LUTON
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Wouldn't you like to know!
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A couple of months ago Luton - Newcastle appeared on FlyBe's destination map then vanished.
Debonair used to operate the route, I'm not too sure how great it performed though.
Debonair used to operate the route, I'm not too sure how great it performed though.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,870
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Debonair used to operate the route, I'm not too sure how great it performed though.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Hitchin
Posts: 1,405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Debonair did operate the LTN-NCL route, but only for about 2 months as loads were poor. True, Flybe were considering the route earlier this year but decided they could make more money elsewhere. Easy probably could make a go of it, like they did to LPL 3/4 years ago, but know there are more profitable routes to be had.
Wroclaw-Luton, by Wizz, is under consideration, and if all goes well, we could see the route start late April/early May.
Wroclaw-Luton, by Wizz, is under consideration, and if all goes well, we could see the route start late April/early May.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Hitchin
Posts: 1,405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr@Spotty M
I
Received an email this morning from MON stating that GIB ex LTN has not been dropped. It will be available for booking in three weeks.
This route has been daily in the summer and might come in at a reduced schedule for S06. If that happens, we might see the gap filled by a new destination/s which have been rumoured in the past. Can't see MON actually basing another aircraft at LTN but route expansion by 'W's is possible.
I
Received an email this morning from MON stating that GIB ex LTN has not been dropped. It will be available for booking in three weeks.
This route has been daily in the summer and might come in at a reduced schedule for S06. If that happens, we might see the gap filled by a new destination/s which have been rumoured in the past. Can't see MON actually basing another aircraft at LTN but route expansion by 'W's is possible.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: A Virtual World!
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Debonair to Newcastle ... & Cargo Matters
I seem to recall that the Debonair Luton - Newcastle timings were far from practical to allow either a day trip to London or Newcastle.
Further to my recent post on cargo during the runway closures, it looks as if MNG Cargo have decamped to Gatwick. Whether they will get night slots there during the summer is however another matter.
Further to my recent post on cargo during the runway closures, it looks as if MNG Cargo have decamped to Gatwick. Whether they will get night slots there during the summer is however another matter.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,870
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see that the first TV series on Luton Airport, which was shown on ITV London and Sky Travel via freeview and satellite, was so popular that a second series is now being filmed.
No doubt fascinating highlights will include the resurfacing of the runway and delays to passengers due to fog when the airport goes CAT 1 for 6 months. Other enthralling highlights could include the painting of hangar 89 in a nice shade of orange and the changing of the road layout in the central area.
Who needs Coronation Street when we have this captivating series?
No doubt fascinating highlights will include the resurfacing of the runway and delays to passengers due to fog when the airport goes CAT 1 for 6 months. Other enthralling highlights could include the painting of hangar 89 in a nice shade of orange and the changing of the road layout in the central area.
Who needs Coronation Street when we have this captivating series?
Last edited by LTNman; 17th Nov 2005 at 17:27.
aceatco, retired
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: one airshow or another
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
No doubt fascinating highlights will include the resurfacing of the runway and delays to passengers due to fog when the airport goes CAT 1 for 6 months.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK Home Counties
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...and delays to passengers due to fog when the airport goes CAT 1 for 6 months.
Whilst it is undoubtedly a situation that LLAO would wish to avoid, there is no alternative.
Stansted was Cat 1 during runway resurfacing, as was Birmingham and of course, Gatwick doesn't even manage Cat 1 on 26R/08L (the 'Northern' runway) albeit, none have been Cat 1 for four or more months.
Then there's Southampton (uncategorised and only x 1 ILS), City (uncategorised), Aberdeen (Cat 1) etc., etc.
If LTNman, you have any constructive suggestions as to how a runway that's 10 years overdue for resurfacing, can retain Cat 3 throughout a period of such major works, no doubt LLAO would pay well for the benefit of your expert opinion...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,870
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wasn’t criticising the airport for going CAT1, as you say the work needs to be carried out, I was just stating a fact.
Can someone answer a question? As I understand it, the problem is that the CAT 3 lighting that is set into the tarmac will be switched off for the duration, as it will be changed out. I assume that the work will start at one end of the runway and progress slowly down the runway. Initially during the first few weeks and for the last few weeks when the work is at the end of the runway could not the lighting be isolated allowing the majority of the centre line lighting to remain working so allowing CAT 3 approaches from the opposite end. Can CAT 3 approaches be made on a reduced runway length?
I appreciate the lighting changes colour towards the end of the runway so maybe I have answered my own question as to why the answer is no
Can someone answer a question? As I understand it, the problem is that the CAT 3 lighting that is set into the tarmac will be switched off for the duration, as it will be changed out. I assume that the work will start at one end of the runway and progress slowly down the runway. Initially during the first few weeks and for the last few weeks when the work is at the end of the runway could not the lighting be isolated allowing the majority of the centre line lighting to remain working so allowing CAT 3 approaches from the opposite end. Can CAT 3 approaches be made on a reduced runway length?
I appreciate the lighting changes colour towards the end of the runway so maybe I have answered my own question as to why the answer is no
Last edited by LTNman; 18th Nov 2005 at 07:10.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Hitchin
Posts: 1,405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MON have now got GIB back on sale for S06, with a daily service. This seems to give MON Sch 39 weekly departures from LTN from May with hopefully more to come in the next few weeks.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,039
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not very good with numbers, so are 39 weekly departures (so far), more, less or the same as Summer 05 powerjet1?
I nearly choked on my fish and honey tonight. BBC Look East, had a lady complaining about loud night movements and she moved into Breachwood Green 25 years ago. She has now decided to complain.
I guess that the wonders of modern medicine have amazingly brought back her hearing, for the numbers of actual passenger/cargo flight for summer 05, must have been quite low compared to 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990.........etc?
Then my fur bristled, they had an interview with a Lilly MP, who wanted night noise comparity with the London BAA airports, so does his comparity extend to cross London airport subsidies?
How did this story make the lead report on prime time BBC local networked news? Heathrow has a night jet ban, but the times of this argument included the traffic generated for re-opening period from 05:00 until 06:00! If the organisers of this media blitz had cared to think, removing the 05:00 arrivals from the figures, so terminating the night time period at 05:00, would have made Luton look really LOUD from 23:00 to 05:00 compared to Heathrow.
Old woman got awoken by a plane at night then cannot sleep. "I have lived here for 25 years" she said!
Are Ryanair doing crew training on a ghost B737-200?
What is this 'old gal' going to make of the night closure!
LADACAN have probably popped off to the pub to celebrate a huge victory. Unfortunately their amazing trick to get onto TV worked, however the substance of their argument was farcical!
Never mind, they have an old and fading MP to back them.
I still cannot believe that this non news story made the lead on the BBC! Shame on you for not doing your home work Look East!
I nearly choked on my fish and honey tonight. BBC Look East, had a lady complaining about loud night movements and she moved into Breachwood Green 25 years ago. She has now decided to complain.
I guess that the wonders of modern medicine have amazingly brought back her hearing, for the numbers of actual passenger/cargo flight for summer 05, must have been quite low compared to 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990.........etc?
Then my fur bristled, they had an interview with a Lilly MP, who wanted night noise comparity with the London BAA airports, so does his comparity extend to cross London airport subsidies?
How did this story make the lead report on prime time BBC local networked news? Heathrow has a night jet ban, but the times of this argument included the traffic generated for re-opening period from 05:00 until 06:00! If the organisers of this media blitz had cared to think, removing the 05:00 arrivals from the figures, so terminating the night time period at 05:00, would have made Luton look really LOUD from 23:00 to 05:00 compared to Heathrow.
Old woman got awoken by a plane at night then cannot sleep. "I have lived here for 25 years" she said!
Are Ryanair doing crew training on a ghost B737-200?
What is this 'old gal' going to make of the night closure!
LADACAN have probably popped off to the pub to celebrate a huge victory. Unfortunately their amazing trick to get onto TV worked, however the substance of their argument was farcical!
Never mind, they have an old and fading MP to back them.
I still cannot believe that this non news story made the lead on the BBC! Shame on you for not doing your home work Look East!
Last edited by Buster the Bear; 18th Nov 2005 at 21:31.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Hitchin
Posts: 1,405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Buster
S05 saw 34 weekly departures by MON Sch, so an increase of about 15% for S06, although this is expected to rise in the next few weeks when two more new destinations are expected to be announced. No idea of freq, though def not daily.
S05 saw 34 weekly departures by MON Sch, so an increase of about 15% for S06, although this is expected to rise in the next few weeks when two more new destinations are expected to be announced. No idea of freq, though def not daily.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Hitchin
Posts: 1,405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Me too. Started this month and continuing into the summer. Despite the extra three weekly AGP flights being put on hold, MON still have 37 deps this winter, about 25% up on last year.
AGP will see nearly 50 weekly sch flights out of LTN next summer spread around the various airlines. Hope they get enough pax to fill them.
AGP will see nearly 50 weekly sch flights out of LTN next summer spread around the various airlines. Hope they get enough pax to fill them.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK Home Counties
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...they had an interview with a Lilly MP, who wanted night noise comparity with the London BAA airports
As to residents that have been living locally for a quarter-of-a-century, they obviously are suffering from advancing age because presumably, they cannot remember the semi-continuous night-time movements at Luton in the early 1980s involving non-hushkitted aircraft such as the BAC1-11 and B737-200. Now THAT'S NOISY!!!
Why therefore, would at that time, any sane person choose to move to Breachwood Green...???
As for LADACAN - it would be nice to say "the facts speak for themselves" but regrettably, most of LADACAN's 'facts' are inaccurate and subjective rumour and tittle-tattle expressed by self-appointed 'experts'.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: North of 50N
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like part of LLAO's interim development plan will be to provide taxiways all the way to the (existing) runway ends.
If correct (and if planning permission is granted) this will have three operational benefits:
1. Departing crew will be able to apply a lower factoring percentage in respect of the published take-off runs because the aircraft will actually line-up at the start of each run (the best scenario is a line-up into the beginning of the take-off run [e.g. MAN Runway 24L via Taxiway Sierra & LGW Runway 08R via Taxiway Juliet] because there's no factoring required). This should slightly improve payload/range potential.
2. ATC at Luton will in theory, be able to depart aircraft at one-minute intervals, subject to vortex-wake and departure (route) separations (this is currently, only permitted from Runway 08 but the opportunities are relatively few). This should mean aircraft holding at the holding points for less time which is more efficient.
3. Luton Radar at West Drayton will be able to position landing aircraft at 3 miles apart (subejct to vortex wake separation), because the aircraft will all be able to clear the runway by rolling to either end after landing, instead of having to backtrack if they miss the existing taxiway turn-offs.
The overall effect should be to increase slightly, the declared hourly movement rate from the current 32 an hour but more importantly, it will enable LTN to run continuously at 32 movements an hour without any major difficulties.
Tentative date for completion (subject to planning permission) is Autumn, 2007.
If correct (and if planning permission is granted) this will have three operational benefits:
1. Departing crew will be able to apply a lower factoring percentage in respect of the published take-off runs because the aircraft will actually line-up at the start of each run (the best scenario is a line-up into the beginning of the take-off run [e.g. MAN Runway 24L via Taxiway Sierra & LGW Runway 08R via Taxiway Juliet] because there's no factoring required). This should slightly improve payload/range potential.
2. ATC at Luton will in theory, be able to depart aircraft at one-minute intervals, subject to vortex-wake and departure (route) separations (this is currently, only permitted from Runway 08 but the opportunities are relatively few). This should mean aircraft holding at the holding points for less time which is more efficient.
3. Luton Radar at West Drayton will be able to position landing aircraft at 3 miles apart (subejct to vortex wake separation), because the aircraft will all be able to clear the runway by rolling to either end after landing, instead of having to backtrack if they miss the existing taxiway turn-offs.
The overall effect should be to increase slightly, the declared hourly movement rate from the current 32 an hour but more importantly, it will enable LTN to run continuously at 32 movements an hour without any major difficulties.
Tentative date for completion (subject to planning permission) is Autumn, 2007.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: A Virtual World!
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How do Luton expect to win new business if they behave like this?
Now before anyone shouts at me, I know that when work in progress is scheduled resulting in runway closures, the start of the closure period needs to be applied fairly rigourously otherwise completion of the work will not be achieved on schedule.
Nevertheless I found it difficult to comprehend the thinking behind a conversation I heard last night between a Ryanair aircraft and Luton Air Traffic. I must add at this juncture that Air Traffic made it quite clear that they were acting at the behest of "the airport authority" and that it was not them trying to be unreasonable.
So .. picture the scene. It's 23.55 and a Ryanair 737 is about 30 miles from touchdown and working approach. Luton is in LVP's with a touchdown RVR of 225m. Approach tell the aircraft that if it is not on the ground by 24.00 it will be given instructions to go around. The aircraft is also told that as Luton is in LVP's it must have a minimum of a 10 mile final - fair enough.
The aircraft says that in view of the extended finals it may not land until 00.01 to which it is told once more that it will be told to go around if it can't make 24.00 .. even if it is on short finals.
In the end, there was not a problem as the contractors appeared not to be ready to take possession on the stroke of 00.01 and the aircraft was therefore allowed to land.
Now given that the 24.00 closure is down to the airport's work programme and not due to noise restrictions, is allowing an aircraft 1 or 2 minutes leeway going to cause the work programme to slip that much ... I think not.
Is this attitude with absolutely no flexibility also going to endear Luton to airlines that the airport wish to attract .. particularly Ryanair where the airport wants to see more aircraft based.
Finally, and most importantly, is it appropriate for such situations to be allowed to occur when weather conditions are on minimums thus placing additional stress on crews? to me it seems totally unreasonable.
Nevertheless I found it difficult to comprehend the thinking behind a conversation I heard last night between a Ryanair aircraft and Luton Air Traffic. I must add at this juncture that Air Traffic made it quite clear that they were acting at the behest of "the airport authority" and that it was not them trying to be unreasonable.
So .. picture the scene. It's 23.55 and a Ryanair 737 is about 30 miles from touchdown and working approach. Luton is in LVP's with a touchdown RVR of 225m. Approach tell the aircraft that if it is not on the ground by 24.00 it will be given instructions to go around. The aircraft is also told that as Luton is in LVP's it must have a minimum of a 10 mile final - fair enough.
The aircraft says that in view of the extended finals it may not land until 00.01 to which it is told once more that it will be told to go around if it can't make 24.00 .. even if it is on short finals.
In the end, there was not a problem as the contractors appeared not to be ready to take possession on the stroke of 00.01 and the aircraft was therefore allowed to land.
Now given that the 24.00 closure is down to the airport's work programme and not due to noise restrictions, is allowing an aircraft 1 or 2 minutes leeway going to cause the work programme to slip that much ... I think not.
Is this attitude with absolutely no flexibility also going to endear Luton to airlines that the airport wish to attract .. particularly Ryanair where the airport wants to see more aircraft based.
Finally, and most importantly, is it appropriate for such situations to be allowed to occur when weather conditions are on minimums thus placing additional stress on crews? to me it seems totally unreasonable.