HEATHROW
This has to be a wind up surely?
That shouldn't come as any surprise, given that EMA's owners also operate a rather larger airport just outside the M25.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skipness
What is the connection between economic growth and airport capacity?
A very large portion of passengers at LHR are in transit - the only contribution they make is at WH Smith's
What you actually mean is that BA want to have a single hub at LHR and it is in THEIR economic interest to expand LHR
What is the connection between economic growth and airport capacity?
A very large portion of passengers at LHR are in transit - the only contribution they make is at WH Smith's
What you actually mean is that BA want to have a single hub at LHR and it is in THEIR economic interest to expand LHR
A very large portion of passengers at LHR are in transit - the only contribution they make is at WH Smith's
If all arriving passengers were frog-marched to the Tube or coach station to ensure that they couldn't board another departing flight, that would solve the capacity problem at a stroke, because many routes would no longer be viable.
Now why hasn't the Airports Commission thought of that?
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Harry, as the economy grows, and we try to pay our debts off, we encourage more trade, which drives more travel. In a competition for new business in terms of emerging markets, we lose out against our competitors if they can't fly direct.
I know you enjoy knocking BA, but doing so just helps Air France, KLM and Lufthansa even more. I would prefer to have inward investment come to the UK bringing jobs and capital with it. If you don't think the rest of our competitors are fighting dirty and laying out the red carpet for their money, you're being naive.
None of the players capable of delivering this are interested in using Gatwick save Air China who maintain a summer shuttle for students. Korean were the latest to give it a go and that didn't last.
As for transit passengers contributing "nothing", that beggars belief.
How many routes are not viable without feed?
How many routes would see frequency collapse without feed?
How much more would we pay with capacity costraints that come with the points above?
How many pilots would BA need to pay off?
Suppliers? White van drivers? WHSmith workers even?
From AB1s to DEs, it would affect a lot of jobs. I imagine you consider we have too many jobs and can afford to relax??!
May I suggest you re-consider?
I know you enjoy knocking BA, but doing so just helps Air France, KLM and Lufthansa even more. I would prefer to have inward investment come to the UK bringing jobs and capital with it. If you don't think the rest of our competitors are fighting dirty and laying out the red carpet for their money, you're being naive.
None of the players capable of delivering this are interested in using Gatwick save Air China who maintain a summer shuttle for students. Korean were the latest to give it a go and that didn't last.
As for transit passengers contributing "nothing", that beggars belief.
How many routes are not viable without feed?
How many routes would see frequency collapse without feed?
How much more would we pay with capacity costraints that come with the points above?
How many pilots would BA need to pay off?
Suppliers? White van drivers? WHSmith workers even?
From AB1s to DEs, it would affect a lot of jobs. I imagine you consider we have too many jobs and can afford to relax??!
May I suggest you re-consider?
Mr or Ms Onyx
I am sorry someone was rude enough to abuse you for making a reasonable suggestion-I do not understand why people get so emotive on here on what is meant to be a friendly discussion on a project
With high Speed rail the problem is not so much time as cost, this also applies to the rail link from the LHR catchment area west of the airport to Boris Island.
At present the LHR express is Ł21 one way to go about 12 miles. If you were to have a hub built around East Midlands a central for the country you would need two southern termini-one in London and one in Reading- joining up somewhere en route to the airport line -maybe somewhere like Northampton. The route to the south then needs two new lines as existing tracks have neither cap city nor capability- probably as much real estate involved as expansion of LHR and probably a similar number of people affected.
Now comes the real killer , the journey length is 116 miles which to all intents and purposes is ten times the Heathrow Express length.-that makes the SINGLE FARE , certainly by the time its built, Ł200. And that kills it in one
I am sorry someone was rude enough to abuse you for making a reasonable suggestion-I do not understand why people get so emotive on here on what is meant to be a friendly discussion on a project
With high Speed rail the problem is not so much time as cost, this also applies to the rail link from the LHR catchment area west of the airport to Boris Island.
At present the LHR express is Ł21 one way to go about 12 miles. If you were to have a hub built around East Midlands a central for the country you would need two southern termini-one in London and one in Reading- joining up somewhere en route to the airport line -maybe somewhere like Northampton. The route to the south then needs two new lines as existing tracks have neither cap city nor capability- probably as much real estate involved as expansion of LHR and probably a similar number of people affected.
Now comes the real killer , the journey length is 116 miles which to all intents and purposes is ten times the Heathrow Express length.-that makes the SINGLE FARE , certainly by the time its built, Ł200. And that kills it in one
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"In a competition for new business in terms of emerging markets, we lose out against our competitors if they can't fly direct."
I'm afraid there is absolutely no evidence to show it
There have been more direct flights from LHR to the rest of the world than from Frankfurt for years and yet the Germans have persistently out sold UK industry world wide
I'm afraid there is absolutely no evidence to show it
There have been more direct flights from LHR to the rest of the world than from Frankfurt for years and yet the Germans have persistently out sold UK industry world wide
There have been more direct flights from LHR to the rest of the world than from Frankfurt for years and yet the Germans have persistently out sold UK industry world wide
The Germans might simply be better salesman, with better products.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm afraid there is absolutely no evidence to show it
There have been more direct flights from LHR to the rest of the world than from Frankfurt for years and yet the Germans have persistently out sold UK industry world wide
There have been more direct flights from LHR to the rest of the world than from Frankfurt for years and yet the Germans have persistently out sold UK industry world wide
CDG has more destinations than LHR.
AMS has more destinations than LHR.
That's only going to get worse if as you wish, we sit on our bums and allow LHR to stagnate further. That's no way to run a business.
Your idea that the way to beat the Germans is to allow the number of hub destinations to wither further has no logic.
Skipness - while I agree with your argument, how many of those destinations at AMS, CDG and FRA have a non trivial proportion of connecting passengers ? If the flights on a route are largely carrying north Europeans to a Greek island (for example) I suspect the destination adds little to the airport's overall network connectivity
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look at the Air France, KLM and Lufthansa presence going to the Far East and compare to BA with BKK, SIN, HKG, PVG, PEK, ICN, Chengdu and SYD. Under ten, not great. (bet I missed a couple!)
Our hub airport faces overwhelmingly to the US which is essential for BA to make money but constrains growth into important markets at the same time. We are being marginalised, albeit slowly, but it appears unmistakeable I think.
Our hub airport faces overwhelmingly to the US which is essential for BA to make money but constrains growth into important markets at the same time. We are being marginalised, albeit slowly, but it appears unmistakeable I think.
And look at the huge losses AF/KL and LH are currently making compared to BA.
I believe BA currently also operates to NRT and HND. But more to the point BA previously operated to many more Far East points than they do now - TPE, JKT, KUL, BNE, MEL, ADL, PER, AKL, CHC, CMB and probably others I've forgotten. All those destinations ceased because BA couldn't compete with other carriers on the routes and as a result each was making huge losses. Are those destinations suddenly going to become viable again and be added to BA's route map just because of a third runway ?? I don't think so. How many other viable new destinations from LHR are really out there ??
I don't doubt the need for a third runway, however the days of BA flying to everywhere on the planet with a long enough runway are long gone. More likely the extra slots would be used to add yet more flights to current gateways, especially those where their Oneworld mates are dominant.
I believe BA currently also operates to NRT and HND. But more to the point BA previously operated to many more Far East points than they do now - TPE, JKT, KUL, BNE, MEL, ADL, PER, AKL, CHC, CMB and probably others I've forgotten. All those destinations ceased because BA couldn't compete with other carriers on the routes and as a result each was making huge losses. Are those destinations suddenly going to become viable again and be added to BA's route map just because of a third runway ?? I don't think so. How many other viable new destinations from LHR are really out there ??
I don't doubt the need for a third runway, however the days of BA flying to everywhere on the planet with a long enough runway are long gone. More likely the extra slots would be used to add yet more flights to current gateways, especially those where their Oneworld mates are dominant.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe BA currently also operates to NRT and HND.
All those destinations ceased because BA couldn't compete with other carriers on the routes and as a result each was making huge losses. Are those destinations suddenly going to become viable again and be added to BA's route map just because of a third runway ?? I don't think so. How many other viable new destinations from LHR are really out there ??
Of course a third runway is not a panacea however the idea that we shouldn't bother to try?? Come off it, ever wondered why Toulouse and Hamburg still build commercial airliners whereas Filton is very much closed? How much more is the British disease of apathay, dither and nonsense going to surrender?
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 20th May 2014 at 12:35.
Well said Skipness 1E-are your a STAR or SID btw?
Your last sentence sums up my whole point that in UK we just faff about on infrastructure projects and a 'real' economy until whoops the opportunity has gone .
Your last sentence sums up my whole point that in UK we just faff about on infrastructure projects and a 'real' economy until whoops the opportunity has gone .
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"why Toulouse and Hamburg still build commercial airliners whereas Filton is very much closed?"
maybe because the returns on investment aren't wonderful and it's a prestige project?
EADS 1.2 Bn profit on a turnover of 53 Bn = 2.2% and AIrbus aims for a cash neutral 2014 & 2015 ..... not a wonderful investment TBH
maybe because the returns on investment aren't wonderful and it's a prestige project?
EADS 1.2 Bn profit on a turnover of 53 Bn = 2.2% and AIrbus aims for a cash neutral 2014 & 2015 ..... not a wonderful investment TBH
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
maybe because the returns on investment aren't wonderful and it's a prestige project?
EADS 1.2 Bn profit on a turnover of 53 Bn = 2.2% and AIrbus aims for a cash neutral 2014 & 2015 ..... not a wonderful investment TBH
EADS 1.2 Bn profit on a turnover of 53 Bn = 2.2% and AIrbus aims for a cash neutral 2014 & 2015 ..... not a wonderful investment TBH
Nahhhh sounds like hard work innit? Dude, you make me look like an optimist and that's not something I see every day....
Your way is just plain lazy and lacks any form of aspiration or ambition, if the worst thing you come back with it's not making quite enough money? As prestige projects go, it allows an economy to be less dependent on B(w)ankers than ours was, and I should point out, that did not work out well which is why the're desperate to grow the real economy now. Sorry if that's not sexy enough for your tastes (!)
Heathrow Harry
How much of that 52 billion do you think went to the French and German governments directly? Then how much tax did the workers pay on their wages? Then how much VAT did they pay on all the nice things they can buy? Road tax? Then there's the indirect benefits. Fuelers for the test aircraft, third party companies (Honeywell, RR, CFM, BAE etc etc) who employ more workers as a result of a company as massive as Airbus being in existence.
How much extra tax revenue does the British government get from non UK residents transitting through Heathrow? How many extra immigration officers/Pilots/Cabin Crew/Cleaners/Shop Workers/Mechanics/ATC/Caterers/Fuelers/Security/Baggage Handlers/Bus Drivers etc etc are employed because of them? How much Tax do they contribute to the UK economy?
How much of that 52 billion do you think went to the French and German governments directly? Then how much tax did the workers pay on their wages? Then how much VAT did they pay on all the nice things they can buy? Road tax? Then there's the indirect benefits. Fuelers for the test aircraft, third party companies (Honeywell, RR, CFM, BAE etc etc) who employ more workers as a result of a company as massive as Airbus being in existence.
How much extra tax revenue does the British government get from non UK residents transitting through Heathrow? How many extra immigration officers/Pilots/Cabin Crew/Cleaners/Shop Workers/Mechanics/ATC/Caterers/Fuelers/Security/Baggage Handlers/Bus Drivers etc etc are employed because of them? How much Tax do they contribute to the UK economy?