But we already know the range of projected estimates and can make preliminary judgments accordingly.
Really? Then why do we have 3 different figures put forward for the access works.
Fares from regionals are often higher than corresponding offers from London but must be set against the cost of travel to London and incidental costs such as an overnight hotel stay.
At the moment yes, that's my point. If the train to London, tube transfer and hotel room was replaced by a 45 minute cheap shuttle flight though?
National express?? Are you serious?
Totally serious. Do you have a genuine problem with National Express or are you exhibiting snobbery?
It's not snobbery. The last thing people want is to have to get on a coach after a long flight and sit on the motorway. You have already mentioned that people pay a premium to fly from Manchester. Add that to a coach/train ticket or expensive taxi fare and it is not even cheaper than the LHR option. Certainly a lot more hassle though.
So your complaint is that people who live close to an international airport are better placed for air travel than those who live more distantly from the airport? Is that not equally true everywhere?
It is, which is why connecting regionals that could never hope to have LH flights with LHR is such a good thing.
NCL and MAN both offer regular long-hauls. DSA offers occasional long-haul charters to MCO etc. LPL has offered JFK and YYZ flights in the past but the market didn't sustain these. LBA has runway length limitations. MME and HUY are small niche operations. What other alternatives do you envisage?
And long may all these continue, LBA also does a NY flight in December.
I am not expecting the NY, MCO etc. flights to disappear from regional airports. If any airport can give the pax numbers then an airline is likely to fly the route. Thats supply and demand. The fact remains however that even Manchester doesn't have the demand for a large number of international locations that an expanded LHR connected to multiple regionals would.
This is more about routes that currently require a change elsewhere and bringing the connection in to the UK. It's about routes that will only work when they are servicing the whole of the UK market. These routes then bring in connecting traffic from elsewhere outside the UK. The numbers of people flying to Amsterdam to connect show the market is there.
It is also not just about domestic connections even though I have been concentrating on that. There is a lot of money spent whilst waiting for a connecting flight. That's income direct into the UK which otherwise would not be there.
So once again you are talking about a future development that will not be operational until after 2030 from first hand experience
No, I was talking about LHR transfer arrangements in place at the present time from first-hand experience. Neither of us could know what to expect in 2030.
Well we could if they can get on and spend some money designing it. Talking about the setup in place at the moment though is pointless.
Well that option wasn't offered to me using the Shuttle from MAN. Were you on a special ticket? Anyway, what about the people who do have to join the queue? Do we just ignore their implied transit times? They're passengers too. All part of the equation.
EDIT: I've just realised that you're referring to flight boarding arrangements at Leeds-Bradford Airport. All my comments relate to the arrivals experience for domestic to international flights at LHR itself.
As above. It is pointless debating about the current arrangement to argue against a proposed development that's aim is to improve things.
As for the funding argument and HS2/3, Northern powerhouse etc. I am all for it. I hope to be working on it. If any project can give a return on investment to UK PLC then lets do it. You could build LHR, HS2, HS3, the Sheffield to Manchester tunnel and a new runway at LGW for less than the amount given to bail out the banks. All of these would pay for themselves and more in the long run IMO.