HEATHROW
AF A380
Also reported that Air France will use an A380 between LHR & CDG, to utilise the aircraft inbetween longhaul sectors, to save parking fees at CDG. Will it take longer to board than the actual flight?
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cornwall UK
Age: 79
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heathrow (Third Runway) its been cancelled before
There was a plan for a set of 3 runways north of the A4 dating from the 1940s which was publicly abandoned in the 1950s with newspaper headlines and local rejoicing, so somewhere in Whitehall you can be sure that the PLANS i.e, drawings survive 
even if the current Government is opposed the the project (things change )
What I would like to know from the professionals on this forum is whether air safety would be improved by having the 3rd parallel runway at Heathrow (increased separations?) similarly how much would safety be improved (and stress reduced) by giving Gatwick and Stansted 2nd parallel runways. Is there an ideal civil airport platform? e.g. 2 parallel runways with the terminal(s) laid down the centre?
Worth reading the Heathrow ATC book by Piket and Bish (and much input from one Brendan McCartney I believe) for the account of the interesting situations resulting from the use of 23L at LHR
even if the current Government is opposed the the project (things change )What I would like to know from the professionals on this forum is whether air safety would be improved by having the 3rd parallel runway at Heathrow (increased separations?) similarly how much would safety be improved (and stress reduced) by giving Gatwick and Stansted 2nd parallel runways. Is there an ideal civil airport platform? e.g. 2 parallel runways with the terminal(s) laid down the centre?
Worth reading the Heathrow ATC book by Piket and Bish (and much input from one Brendan McCartney I believe) for the account of the interesting situations resulting from the use of 23L at LHR
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The next runway in the South East needs to go where it'll be worth most to the economy, surely that's not Stansted or Gatwick.
Quick question, is Northolt further from Heathrow than 18R / 36L is at Schiphol?
Quick question, is Northolt further from Heathrow than 18R / 36L is at Schiphol?
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: over the hill
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gonzo,
-Absoloutely correct; I could probably count on two hands the No. of times that I've had to use it. 'Trouble is, once you demolish something it's a damn sight harder to get planning for a replacement than if it were still in existence. (maybe applying to "re-align" an existing R/W would throw up fewer restrictions than building an entirely new one).Perhaps we'll never know.
For most of the decade before Runway 23 was taken out of service, it was used on average for a handful of hours per year, and when it was used it decreased the capacity of the airport.
More runways ?
I think the eco argument would be that the UK is a small country. There is plenty of runway capacity in the UK at the likes of Birmingham, Manchester, Glasgow etc. Until the existing capacity is used up via redistribution of air services, then there is no case for extra runway capacity.
I'm not saying I agree with that, but that will be the eco argument.
I'm not saying I agree with that, but that will be the eco argument.
Mr A Tis - one could argue that with relatively unused runways in the south east of the UK at Manston, Southend and Oxford capable of handling short-haul flights, a partial redistribution of air transport demand to these airports could well be possible. Yes, Manston may be in the wrong place, but Oxford at the very least should be (and finally is showing itself to be) usable by commercial airlines
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: North, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 936
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem I see is for example (strike permitting) 2 weeks today I am flying MAN-LHR-HKG.
When I booked one of the options was to fly MAN-LGW then by road to LHR-HKG.
Why on earth would I want to troll between 2 London airports, If I have to transit, as I do because no direct MAN-HKG then I want to transit 1 airport.
If domestic services were moved to say Manston, Oxford, et al then all I will do is transit via Europe or the Middle East.
And before anyone mentions I don't want to travel by road or rail to London, and dount I am alone in that.
When I booked one of the options was to fly MAN-LGW then by road to LHR-HKG.
Why on earth would I want to troll between 2 London airports, If I have to transit, as I do because no direct MAN-HKG then I want to transit 1 airport.
If domestic services were moved to say Manston, Oxford, et al then all I will do is transit via Europe or the Middle East.
And before anyone mentions I don't want to travel by road or rail to London, and dount I am alone in that.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no problem with runway availability, surely the problem is one of airspace, and that is already full ! You can use or even add as many runways as you like in the SE but will it really make a measurable difference ?
In addition airlines will not dilute costs over two airports, hence the requirement to ram as many flights into Heathrow as possible.
Some years ago BAA offered a not inconsiderable 25% decrease in landing costs to airlines wishing to switch from Heathrow to Gatwick.....the number of airlines who took up the offer was nil so using Manston , Southend or indeed Stansted is not an option....although clearly something does have to give.
For years and for a variety of reasons "total UK demand" has by and large been forced into the South East, there is no incentive or appetite to do anything different, there are too many vested interests BUT something does have to change, we cannot carry on like this. My personnal belief is to develope Manchester, or start again with one airport and 6 runways.
Manchester is an airport located at the centre of the UK, its within an hour of many of the UKs major cities, it has excellent connections by road and rail and high frequency connections to the rest of the UK and Europe, these are already in place. With two runways three terminals Manchester could handle another 34m per annum and could even be expanded much much more ......
I do however fully take on board that an almost embarrasing number of airlines have tried and failed at MAN so why on earth should we go down this route again, well basically because going in the other direction and expanding in the SE is even less of an option...... something has to give !
In addition airlines will not dilute costs over two airports, hence the requirement to ram as many flights into Heathrow as possible.
Some years ago BAA offered a not inconsiderable 25% decrease in landing costs to airlines wishing to switch from Heathrow to Gatwick.....the number of airlines who took up the offer was nil so using Manston , Southend or indeed Stansted is not an option....although clearly something does have to give.
For years and for a variety of reasons "total UK demand" has by and large been forced into the South East, there is no incentive or appetite to do anything different, there are too many vested interests BUT something does have to change, we cannot carry on like this. My personnal belief is to develope Manchester, or start again with one airport and 6 runways.
Manchester is an airport located at the centre of the UK, its within an hour of many of the UKs major cities, it has excellent connections by road and rail and high frequency connections to the rest of the UK and Europe, these are already in place. With two runways three terminals Manchester could handle another 34m per annum and could even be expanded much much more ......
I do however fully take on board that an almost embarrasing number of airlines have tried and failed at MAN so why on earth should we go down this route again, well basically because going in the other direction and expanding in the SE is even less of an option...... something has to give !
pwalhx - I agree that transiting between airports is a pain and unrealistic. However, a substantial amount of the short-haul traffic from Europe to Heathrow is to travel to/from the south east of England
The LCCs at Gatwick, Stansted and Luton generally do not officially accept connecting passengers, but still seem to be fairly busy and have plenty of passengers. If anything, Stansted could probably do with an additional runway of its own this decade.
Thus, would it really be a bad thing if the private sector were to be encouraged to migrate some of their O&D traffic away from Heathrow towards Oxford ? If Continental can make transatlantic work to the likes of Belfast and Bristol, then increased constraints at Heathrow may well provide additional encouragement for long-haul routes at Manchester which presumably would make you happier. The words "if rather than action X you take action Y you can save time and money" seems to be remarkably effective on many people. British Airways may not want to open up in Oxford, but if the demand is big enough and the profits available, an entrpreneurial bod in an airline may well spot the opportunity.
At the very least, I'm not sure why for example a ski trip to Switzerland, or a day trip to Frankfurt by someone living in Berkshire needs to begin specifically at Heathrow.The people of the Thames Valley might even find this rather more convenient.
The LCCs at Gatwick, Stansted and Luton generally do not officially accept connecting passengers, but still seem to be fairly busy and have plenty of passengers. If anything, Stansted could probably do with an additional runway of its own this decade.
Thus, would it really be a bad thing if the private sector were to be encouraged to migrate some of their O&D traffic away from Heathrow towards Oxford ? If Continental can make transatlantic work to the likes of Belfast and Bristol, then increased constraints at Heathrow may well provide additional encouragement for long-haul routes at Manchester which presumably would make you happier. The words "if rather than action X you take action Y you can save time and money" seems to be remarkably effective on many people. British Airways may not want to open up in Oxford, but if the demand is big enough and the profits available, an entrpreneurial bod in an airline may well spot the opportunity.
At the very least, I'm not sure why for example a ski trip to Switzerland, or a day trip to Frankfurt by someone living in Berkshire needs to begin specifically at Heathrow.The people of the Thames Valley might even find this rather more convenient.
Last edited by davidjohnson6; 15th May 2010 at 17:28.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also reported that Air France will use an A380 between LHR & CDG, to utilise the aircraft inbetween longhaul sectors, to save parking fees at CDG. Will it take longer to board than the actual flight?
CDG-LHR AF 1980 10:05 - 10:25 (A380 on day 1/6/7 from 12th June-30th August)
LHR-CDG AF 1981 12:50 - 15:25 (A380 on day 1/6/7 from 12th June-30th August)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the very least, I'm not sure why for example a ski trip to Switzerland, or a day trip to Frankfurt by someone living in Berkshire needs to begin specifically at Heathrow.The people of the Thames Valley might even find this rather more convenient.
It's got nothing to dow ith capacity at Manchester airport btw, that's an utter red herring.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quick question, is Northolt further from Heathrow than 18R / 36L is at Schiphol?
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ireland
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Missed approach at LHR tonight?
My girlfriend flew into LHR with EI this evening at about 9:26 and it seemed to her untrained eye that the plane landing afterwards executed a go around.
Anyone know what was the reason?
Anyone know what was the reason?
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just watched the video of T2 demolition. For those who have yet to see it a dinosaur like machine spends 3 minutes chewing its way through the Terminal 2 sign. At that rate it will still be standing for some time to come.
Ironically there's a huge poster along the side of the building which reads "Make way for a world class facility. Terminal 2 demolition, scheduled 2009".
Ops normal at LHR then - scheduled 2009, actual 2010.
Bring on the third runway!
Ironically there's a huge poster along the side of the building which reads "Make way for a world class facility. Terminal 2 demolition, scheduled 2009".
Ops normal at LHR then - scheduled 2009, actual 2010.
Bring on the third runway!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Costa del Gatwick
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ops normal at LHR then - scheduled 2009, actual 2010.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
starbag many thanks for the clarification. Apologies to all for jumping to the wrong conclusion.
But the video is captioned:
And the source Heathrow News seems to be a BAA channel. Honest mistake then!
But the video is captioned:
HeathrowNews — May 18, 2010 — Demolition work starts on Heathrow's Terminal 2, the oldest of the airport's five passenger terminals.
Last edited by Haven't a clue; 26th May 2010 at 08:16.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas will increase its A380 services on SYD-SIN-LHR from 5 weekly to daily flights (after receiving A380 No.7) and MEL-SIN-LHR from current 2 weekly to daily flights in March 2011 when A380 No.10 will be delivered.
About Qantas - Media Room - Media Releases
About Qantas - Media Room - Media Releases