HEATHROW
Paxing All Over The World
No answer until after the election and then made by people who are not politicians so the politicians can claim innocence (!).
Boris island is already off the table. There are threads in this forum specifically talkinh about this if you search.
Boris island is already off the table. There are threads in this forum specifically talkinh about this if you search.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And Easyjet now circling Heathrow IF of course it gets RW3 although with emergence of UKIP, who are against expansion and some animosity in The North which has emerged since the enquiry started the whole thing is back in the melting pot.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8596d4c2-6...#axzz3JWZzfxRK
Interesting story.....
Increase in charges based on RW" at LGW would wipe out profit !
also
"We are in confidential discussions with Gatwick and Heathrow.”
No wonder LGW is pushing hard, as I have said before with a glut of slots you could shut LGW down.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8596d4c2-6...#axzz3JWZzfxRK
Interesting story.....
Increase in charges based on RW" at LGW would wipe out profit !
also
"We are in confidential discussions with Gatwick and Heathrow.”
No wonder LGW is pushing hard, as I have said before with a glut of slots you could shut LGW down.
No serious party thinks a third runway at LHR would close LGW......
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No insider knowledge here, but surely it's obvious why Easy prefer LHR R3 to LGW R2....?
LHR gets new runway.
Many carriers move from LGW to LHR.
That frees up lots of spare capacity at LGW for Easy to expand into and increase their punctuality, all without paying for it.
It's what I'd want, if I was them!
LHR gets new runway.
Many carriers move from LGW to LHR.
That frees up lots of spare capacity at LGW for Easy to expand into and increase their punctuality, all without paying for it.
It's what I'd want, if I was them!
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And Easyjet now circling Heathrow IF of course it gets RW3 although with emergence of UKIP, who are against expansion and some animosity in The North which has emerged since the enquiry started the whole thing is back in the melting pot.
(1) it helps it to chase business travellers;
(2) it can take on BA at LGW and LHR;
(3) it can use the availability of an LHR move to drive a better deal with the LGW managers.
Think a small U2 operation at LHR is highly likely if expansion takes place, and this would be in addition to LGW, not instead of. Wouldn't expect the likes of FR to be doing likewise.
As for "some animosity in The North" that maybe more to do with the lack of infrastructure expenditure generally, especially on the railways. There are also many in the north (and other parts of the country) who want LHR expansion so that their areas can once again be connected to the UK hub, and, in some cases, for their local airports to survive and thrive.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8596d4c2-6...#axzz3JWZzfxRK
Interesting story.....
Increase in charges based on RW" at LGW would wipe out profit !
also
"We are in confidential discussions with Gatwick and Heathrow.”
No wonder LGW is pushing hard, as I have said before with a glut of slots you could shut LGW down.
Interesting story.....
Increase in charges based on RW" at LGW would wipe out profit !
also
"We are in confidential discussions with Gatwick and Heathrow.”
No wonder LGW is pushing hard, as I have said before with a glut of slots you could shut LGW down.
Have often stated that it is very likely that the exodus from LGW to LHR (the "waiting room", VS and BA longhaul) would be compensated at least in part by an exodus from the likes of LTN and STN, unless LGW does something stupid like hiking its charges over the odds. This being the case, the requirement for a second rwy at LGW becomes less urgent.
Are Heathrow still arguing, as they were last year, that a second Gatwick runway "could lead to the decline or even closure of LHR" ?
No insider knowledge here, but surely it's obvious why Easy prefer LHR R3 to LGW R2....?
LHR gets new runway.
Many carriers move from LGW to LHR.
That frees up lots of spare capacity at LGW for Easy to expand into and increase their punctuality, all without paying for it.
It's what I'd want, if I was them!
LHR gets new runway.
Many carriers move from LGW to LHR.
That frees up lots of spare capacity at LGW for Easy to expand into and increase their punctuality, all without paying for it.
It's what I'd want, if I was them!
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: leeds
Age: 77
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But wouldn't it be nice if a few airlines said 'We really welcome new capacity where we fly, we are confident our customers will pay £10 per one way extra and we will be looking to apply for and take up slots which suit our operation.' At the moment it feels like we have some regulated airport operators who are very keen and some commercial airlines who are not quite so keen.
Perhaps some of the airlines currently at LHR wouldn't be too disappointed to see the status quo remain.
The last thing they probably want is to face the brunt of new or more competition muscling in on their patch from lower cost rivals such as Easyjet or Emirates etc, and also see the current value of their LHR slot portfolio depleted.
Just an alternative viewpoint (dons tin hat and retreats to trenches)
The last thing they probably want is to face the brunt of new or more competition muscling in on their patch from lower cost rivals such as Easyjet or Emirates etc, and also see the current value of their LHR slot portfolio depleted.
Just an alternative viewpoint (dons tin hat and retreats to trenches)
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But wouldn't it be nice if a few airlines said 'We really welcome new capacity where we fly, we are confident our customers will pay £10 per one way extra and we will be looking to apply for and take up slots which suit our operation.' At the moment it feels like we have some regulated airport operators who are very keen and some commercial airlines who are not quite so keen.
Perhaps some of the airlines currently at LHR wouldn't be too disappointed to see the status quo remain.
The last thing they probably want is to face the brunt of new or more competition muscling in on their patch from lower cost rivals such as Easyjet or Emirates etc, and also see the current value of their LHR slot portfolio depleted.
Just an alternative viewpoint (dons tin hat and retreats to trenches)
The last thing they probably want is to face the brunt of new or more competition muscling in on their patch from lower cost rivals such as Easyjet or Emirates etc, and also see the current value of their LHR slot portfolio depleted.
Just an alternative viewpoint (dons tin hat and retreats to trenches)
The incumbent carriers that don't want to "face the brunt of new or more competition muscling in on their patch from lower cost rivals such as Easyjet or Emirates etc, and also see the current value of their LHR slot portfolio depleted" would also be prevented from growing/expanding their own businesses.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: U.K.
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have only to listen to any broadcast from Central London to realise why Heathrow should close,apart from all the congestion and lack of space for expansion. Why not "Boris Island" Aligned 23/05 with at least 6 runways with transport links north and South along a barrier across the estuary opening up East Kent and Essex and generating tidal power for the airport? Think big!
Of course,any political party that starts it will have it immediately cancelled by the next government,like most of our potentially great aviation achievements.
Heathrow has been a millstone round the neck of commercial aviation,in Britain,for decades.It's about time we bit the bullet.
Of course,any political party that starts it will have it immediately cancelled by the next government,like most of our potentially great aviation achievements.
Heathrow has been a millstone round the neck of commercial aviation,in Britain,for decades.It's about time we bit the bullet.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heathrow has been a millstone round the neck of commercial aviation,in Britain,for decades.It's about time we bit the bullet.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have only to listen to any broadcast from Central London to realise why Heathrow should close,apart from all the congestion and lack of space for expansion.
"As for the existing hub at Heathrow, you could keep an Orly-style airport"
First stage in abandoning the estauary and backing Heathrow?
Perhaps it's the "Uxbridge" effect?
Why not "Boris Island" Aligned 23/05 with at least 6 runways with transport links north and South along a barrier across the estuary opening up East Kent and Essex and generating tidal power for the airport? Think big! Of course,any political party that starts it will have it immediately cancelled by the next government,like most of our potentially great aviation achievements.
But even if a new airport was to be built, Heathrow still needs expansion in the interim, so we might as well stick with it.
Heathrow has been a millstone round the neck of commercial aviation,in Britain,for decades.It's about time we bit the bullet.
Airlines are falling over themselves and spending millions to acquire LHR slots, and the very fast exodus from LGW by American carriers at the ending of the "Bermuda 2" arrangements doesn't exactly suggest "a millstone round the neck of commercial aviation,in Britain,for decades". You cannot be serious.
It is not Heathrow that is the millstone, it is the gutless politicians that are the problem. Also, the millstone is not just around the neck of commercial aviation, but around UK PLC.
Come May a few of those "gutless" politicians might not actually be there to even make the decision now anyway !
Last edited by Fairdealfrank; 21st Nov 2014 at 23:20.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: U.K.
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is the Uxbridge effect? Accessibility will sort itself out,as will the airline slot system.If you build it,they will come. If you call it "Heathrow East" most customers won't notice the difference. The reference to broadcasts from London simply refers to the background aircraft noise,not the whining of politicians.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 2,781
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It makes total sense from the perspective of easyJet to oppose 2nd runway @ LGW in favour of 3rd @ LHR.
They maintain their scale at LGW, and less room for an absolute invasion by other LOCO's at the airport. LGW will remain london airport #2, so it will suit easyJet to remain #1 there. An additional runway could change all that as it could provide as serious opportunity for FR DY VY etc to expand there.
An additional expansion of runway capacity @ LHR would give ezy a golden opportunity to fly head to head against much higher cost rivals. Let's call it a honey pot , one where FR will be unwilling to go.
So from an Easyjet perspective it's all about the relative cost position. Expand LHR and challenge higher cost rivals, and disable LGW where rivals tend to be lower cost eg DY, FR, VY etc.
They maintain their scale at LGW, and less room for an absolute invasion by other LOCO's at the airport. LGW will remain london airport #2, so it will suit easyJet to remain #1 there. An additional runway could change all that as it could provide as serious opportunity for FR DY VY etc to expand there.
An additional expansion of runway capacity @ LHR would give ezy a golden opportunity to fly head to head against much higher cost rivals. Let's call it a honey pot , one where FR will be unwilling to go.
So from an Easyjet perspective it's all about the relative cost position. Expand LHR and challenge higher cost rivals, and disable LGW where rivals tend to be lower cost eg DY, FR, VY etc.
Paxing All Over The World
dash6
Oh yes they would! Once they discover that their (say) less than 1hr to the airport is now 2hrs.
Example, I've lived in West Hertfordshire and North London for 30 years. Going to the Isle of Man was a doddle from LTN. Now I have to schlep to LGW because I have no choice.
I return to LHR on Monday morning and am very glad that it's not to a 2nd at LGW or an island even further away.
Also, to repeat myself from other threads, Britain is broke and the cost for a new airport does not exist. Forget that it would be 'paid for by commercial companies' the UK would have to put an inordinate amount of govt, local govt time and money and effort into legislation and approving new infrastructure. It would have to be squeezed into spaces already tight. Consider the enormous problems of Cross-Rail construction for an example.
If you call it "Heathrow East" most customers won't notice the difference.
Example, I've lived in West Hertfordshire and North London for 30 years. Going to the Isle of Man was a doddle from LTN. Now I have to schlep to LGW because I have no choice.
I return to LHR on Monday morning and am very glad that it's not to a 2nd at LGW or an island even further away.
Also, to repeat myself from other threads, Britain is broke and the cost for a new airport does not exist. Forget that it would be 'paid for by commercial companies' the UK would have to put an inordinate amount of govt, local govt time and money and effort into legislation and approving new infrastructure. It would have to be squeezed into spaces already tight. Consider the enormous problems of Cross-Rail construction for an example.
Last edited by PAXboy; 22nd Nov 2014 at 18:43. Reason: Typos