun" of security joining long lines even though from passing through security at Shannon, I have been airside continually.
Unlike Ireland, the population of the UK is large enough and the concentrations of population are centred in such a way as, in normal economic times, the country can support a number of gateway airports of varying sizes. If Emirates, United, Turkish etc. can serve multiple UK airports, so can others. If the pressure on London is so great, spread the load both ways by both encouraging new routes from the regions which would reduce the load on LHR's runways and revisit the mixed mode use of the Heathrow runways. The old chestnut of not enough distance between them is a fallacy, proved both by the number of airports around the world operating mixed mode with a shorter distance between their runways and the use of the runways in mixed mode at LHR when necessary. Fewer flights into Heathrow would make mixed mode much easier.
The often stated argument that airlines only want to serve LHR in the UK is specious. Since deregulation and the reworking of various bilateral agreements, the number of foreign airlines serving UK regional airports has grown rapidly, as has the number of flights per day/week by those
airlines. It isn't that long ago that MAN for instance, had one Air France, one Lufthansa, one Sabena and on Emirates flight a day. This was the legacy of restrictive bilateral agreements and the protection of BA and its predecessors. Look at the expansion once the shackles were taken off.
No one is saying London should cease to be the premier UK gateway. London is a world city that will always attract the greater volume of traffic. The problem with the HAL proposal is that, to make a worthwhile return for the shareholders and for UK PLC not to be seen to fail, the marketing and, in a case worse scenario, the viability of the project will have to be underwritten in a way it cannot fail. Thus there will be no level playing field for the regions and, as has been the case in he past, the marketing of London will come first and will get the preponderance of the budget, in the worst case there will be some form of regulation to "encourage" use of LHR. History has a horrible habit of repeating itself.