Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

HEATHROW

Old 13th Nov 2015, 13:50
  #3881 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: scotland
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Are there any plans for Aer Lingus to relocate to T5 with BA and Iberia, or are they going to remain at T2 for the foreseeable future.
goldeneye is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2015, 12:32
  #3882 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Given that a) Aer Lingus have only just moved to T2 and b) BA are currently having to split operations into T3 as well as T5 given that there's not enough space in T5 alone, I think we can safely assume the shamrocks will be staying put for the time being!
Libertine Winno is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2015, 10:12
  #3883 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 1,438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Vueling add limited LHR-BCN operation

Vueling will operate a daily A320 service to BCN from LHR between 17DEC15 and 25FEB16 according to airlineroute.net

VY7842 BCN 09:50 LHR 11:15 320 D
VY7843 LHR 12:25 BCN 15:40 320 D

Vueling Adds Barcelona ? London Heathrow Service Dec 2015 ? Feb 2016 | Airline Route
BAladdy is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2015, 15:02
  #3884 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Kent
Age: 47
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I suspect those who have swallowed the BackHeathrow line have done so based on the simple expansion of the robust model that operates "as at today" with BA a "UK" airline continuing to shuttle pax and provide service to various UK domestic points !
Actually no, why do you assume everyone is so eager to use BA?

The long haul portion of the flight will be chosen by airline with the initial departure being from a local airport. I doubt anyone will care who provides the shuttle down to LHR and different airlines or alliances may use different carriers.

Heathrow will be sinking under the weight of new debt so will pass that on, they are already talking about slashing wages by 30% and renogotiating contracts, are we seriously suggesting an airline like FlyBe who have recently pulled out of Gatwick and who have witnessed the demise of Virgin would contemplate taking on BA routes?
Heathrow is currently being unfairly held back by the inability of the politicians to make the decision.

As for Flybe not taking on the routes, why not? Again, just because BA are providing the domestic routes today does not mean it will stay that way. It will also not be seen as competition as such if BA are feeding their own flights. They may be happy to let somebody else feed people onto the long haul competition. The third runway will change things and open up this market to others. If Flybe don't want it then somebody will.
Prophead is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2015, 16:02
  #3885 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: leeds
Age: 77
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Prophead

As for Flybe not taking on the routes, why not? Again, just because BA are providing the domestic routes today does not mean it will stay that way. It will also not be seen as competition as such if BA are feeding their own flights. They may be happy to let somebody else feed people onto the long haul competition. The third runway will change things and open up this market to others. If Flybe don't want it then somebody will.
Tend to agree. Flybe does a good job in my experience on Manchester-Paris with 75 or 90 seaters codesharing with AF. No reason why it couldn't do the same to LHR with BA. Isn't that the way most hubs work in the US? In a more competitive LHR environment, will BA really want to be running its own spoke regional routes?
anothertyke is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2015, 16:23
  #3886 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: LV
Posts: 2,296
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Kalamata and Chania added for BA ex LHR.
CabinCrewe is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2015, 16:24
  #3887 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,630
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 14 Posts
Originally Posted by Bagso

Providing a new runway just for routes such as JFK - Prague pax isn't really helping the UK !

And what of cost?

Heathrow will be sinking under the weight of new debt so will pass that on
In the regulated environment that Heathrow operate in, it serves you well to exaggerate your costs with creative accounting so you can get a higher base to measure your rate of return on.

For example, all the suggestions of costs for the new runway include the land at "current value". As property prices increase in London so the project gets progressively more expensive. However, much of the land, houses in Harmondsworth, etc, has been bought up by Heathrow over many years as it comes onto the market, it is then rented out short term (not directly, of course, but passed through a series of companies), but can be recovered without further cost when desired. But when it comes to measuring their asset base value, it will all go in at current cost.

Regarding JFK to Prague, that is just the sort of traffic you do need for a "world hub". Dubai didn't become the centre of Gulf commerce just through its own businesses, it did it because the huge range of air services to everywhere and every continent, hauling connecting passengers, also made it possible for the business community to share those flights. So yes, if connecting passengers mean BA can do 6x daily to Prague and hourly to JFK, likewise across all other destinations, that reinforces London, and Britain, as a European centre of commerce and international trade using all those flights. In recent times BA have started Belfast and Leeds, are about to start Inverness, and have reinforced Edinburgh etc. This has benefitted all those places, who can now make better connections than before to the world, and all on a UK carrier who typically buys UK goods, builds hangars in the UK with UK contractors and then employs UK engineers, gives jobs to our UK flight crew colleagues, etc.
WHBM is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2015, 22:02
  #3888 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sorry but I must thoroughly disagree with that! Heathrow expansion has been a massive electoral issue in many constituencies, and was probably the key reason why the Tories came out against the third runway before the 2010 election (David Cameron's "no ifs, no buts" stance). It's also a key political issue in terms of London Mayoral (and Assembly) politics, and there's an election for the London Mayor and Assembly coming up in May '16.
Some MPs near Heathrow have made a big deal out of opposing expansion with varying degrees of success, most haven't and won't. So to repeat, at the risk of being boring, there are many more important issues on which seats will change hands. Heathrow expansion is not one of them.

As for the mayoralty, Goldsmith is a well known opponent, Khan is a flip-flopper: presently against, formerly in favour, and who knows what in six months. No other candidates matter. That election will probably be decided on housing or national issues.




I suspect those who have swallowed the BackHeathrow line have done so based on the simple expansion of the robust model that operates "as at today" with BA a "UK" airline continuing to shuttle pax and provide service to various UK domestic points !

Very nice and all very fluffy but not quite the reality of what may happen 10 years down the line !!!!!!!

I cannot for the life of me think that any of these groups are offering support for RW3 based on the wholesale change being promoted here.

Or the premise of BA pulling GLA, EDI, LBA, etc only to be replaced by the likes of BMI regional Flybe or EZY...
They won't be dancing in the streets of Auchtermuchty based on that notion !
Why do you assume that BA will be the only carrier on domestic if there are 3 rwys? There could be several, not just BA, VY and U2 (which has stated an intention to base 30 aircraft at LHR). Of course if thinner routes are started, carriers with smaller aircraft than A319s will be needed, maybe BD reg, BE, T3, who can say?

Why do you also assume that there would be only one carrier (BA) on domestic routes?

AND using the EZY model as a positive for expansion from T4 really does beggar belief. Yes 100% great for the consumer flying say Scotland to London ...and back ! Point to point all housed in one terminal but totally useless for domestic / long haul connectivity which is after all the primary basis on which this is being sold!
U2 doesn't do interlining so it does not matter. Any carrier on a feed arrangement with one or more long haul carriers may be co-sited. There may even be more UK carriers based at LHR, shock horror.

Expansion is so far into the future or never, so one can use imaginative thinking. Try it.

EZY will cherry pick prime routes "supposedly" some of these will almost crucially be those which make the whole "UK" hub concept viable, on the other hand it is of course possible they may even create a mini hub themselves "Inverness to Paris, is an example but that isn't Edinburgh to Melbourne via LHR on BA is it and that is after all what BackHeathrow are pumping out as the lead headline!

Providing a new runway just for routes such as JFK - Prague pax isn't really helping the UK !

And what of cost?
It's not only about JFK-PRG. It's for the present as much as the future. At present there is a need to eliminate the congestion.

At present aircraft landing have to stack, then on arrival have to wait to access the stand because it is still occupied. It is still occupied because the departing aircraft cannot even join the queue for take off because it's too long. Eventually the departing aircraft joins the queue and 20 minutes passes before it's in the air.

Then there's the issue of the elimination of the secondary slot market so that costs come down and carriers can access LHR. Consequently more destinations become available and fares come down.






Actually no, why do you assume everyone is so eager to use BA?

The long haul portion of the flight will be chosen by airline with the initial departure being from a local airport. I doubt anyone will care who provides the shuttle down to LHR and different airlines or alliances may use different carriers.
Indeed.

Tend to agree. Flybe does a good job in my experience on Manchester-Paris with 75 or 90 seaters codesharing with AF. No reason why it couldn't do the same to LHR with BA. Isn't that the way most hubs work in the US? In a more competitive LHR environment, will BA really want to be running its own spoke regional routes?
Yes, given the size of its smallest aircraft, BA would probably stick to the trunk routes(?).

Last edited by Fairdealfrank; 18th Nov 2015 at 20:00.
Fairdealfrank is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2015, 22:14
  #3889 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dodging Flybe at EHASC
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The surest sign that a runway expansion in the 9th Circle of Hell is about to be given the green light:

A £130m Network Rail scheme to create a direct rail link from Reading to Heathrow airport has been confirmed as going ahead - despite an ongoing review into the infrastructure client’s spending programme.

All projects in Network Rail’s Control Period 5 (CP5) spending plan are currently on hold while its new chairman Peter Hendy carries out a review of its investment, which is due to be published in November.

However, Building can reveal that the Western Rail Access to Heathrow scheme - which will enable passengers from the west of England to travel by rail directly to Heathrow without having to change at London Paddington - is one of the schemes in the CP5 programme that has been spared the axe.

The plans will see a 5km tunnel built under the M4 and M25, which will connect with the Great Western main line at a new junction built between the Langley and Iver train stations.

The new rail line would travel above ground for 250m before entering the tunnel, and would then connect with existing platforms at Heathrow’s terminal five.

Speaking to Building, Jane Mason, economic partnership officer at Slough council and lead on the rail programme, said the project “is confirmed” subject to planning permission - due to be submitted by spring 2016.

Mason admitted there was “a bit of a slippage” with the programme due to the Hendy review, with a full stakeholder consultation yet to come.

But she said: “The scheme will go ahead. What we are unsure about is the timetable Network Rail originally committed to.

“We’re looking to see what can be done to catch up a bit and we are hoping to be as close to the original timetable as possible.”


Heathrow Airport has started the tendering process for consultancy work on a third runway, despite the project not yet receiving the go-ahead from government.

Heathrow Airport Holdings has called for expressions of interest in four key areas: programme management, information management, construction advice, and technical and design advice.

Interested firms have until 16 October to respond, after which Heathrow will draw up a shortlist.

Shortlisted companies will be formally invited to tender in November. A decision on preferred bidders is expected in early 2016



Baltasound is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 08:37
  #3890 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,786
Received 196 Likes on 90 Posts
The surest sign that a runway expansion in the 9th Circle of Hell is about to be given the green light
It's generally agreed that WRATH is likely to go ahead whether or not Heathrow expansion happens, so the implication that Network Rail has somehow been given the nod doesn't really stand up to scrutiny.

The article appeared in Construction News 6 weeks ago, by the way, so their prediction that R3 is "about to be given the green light" seems to have been a tad premature.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2015, 22:36
  #3891 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The surest sign that a runway expansion in the 9th Circle of Hell is about to be given the green light:
The western rail access to/from Heathrow is not dependent on the third rwy, it has more to with crossrail although not necessarily officially.

It is also unfinished business because of the failure to provide this access at Airport Junction.

Indeed the western rail access is likely to be in operation long before a third rwy is built (if it ever is).
Fairdealfrank is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2015, 07:06
  #3892 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,786
Received 196 Likes on 90 Posts
Originally Posted by Fairdealfrank
It is also unfinished business because of the failure to provide this access at Airport Junction.
Providing access to the junction at Hayes for trains on the GWR to/from the west would have involved demolishing almost as many houses as R3.

That's why the planned junction is about 4 miles further west, between Iver and Langley stations.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 25th Nov 2015, 11:29
  #3893 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
British Airways chief: build toll roads to help foot 'outrageous' Heathrow bill | Business | The Guardian

At least the "locals" will be footing the bill.

Frank...note that reference to "outrageous costs"!
Or does WW know nothing.

Just a footnote from the spending review.

Chancellor mentioned expansion of infastructure in road, rail, energy, rivers and flood defences..... interestingly no mention of runways!

I would have thought they would have made political capital from mentioning Heathrow and
"expanding our airports".

Last edited by Bagso; 25th Nov 2015 at 13:11.
Bagso is offline  
Old 25th Nov 2015, 14:02
  #3894 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just a footnote from the spending review.

Chancellor mentioned expansion of infastructure in road, rail, energy, rivers and flood defences..... interestingly no mention of runways!

I would have thought they would have made political capital from mentioning Heathrow and
"expanding our airports"
Well it's the government spending review. How much do you think the government is spending on 'runways'?

Please keep up.

You seem to be clutching at straws now in your eagerness for the project not to go ahead. You must be one of the Manchester airport appreciation society members
felixflyer is offline  
Old 25th Nov 2015, 17:35
  #3895 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
LHR are already talking about changing the curfew - before they even have the thrid runway

Really brilliant idea a few weeks before the announcement................
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 25th Nov 2015, 17:45
  #3896 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,786
Received 196 Likes on 90 Posts
Originally Posted by Heathrow Harry
LHR are already talking about changing the curfew - before they even have the thrid runway
Wrong. There isn't a curfew, never has been, so the question of changing it doesn't arise.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 25th Nov 2015, 19:34
  #3897 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: London
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Correct in a very technical way !

There are approximately 18 slots available after 23.01 and 06.00 every night .

Almost all were at one time used by freighters but these days are repurposed to long haul arrivals.

Depending on season the earliest arrival are 04.40 from Boston or 04.50 from Hong Kong !

What is in force is very strict slot control and noise abatement procedures.

That said when there are advantagous winds over the atlantic early arrivals are held in the air until after 06.00 .

Between 06.00 and 07.00 the runways are used in mixed mode with near parallel lands as well.
rutankrd is offline  
Old 25th Nov 2015, 21:11
  #3898 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,786
Received 196 Likes on 90 Posts
I think the word you are looking for is "quota".

There are approximately 18 slots available after 23.01 and 06.00 every night
There is indeed a Night Quota of 5,800 movements per year during the night period (which actually starts at 23:30). That's 16 per day on average (in practice about 14 in the summer and 18 in the winter).

But regardless of what you call it, the OP's assertion that Heathrow are seeking to make changes to the quota/curfew any time soon is incorrect.

Instead, the issue is what happens if and when R3 is approved.

The Davies Commission has recommended that when a third runway is built it should be accompanied by a complete ban on night flights. Heathrow is refusing to accept such a ban and is pressing the Government to relax that precondition so that some night flights would still be allowed if R3 goes ahead.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 25th Nov 2015, 22:07
  #3899 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
FelixFlyer

...well unless you have been on another planet, the taxpayer was down for £6bn but it "now" seems HAL will have to find the money for all the road/rail infastructure unless it's buried in that juicy £11bn transport for London budget!

£11bn.....

Maybe it's you that need to keep up.
Bagso is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2015, 06:07
  #3900 (permalink)  

OLD RED DAMASK
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Lancashire born. In Cebu now
Age: 70
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Flew to Singapore last Friday. My friend who used to work at T5 has now been relocated to T3, he is definitely not happy. Looks that T5 cannot sustain the growth in BA traffic.
The other bad thing is that with the introduction of A380's into the fleet, these all go from T5 C. There is no business lounge there. With the attitude that passengers only need to know a gate number about 50 mins before take off makes things a bit of a rush from the lounge in T5 main. About time BA got a lounge in T5 C.
lasernigel is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.