HEATHROW
Ownership??
Our company, Heathrow Airport Holdings Limited (formerly BAA) owns and runs London Heathrow Airport, Britain's aviation hub.
Heathrow Airport Holdings Limited is in turn owned by FGP Topco Limited, a consortium owned and led by the infrastructure specialist Ferrovial S.A. (25.00%), Qatar Holding LLC (20.00%), Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (12.62%), the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (11.20%), Alinda Capital Partners (11.18%), China Investment Corporation (10.00%) and Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS) (10.00%)
This may not include the recent Qatar wealth fund investment
Heathrow Airport Holdings Limited is in turn owned by FGP Topco Limited, a consortium owned and led by the infrastructure specialist Ferrovial S.A. (25.00%), Qatar Holding LLC (20.00%), Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (12.62%), the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (11.20%), Alinda Capital Partners (11.18%), China Investment Corporation (10.00%) and Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS) (10.00%)
This may not include the recent Qatar wealth fund investment
Last edited by Trinity 09L; 6th Oct 2016 at 11:00. Reason: Update
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Changing tack, do we have to worry about EU air pollution limits if we are no longer members of the EU? I think not because their laws will no longer apply. Yet another good reason to leave this corrupt, intellectual talking shop behind.
PM
PM
The consensus is that many of the laws that originate from the EU are now so embedded in the fabric of UK law that there aren't enough lawyers in existence to be able to disentangle them all and so many, if not most, are highly likely to remain on the statute books.
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Oban, Scotland
Posts: 1,844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Piltdown Man
I'm trying to decide on the significance of this choice of moniker. He was a fraud, wasn't he?
We have to worry about NOx and PM10 pollution not because of the EU, but because every year it is killing thousands of people in our cities.
We have to worry about NOx and PM10 pollution not because of the EU, but because every year it is killing thousands of people in our cities.
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: 2DME
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Absolutely. Bring back the smogs I say, and whilst we're at it let's drop those pesky drinkinga nd bathing water standards too. 😷
An email to Heathrow's press office elicited no response, but their website confirms that if the launch actually took place in Birmingham this week it wasn't deemed worthy of a press release.
Interestingly, it appears that there were two different version of last week's advance announcement by Heathrow summarising the "Brexit Boost" measures:
The version circulated to local media did include a reference, discussed on here earlier, to a ban on scheduled arrivals before 5:30 am, subject to getting the go-ahead for R3. Some of the local papers, the Maidenhead Advertiser for example, ran with that story.
But the national press were sent a different version of the release which omitted any mention of the proposed night flight changes.
Doubtless once all the ducks have been got in a row we'll find out which carrots have made the final cut.
Interestingly, it appears that there were two different version of last week's advance announcement by Heathrow summarising the "Brexit Boost" measures:
The version circulated to local media did include a reference, discussed on here earlier, to a ban on scheduled arrivals before 5:30 am, subject to getting the go-ahead for R3. Some of the local papers, the Maidenhead Advertiser for example, ran with that story.
But the national press were sent a different version of the release which omitted any mention of the proposed night flight changes.
Doubtless once all the ducks have been got in a row we'll find out which carrots have made the final cut.
BBC Radio 4 said this morning that "PM Theresa May is expected by informed commentators to make an announcement about a go-ahead for R3 at Heathrow in the next few days".
Can this be true ?
Can this be true ?
Reply from HAL
An increase in ATMs before a new runway is built will require airspace changes that improve runway efficiency for both arriving and departing aircraft which will enable a small increase in runway capacity. Very simply, this will be achieved by reducing the gaps between aircraft. New technologies for arrivals are already being developed and progressed that could deliver this efficiency which would enable us to introduce the 5.30am start time at the same time as the additional ATMs. We know how important maintaining periods of respite is for people living near the airport. There are no plans to change the rules around TEAM. More efficient use of the runways means we could enable an increase in ATMs while maintaining runway alternation.
As we said in the newsletter, any increase above our planning cap of 480,000 flights per year would be subject to public consultation and planning permission.
As we said in the newsletter, any increase above our planning cap of 480,000 flights per year would be subject to public consultation and planning permission.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Cyprus
Age: 76
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been wondering why the lengthening of the Northern R/W seems to be so out of favour
Surely if it was built entirely on the West side of the M25 all that would be needed then to connect to the main airport would be 2 taxiways over the M25, with all the new terminal infrastructure also on the West side
This would be a much simpler undertaking
Surely if it was built entirely on the West side of the M25 all that would be needed then to connect to the main airport would be 2 taxiways over the M25, with all the new terminal infrastructure also on the West side
This would be a much simpler undertaking
An increase in ATMs before a new runway is built will require airspace changes that improve runway efficiency for both arriving and departing aircraft which will enable a small increase in runway capacity. Very simply, this will be achieved by reducing the gaps between aircraft. New technologies for arrivals are already being developed and progressed that could deliver this efficiency which would enable us to introduce the 5.30am start time at the same time as the additional ATMs. We know how important maintaining periods of respite is for people living near the airport. There are no plans to change the rules around TEAM. More efficient use of the runways means we could enable an increase in ATMs while maintaining runway alternation.
There are on average about 10 daily landings before 5:30 am, so assuming they are pushed back until after the new start time, that would make a total of just under 80 additional ATMs during the (shorter) operational day. In other words about 4.5 movements per hour more than at present, with the increase split roughly equally between arrivals and departures.
I have been wondering why the lengthening of the Northern R/W seems to be so out of favour
Surely if it was built entirely on the West side of the M25 all that would be needed then to connect to the main airport would be 2 taxiways over the M25, with all the new terminal infrastructure also on the West side
This would be a much simpler undertaking
Surely if it was built entirely on the West side of the M25 all that would be needed then to connect to the main airport would be 2 taxiways over the M25, with all the new terminal infrastructure also on the West side
This would be a much simpler undertaking
How much do you think it would cost to move the Queen Mother Reservoir ?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
plus you'd put the end of the runway jsut by the front door of Windsor Castle, maybe with the approach lights in the middle of Eton College and final approach right over Maidenhead subburbs which just happens to be the Consituency of Mrs......................
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: 2DME
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Theresa May chairs a special Cabinet Sub-Committee (Economic Affairs (Airports) Sub Committee) which is due to meet on either 11th or 18th October, according to the FT (29th September, front page). Suggestions are that a decision will be made at that meeting and announced fairly soon after.
And, my suggestion is that it will be a deeply flawed decision based on political considerations alone (apart from fudge); & probably not worth the paper it is written on. After all this time (it has been discussed, & the decision has been pending, since before I entered the aviation scene - 1971), does anyone think that we will get an objective & decisive conclusion ? I know that I am not going to hold my breath whilst waiting for one !
Paxing All Over The World
Since May has renewed Trident, taken the close run (and deeply flawed) referendum as gospel, has just said that she is changing the country by doing all the usual Tory things - she could do anything ...
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Must confess I do not think the PM and her cabinet have a clue about the complex situation re Heathrow.
I can see a situation where she gives the go ahead thinking that's it without any understanding of what she is actually saying yes too.
Details of whose paying for what need sorting and hopefully the government give an unequivocal yes to the huge spend, but what if this is sidestepped it becomes a yes withough any substance.
And what about raising funds in the markets to pay for the runway aside from the m25 work and railway lines.
In effect the shareholders are going to be expected to raise a sum which will be the highest amount of equity ever raised in this country.
Even this is fraught as the amount raised will be more than the value of the airport ! And this against a highly volatile and uncertain Brexit trading picture.
I hope somebody has asked them what they think.
In addition I do wonder if Greening and zac might resign, whilst not a disaster it will leave awkward questions.
Not sure what others think but I think personally we are light years from an easy solution.
I can see a situation where she gives the go ahead thinking that's it without any understanding of what she is actually saying yes too.
Details of whose paying for what need sorting and hopefully the government give an unequivocal yes to the huge spend, but what if this is sidestepped it becomes a yes withough any substance.
And what about raising funds in the markets to pay for the runway aside from the m25 work and railway lines.
In effect the shareholders are going to be expected to raise a sum which will be the highest amount of equity ever raised in this country.
Even this is fraught as the amount raised will be more than the value of the airport ! And this against a highly volatile and uncertain Brexit trading picture.
I hope somebody has asked them what they think.
In addition I do wonder if Greening and zac might resign, whilst not a disaster it will leave awkward questions.
Not sure what others think but I think personally we are light years from an easy solution.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"if Greening and zac might resign, whilst not a disaster it will leave awkward questions"
worse than that - the Tories might lose thei seats and cut their majority from 12 to 8......... Harold Wilson approved the Humber Bridge at a cost of £ 150 million (in 1966) to save a seat in a by-election .....................
worse than that - the Tories might lose thei seats and cut their majority from 12 to 8......... Harold Wilson approved the Humber Bridge at a cost of £ 150 million (in 1966) to save a seat in a by-election .....................
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spoiled brat,Greeny Billionaire and catastrophic failure as a mayoral candidate? TBH they can throw their toys from the pram but Mrs May would then likely call an election and Jezza is planning to fight one before 2020. All signs point to a LHR approval, with conditions attached. We shall see...