HEATHROW
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
re easyJet debunks Gatwick's Heathrow myth - Telegraph
It does beg the Q how much capacity will RW3 add.
Are we not in danger of moving pieces around on same board ?
It does beg the Q how much capacity will RW3 add.
Are we not in danger of moving pieces around on same board ?
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
re easyJet debunks Gatwick's Heathrow myth - Telegraph
It does beg the Q how much capacity will RW3 add.
Are we not in danger of moving pieces around on same board ?
It does beg the Q how much capacity will RW3 add.
Are we not in danger of moving pieces around on same board ?
For U2 and other UK carriers to establish LHR operations is a natural progression. Existing and new carriers, both UK and overseas, will be able to add new destinations.
Some of these may be thin routes between LHR and smaller UK airports, and that will give many of them a lifeline.
All sorts of possibilities open up with extra rwy capacity.
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: southampton
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
can someone tell me why the three runway option at heathrow increases capacity while not affecting other london airfield. Yet as soon as it goes to 4 runways at heathrow, GW, SS and LC all see a drop in capacity (one of which would see a 75% drop). This may seem an obvious answer to some people but im struggling to make sense of where the bottlenecks are that produce these results
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Age: 69
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Around message 2800 in September 2013, people were all talking about the CAA Safety Notice on changes to wake turbulence separations for heavy-heavy departures.
The Heathrow UK AIP document
EG_AD_2_EGLL_en_2014-04-03.pdf
still seems to refer to the old standards :
but those standards were cancelled on 20th February and superseded by
http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/1166.pdf
Does Heathrow operate now with the "new" ICAO standards ?
Has a case to do anything else, as was surmised previously, been put forward ?
The Heathrow UK AIP document
EG_AD_2_EGLL_en_2014-04-03.pdf
still seems to refer to the old standards :
(iii) Departures – Wake Vortex separation.
Wake vortex separations are in accordance with the 5 Group Scheme and are as detailed in UK AIC P 072/2010. On
departure, when in receipt of line up clearance, the pilot must inform ATC if greater wake vortex separation will be
required behind the preceeding aircraft than that laid down in UK AIC P 072/2010. Failure to do so may resut in
additional delay.
Wake vortex separations are in accordance with the 5 Group Scheme and are as detailed in UK AIC P 072/2010. On
departure, when in receipt of line up clearance, the pilot must inform ATC if greater wake vortex separation will be
required behind the preceeding aircraft than that laid down in UK AIC P 072/2010. Failure to do so may resut in
additional delay.
http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/1166.pdf
Does Heathrow operate now with the "new" ICAO standards ?
Has a case to do anything else, as was surmised previously, been put forward ?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No-one believes industry
Today's "Times" carries a report on a poll of the Great British Public on infrastructure for the CBI
1. more than 2/3 think development projects should be delayed until local views are heard properly & extensively
2. 50% think there is no need for ANY improvements to national transport, energy, water & comms infrastructure
3. They do not believe any "lights will go out arguments" on any issues
4 Most believe promoters of new infrastucture projects are not objective and ministers are not to be trusted
5. Half thought all infrastructure decisions should be decided by local communities
No exactly a great base to start arguing for any new runways anywhere at all TBH...............................
1. more than 2/3 think development projects should be delayed until local views are heard properly & extensively
2. 50% think there is no need for ANY improvements to national transport, energy, water & comms infrastructure
3. They do not believe any "lights will go out arguments" on any issues
4 Most believe promoters of new infrastucture projects are not objective and ministers are not to be trusted
5. Half thought all infrastructure decisions should be decided by local communities
No exactly a great base to start arguing for any new runways anywhere at all TBH...............................
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK (reluctantly)
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
118.70
I heard that the 'new' standard would've killed LHR's flow rate so after significant work by NATS, BA & BAA demonstrating the 'old' Hvy/Hvy standard was safe, the safety case for not moving to the new standards was accepted by the CAA.
Seems a good result.
I heard that the 'new' standard would've killed LHR's flow rate so after significant work by NATS, BA & BAA demonstrating the 'old' Hvy/Hvy standard was safe, the safety case for not moving to the new standards was accepted by the CAA.
Seems a good result.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I saw the results of that poll the other day. Bit strange though, as a good proportion of the British public are pretty naffed off with the roads and railways.... and a good moan about an airport is never far away. Load of rubbish.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Local views should not be allowed to overturn strategic national interests. We'd never have another infrastructure project built if we had to extensively consult everyone whose garden might be affected. No more power stations or airports? Ah we'll just print some money.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"We'd never have another infrastructure project built if we had to extensively consult everyone"
Indeed - but every Tory MP is in favour of "infrastructure projects" in general but not (say) HS2 or Heathrow expansion when it comes anywhere near them
Fortunately/unfortunatley we're not living in Singapore or Hong Kong so we have to work on the assumption that small-minded NIMBYism is an integral part of the fabric
and please don't start on about the need for "leadership".............. there isn't any any more
Indeed - but every Tory MP is in favour of "infrastructure projects" in general but not (say) HS2 or Heathrow expansion when it comes anywhere near them
Fortunately/unfortunatley we're not living in Singapore or Hong Kong so we have to work on the assumption that small-minded NIMBYism is an integral part of the fabric
and please don't start on about the need for "leadership".............. there isn't any any more
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: at home
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bye bye T1 ..
Terminal 1 departure ..
With the new Terminal 2 shopping centre opening up from later this summer things will start changing around T1, allegedly.
Some BA services (Belfast & Dublin ?) will go to T5 towards the end of this year, and the other BA services that can't be fitted in to T5 will all be at T3. So from some point in 2015 it'll just be T5 and T3 for BA, apparently.
Perhaps then they'll get rid of the worst bits of bumpy taxiways in Europe .. .
With the new Terminal 2 shopping centre opening up from later this summer things will start changing around T1, allegedly.
Some BA services (Belfast & Dublin ?) will go to T5 towards the end of this year, and the other BA services that can't be fitted in to T5 will all be at T3. So from some point in 2015 it'll just be T5 and T3 for BA, apparently.
Perhaps then they'll get rid of the worst bits of bumpy taxiways in Europe .. .
I see that Etihad will introduce their new A380 by serving Heathrow first.
http://www.skyclub.com/news/2014/04/...80-at-heathrow
http://www.skyclub.com/news/2014/04/...80-at-heathrow
Heathrow proposes congestion charge
Heathrow airport will tell the Airports Commission later this month that there “may be a case for introducing a congestion charge” for people travelling to the airport.
Heathrow airport proposes congestion charge plans
Heathrow airport proposes congestion charge plans
Having done a 'booking' for January 2015 a one way fare from LHR - AUH came out at 77200 Dirhams which is around £12,481.00.
The return fare works out at £25,134 based on a 2 day stay in AUH.
The return fare works out at £25,134 based on a 2 day stay in AUH.
