HEATHROW
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: LONDON
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking again at my post, number 12, I think I have implied that there will be no mix'n'match between the runways and terminals. There will be some of that in order to get the best use of the runways. There will be some crossings but the regulator is sure to pay attentions to the number.
Fortunately, the move towards twins for much of the long-haul demand brings such good departure performance that 2,200m gets you a long way at an economic load. This helps. One concern however is that Heathrow would become more wind critical because traffic would not be able to accept much (if any) tailwind off the short runway, whereas now there's some room for manoeuvre on that.
.4
Fortunately, the move towards twins for much of the long-haul demand brings such good departure performance that 2,200m gets you a long way at an economic load. This helps. One concern however is that Heathrow would become more wind critical because traffic would not be able to accept much (if any) tailwind off the short runway, whereas now there's some room for manoeuvre on that.
.4
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AMS is certainly a pleasure, but CDG (particularly T1) falls into the "avoid" category in my book.
It will be interesting to see how much and to what extent the govt's streamling and fast-tracking of the planning process will be effective? Presumably, it will give the courts the power to strike out deliberately vexatious or obstructive court actions and injunction applications?
There are some reports suggesting that 2020 is the target opening date, which surely can't be right? Do the new govt proposals include any proposed timeframe, i.e. consultation, planning, appeals, construction start etc?
Finally, I'm sure there are many environmentalists complaining about the govts approach and calling for the transport secy's head, but really, even if she does go, won't the govt's approach just become more ruthless?
It will be interesting to see how much and to what extent the govt's streamling and fast-tracking of the planning process will be effective? Presumably, it will give the courts the power to strike out deliberately vexatious or obstructive court actions and injunction applications?
There are some reports suggesting that 2020 is the target opening date, which surely can't be right? Do the new govt proposals include any proposed timeframe, i.e. consultation, planning, appeals, construction start etc?
Finally, I'm sure there are many environmentalists complaining about the govts approach and calling for the transport secy's head, but really, even if she does go, won't the govt's approach just become more ruthless?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am mystified why there is concern over number of routes from one airport, and pure size, when if one looks at London as the whole market of the four major airports, plus London City, the London area is probably serving far more destinations than the competitors in Europe.
Political foresight be damned - we know there is none of that - all we need is good old-fashioned competition (breaking BAA's ownership of 3/5 London airports), and sensible, quick planning laws allowing quicker development. In the meantime, we can only hope that BAA goes bust to save us future aggravation...
Heathrow can have their third runway and sixth terminal, while other operators may see better solutions that attract carriers to other locations: no-one needs to collate them in one airport: in the era of more open skies, fewer people will bother connecting with more direct flights.
"Central planning" and "big ideas" are a little too much like communism for my liking...
Political foresight be damned - we know there is none of that - all we need is good old-fashioned competition (breaking BAA's ownership of 3/5 London airports), and sensible, quick planning laws allowing quicker development. In the meantime, we can only hope that BAA goes bust to save us future aggravation...
Heathrow can have their third runway and sixth terminal, while other operators may see better solutions that attract carriers to other locations: no-one needs to collate them in one airport: in the era of more open skies, fewer people will bother connecting with more direct flights.
"Central planning" and "big ideas" are a little too much like communism for my liking...
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: LONDON
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mmmm...
Except that every time you open a new airport you multiply the route conflictions in the LTMA by the number of airports there are. Currently we have LL, KK, SS GW, WU, LC, LF, KB and they all have routes to all points of the compass. From an ATC perspective it's far better to have 2 or 3 woppers than 6 or 7 small ones.
.4
Except that every time you open a new airport you multiply the route conflictions in the LTMA by the number of airports there are. Currently we have LL, KK, SS GW, WU, LC, LF, KB and they all have routes to all points of the compass. From an ATC perspective it's far better to have 2 or 3 woppers than 6 or 7 small ones.
.4
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can't really argue that making Heathrow grow more is more efficient than getting more traffic out of a two-runway Gatwick and Stansted, and a fully-utilised Luton.
Nothing a little replanning of the airspace (massively) can't handle.
Nothing a little replanning of the airspace (massively) can't handle.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Macclesfield
Age: 53
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New runway
Why does everything have to be based out of the South??
It's over crowded for a start, the Sussex tax payers will never let LGW expand? So why does everyone insist that the way forward is the south east.
It drives me up the wall, MAN is here and not really used to its' fullest this is mostly down to the airlines being blinkered by the bright lights of London, if they spread it about and looked at the reat of the U.K then we may not be thinking about expansion at LHR......
But as we up here, know that everybody in the airline world belives that London IS the U.K. You would think that with every airline bitchin about fuel costs would stop at the first decent airport in the U.K(when flying from the West) not just flying over it on its way to the "Big Smoke"
Rant over................for now...
Fuelboy
It's over crowded for a start, the Sussex tax payers will never let LGW expand? So why does everyone insist that the way forward is the south east.
It drives me up the wall, MAN is here and not really used to its' fullest this is mostly down to the airlines being blinkered by the bright lights of London, if they spread it about and looked at the reat of the U.K then we may not be thinking about expansion at LHR......
But as we up here, know that everybody in the airline world belives that London IS the U.K. You would think that with every airline bitchin about fuel costs would stop at the first decent airport in the U.K(when flying from the West) not just flying over it on its way to the "Big Smoke"
Rant over................for now...
Fuelboy
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: LONDON
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A reality from the ATC perspective is that even if there was not a single increase in flights through Heathrow, the 3rd runway was needed 15 years ago. There is, in my view, unacceptable pressure on ATC to deliver minimum spacing all the time and in all conditions. Being scheduled at 98% of absolute capacity means there is no slack available in an industry that relies on human beings. We WILL make mistakes, therefore minimum approach spacing should never become maximum too.
The government's policy of "...best use of existing runways." has been interpreted to mean maximum use. I believe that is a fundamental flaw in strategy and one that leaves the whole system exposed.
.4
The government's policy of "...best use of existing runways." has been interpreted to mean maximum use. I believe that is a fundamental flaw in strategy and one that leaves the whole system exposed.
.4
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simple solution to the mess.
Heathrow should handle flights going west. Luton does north, Standsted does flights going east and gatwick does those going south. No need for any of them to fly across London. Then build a high speed circular railway line that links all 4 at about 180 mph with about 8 stops to pick up people at the airports and a few other points.
Heathrow should handle flights going west. Luton does north, Standsted does flights going east and gatwick does those going south. No need for any of them to fly across London. Then build a high speed circular railway line that links all 4 at about 180 mph with about 8 stops to pick up people at the airports and a few other points.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Yeah, right. So a company like BA, gets a 744 into Gatwick for an arriving flight from the US, with a southerl track inbound, but has to position to LTN to go out via a Northerly track? There's far more to it than your solution, unfortunately.
Making flying far more expensive may be one viable if unpleasant option.....
Making flying far more expensive may be one viable if unpleasant option.....
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Between Venus and Mars
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like that idea, befree. Instead of assigning a direction for each airport have each airport assigned a continent. For example,
Heathrow -- to/from North and South America
Gatwick -- to/from Asia and Australia
Stansted -- to/from Europe and Africa
Luton -- to/from GB & I
Both Stansted and Luton would need major upgrades, but it shouldn't be too much of a problem because there are not as many NIMBY's up there.
Make transferring from one airport to another as seemless as possible. Have the high-speed railway cars secured so that it wouldn't be necessary to go through security when reaching the airport.
Heathrow -- to/from North and South America
Gatwick -- to/from Asia and Australia
Stansted -- to/from Europe and Africa
Luton -- to/from GB & I
Both Stansted and Luton would need major upgrades, but it shouldn't be too much of a problem because there are not as many NIMBY's up there.
Make transferring from one airport to another as seemless as possible. Have the high-speed railway cars secured so that it wouldn't be necessary to go through security when reaching the airport.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Manchester
Posts: 891
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why all this talk of a new runway at LHR when it already has one : Northolt ! a driverless high speed shuttle train system (like the OrlyVal ) would do the job, it would cost far less and cause much less destruction. Northolt could help generate a much improved domestic feeder system that LHR is fast loosing due to slot reallocation to bigger jets.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,069
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't see the Government wanting to link all the airports up and I can't see Peel and BAA working together!
What is going to happen:
1. The government are going to pass through the LHR new 'East' terminal and 3rd runway.
2. The airport will continue to grow from next summer with more TATL flights with larger aircraft and short hauls (ie CDG, AMS etc.) being cut down as airlines co-operate with their slots.
3. More slots will be released by BAA when the runways change operations and also wait and see how many slots go to BA, BMI and VS! They will certainly get their fair share - if not more!
4. LHR will continue to grow and will probably be the first to pass the 100million mark in passenger numbers and will remain the world hub whatever UAE hierarchy try to do. The reason for this is that Europe, USA and Far East (the future world epicentres) are well within reach of each other non-stop and with LHR slap bang in the middle (and the Pacific on the other side) there will only be one place to transit through! Especially if the airport is completely different as expected by 2020.
2020: 'Welcome to LHR - The global hub of the global city of London.' This is while the rest of the UK is ran by FR and EZY!
What is going to happen:
1. The government are going to pass through the LHR new 'East' terminal and 3rd runway.
2. The airport will continue to grow from next summer with more TATL flights with larger aircraft and short hauls (ie CDG, AMS etc.) being cut down as airlines co-operate with their slots.
3. More slots will be released by BAA when the runways change operations and also wait and see how many slots go to BA, BMI and VS! They will certainly get their fair share - if not more!
4. LHR will continue to grow and will probably be the first to pass the 100million mark in passenger numbers and will remain the world hub whatever UAE hierarchy try to do. The reason for this is that Europe, USA and Far East (the future world epicentres) are well within reach of each other non-stop and with LHR slap bang in the middle (and the Pacific on the other side) there will only be one place to transit through! Especially if the airport is completely different as expected by 2020.
2020: 'Welcome to LHR - The global hub of the global city of London.' This is while the rest of the UK is ran by FR and EZY!
LHR "holdups" 2nd Dec?
Was stuck on board cramped BA A319 at Dusseldorf this afternoon for nearly 2 hours for a 50 min hop to LHR. Reason stated "weather at Heathrow which had also caused the late arrival of the inbound aircraft". Little cheeky one thinks boarding all just to be told this when no doubt delays were already known. The next flight to LHR was apparently canx and therefore any spare seats were slowly filled by pax who had checked in early for the (by then canx) flight. Oh and then no food offered when we eventually got going and ofcourse surprise surprise when we arrive at Shabbyrow another 15 minutes spend because of "aircraft on our parking stand". Such joy BA - thankyou. And people slag off Globespan!!
Was there trouble at LHR late this afternoon?
Tired Nivsy
Was there trouble at LHR late this afternoon?
Tired Nivsy
Last edited by nivsy; 2nd Dec 2007 at 22:21.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heres the weather at LHR all day
http://weather.noaa.gov/weather/current/EGLL.html
Marginally strong winds but nothing out of the ordinary.
http://weather.noaa.gov/weather/current/EGLL.html
Marginally strong winds but nothing out of the ordinary.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Cork, Ireland
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know there was chaos on the Cork-LHR route as well, with flights at one point running 3 hours late. They've also cancelled the last flight of the day since they were so far behind schedule. Perhaps there were weather issues at LHR?