LUTON
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Wouldn't you like to know!
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still no further news from Easy on their proposed 3 new aircraft to be based at Luton. Seems to me they were just attempting to urinate on Ryanair's fire when they announced routes from Luton last autumn.
The days are also ticking for their so-called massive June announcment....
The days are also ticking for their so-called massive June announcment....
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still no further news from Easy on their proposed 3 new aircraft to be based at Luton.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Wouldn't you like to know!
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LTNman,
do you know if there are their any plans to build gates across from the eastern apron on the other side of taxiway delta? Surely this space would be ideal and would only result in a small bus journey for the passengers and may encourage other airlines to start services and see Easy place those more aircraft here?
This must be feasible now considering the cash rich owners of ther airport.
do you know if there are their any plans to build gates across from the eastern apron on the other side of taxiway delta? Surely this space would be ideal and would only result in a small bus journey for the passengers and may encourage other airlines to start services and see Easy place those more aircraft here?
This must be feasible now considering the cash rich owners of ther airport.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was rumoured that some of the new routes recently announced by Ryanair from Stansted were to be operated from Luton, but as Ryanair and the BAA have patched up thier fuel cost issue, the planes will now operate from Stansted?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
do you know if there are their any plans to build gates across from the eastern apron on the other side of taxiway delta
Last edited by LTNman; 23rd Jun 2005 at 18:15.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When Britannia...WHOOPS....ThomsonFlyTUIFlights vacate their airport offices for Wigmore, could extra stands be created on the office area on stilts?
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Hitchin
Posts: 1,405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe one or two things are happening with ryan at LTN this winter so rumour has it. Interesting that SNN flights seem to be operated with a LTN based aircraft. Flights daily ex LTN at 15.10, arriving back into LTN at 18.15.
Also noticed in the timetable section that when you look for flights for Stockholm, apart from Vasteras(VST), it states ' We also fly to Stockholm(Skavsta) from London Luton' . Are we to see flights to both airports from LTN ? or is this just an error.
Also noticed in the timetable section that when you look for flights for Stockholm, apart from Vasteras(VST), it states ' We also fly to Stockholm(Skavsta) from London Luton' . Are we to see flights to both airports from LTN ? or is this just an error.
Last edited by Powerjet1; 24th Jun 2005 at 06:34.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Wouldn't you like to know!
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When Britannia leave, bung easyJet in there, bulldoze easyland, concrete it all, whack all the private jets there that are hanging around the main apron and free up some stands there!
Only thing is, dont think Signature will be too happy.
LTNman, where are the remains of the wooden terminal which Britannia uses?
Only thing is, dont think Signature will be too happy.
LTNman, where are the remains of the wooden terminal which Britannia uses?
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: North of 50N
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst Ryanair may well have decided to start their new routes to Grenoble, Kaunas, Lodz and Poznan from STN instead of LTN, there are according to the runway slot coordinator ACL, virtually no peak-time runway slots left available at STN (stand availability at peak times is also extremely tight).
Therefore, one wonders if Ryanair will be exchanging some STN routes for these new ones and perhaps operating two or three such transferred routes from LTN?
The other option would be to operate them from STN but to utilise off-peak runway slots.
Much as MoL might desire it, you can't get a quart into a pint pot and STN's runway slot availability is just not there at peak times.
Of course, Luton's problem isn't runway slots but stand availability (and as the air traffic guys will tell you, user-friendly airspace).
Therefore, one wonders if Ryanair will be exchanging some STN routes for these new ones and perhaps operating two or three such transferred routes from LTN?
The other option would be to operate them from STN but to utilise off-peak runway slots.
Much as MoL might desire it, you can't get a quart into a pint pot and STN's runway slot availability is just not there at peak times.
Of course, Luton's problem isn't runway slots but stand availability (and as the air traffic guys will tell you, user-friendly airspace).
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LTNman, where are the remains of the wooden terminal which Britannia uses
Last edited by LTNman; 24th Jun 2005 at 18:44.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Hitchin
Posts: 1,405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re my earlier post this morning about possibe flights to Stockholm skavsta(NYO) from LTN as well as VST, it would appear that flights ex STN to NYO drop from 3 to 1 x daily wef 16/12. Coincidence ?
aceatco, retired
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: one airshow or another
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Is this Vintage ATCO and his Aldis lamp?
I've looked closely and I don't feature in any of those photos. However I was present when the prototype BAC1-11 arrived at Luton (bunked off school )
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London FIR
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be nice to think that Luton gets new services due to its own merits and not just because airlines can’t get into a London BAA airport.
The new facilities at Luton are indeed impressive, given the limitations of the existing site, but the likelihood of the present expanded terminal expanding further is slim. If LTN is enabled to move towards its aspirations (which broadly speaking, accord with the Government's White Paper) then in 12 to 15 years time, the existing facilities i.e. aprons and terminal, will be to Luton as was 'London Airport North' to Heathrow in the 1970s and 1980s.
Meantime, as an interim further improvement, what would make Luton considerably more customer-friendly would be a wider approach road with a smaller roundabout in the Central Terminal Area, linked to full dual carriageways from M1 Junction 10A and from the A505 at Stopsley to the northeast of the Airport.
Whilst improvements to the the roundabout fall firmly within LLAO's remit, the rest is down to a combination of Luton Borough Council, Bedfordshire County Council and the DfT - which going on past performance, means that oil will have run out and hydrogen-cell power taken over, before anyone does anything...
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the LTN owners blew it when they built the new terminal in the wrong place. The airport has grown so hap-hazzardly over the years that th only way to make it efficient was to start afresh. They should have built the new terminal to the south of the r/w, with a full length taxiway and parking stands on 3 sides, while leaving the old terminal operational until the new one was ready. Isntead, we have a layout that causes plenty of congestion on the ramp and indoors, with difficulty getting pax to a/c. Much of the work is easing the problems, but how long before the traffic growth overtakes real capacity again.
Operationally, I think the greatest issue is having to back-track from "A" or "B". A full length t/way would allow twice the number of r/w movements, as well as increase safety.
Operationally, I think the greatest issue is having to back-track from "A" or "B". A full length t/way would allow twice the number of r/w movements, as well as increase safety.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London FIR
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A full length t/way would allow twice the number of r/w movements, as well as increase safety.
The current runway hourly movement rate is declared by the Airport operator LLAO at 32; air traffic control at Luton achieves and on occasions, exceeds this figure and does so with air transport and corporate aircraft movements, not light aircraft undertaking 'circuits and bumps'.
Not even Gatwick could achieve "twice the number of runway movements" from a single runway i.e. 64 per hour. The construction of full-length parallel taxiways would facilitate at best, about 46 to 48 movements per hour but the local airspace and London air traffic control infrastructure currently, just couldn't handle that sustained level of runway movements at Luton.
As for increasing safety, your comment implies that there is an element of unsafe practice at Luton owing to the need to backtrack 300 or-so metres on each runway.
This is complete and utter rubbish.
The air traffic control procedures in place at Luton are 100% safe and take account of the need to backtrack most departing aircraft ahead of arrivals. Whilst it might look tight on occasions when busy, it's no tighter than at Gatwick or at Stansted; the guys in the Tower know exactly what they're doing and are trained to finely judge things. If a departure proves to be too slow backtracking and it obviously isn't going to work out as planned, then just as at any busy airport, the landing aircraft flies a missed approach - which is a perfectly standard procedure.
As far as your idea of building on the south side of the runway, whilst in theory it's absolutely correct, the airport (currently....) doesn't own that land and even if it did, there's the issue of planning permission and the inevitable Public Enquiry which as we all know, can take years to be resolved.
I don't know if you operate out of LTN (hopefully, as you've made comment, you do).
If so, why not arrange a visit to air traffic and see for yourself how safely and efficiently things are run? E-mail me.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Wouldn't you like to know!
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Constucting the terminal to the south of the runway would have proved impossible. This is due to the fact the airport is almost right next door to the Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire border and this idea would have meant the terminal being built in Hertfordshire. This is something I can assure you Herts council would have fought desperately. Not only that, the land is anything but flat. It would have made no economical sense to flatten the land out, not to mention re-alligning the roads and demolishing people's homes.
The selected location of the terminal meant it wouldn't have proved as expensive in the flattening of the land and the excavted material was put to good use building the exisiting semi full length taxiway.
Also, what do you mean to make the airport efficient? Please define efficient? Surely an airport which has seen its passenger useage rise from around 1.9 million in 1994, to just under 9 million nowadays per annum, and the fact it posts considerable profits proves it's efficient? If something isn't efficient you suggest it doesn't work...
The selected location of the terminal meant it wouldn't have proved as expensive in the flattening of the land and the excavted material was put to good use building the exisiting semi full length taxiway.
Also, what do you mean to make the airport efficient? Please define efficient? Surely an airport which has seen its passenger useage rise from around 1.9 million in 1994, to just under 9 million nowadays per annum, and the fact it posts considerable profits proves it's efficient? If something isn't efficient you suggest it doesn't work...
Last edited by nickmanl; 25th Jun 2005 at 17:11.