HEATHROW
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Leeds
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think Shed needs to do that - public bodies are doing just that - all you need to do is Google them...
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
presumably you will be happy to enlighten us on precisely where the AC's calculations are in error?
That's if you can post anything in the LHR forum without hyperbole or conjecture.
I meant it doesn't alter the fact that there is still a business case to expand LHR as a hub airport
a whole load of works that will need doing anyway by 2030 even without expansion.
Please, it is used as the only other option is an expensive taxi ride on busy motorways.
A short taxi ride, bags checked and gone then be sat with a coffee in T5 in 45 minutes is much more convenient believe me.
I don't think Shed needs to do that - public bodies are doing just that - all you need to do is Google them...
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"If BA were able to have a single London hub operation (moving Gatwick ops to Heathrow) and develop new routes to new destinations in USA, South America, India and China then Heathrow would become a more attractive proposition to hub through. Add to this more UK domestic destinations and frequencies."
believe it or not there are other airlines and a lot of people prefer them to BA - why should the taxpayer pay for a benifits for a multi-national company just beacuse they stick a flag on their tail???
And anyone who thinks BA will up internal UK flights is away with the birdies - it'll be juts more flights to NY
believe it or not there are other airlines and a lot of people prefer them to BA - why should the taxpayer pay for a benifits for a multi-national company just beacuse they stick a flag on their tail???
And anyone who thinks BA will up internal UK flights is away with the birdies - it'll be juts more flights to NY
Paxing All Over The World
rutankrd
If we could have avoided the favouritism of the last 30 years, we would have a better airport and better competition amongst the carriers. Wider choice of ALL destinations which is what the politicians say they want.
Oh yes, and because HAL was limited in how it could make money it came up with the wheeze of a single handling fee, irrespective of whether it was an RJ or a 747. That really helped the domestic routes.
... however the report should have been devoid of potential favouritism imo.
Oh yes, and because HAL was limited in how it could make money it came up with the wheeze of a single handling fee, irrespective of whether it was an RJ or a 747. That really helped the domestic routes.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Kent
Age: 47
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The cost of making it happen negates the business case for this.
There will also be significant income to the taxpayer and the economy from the main airport construction works in the form of VAT and other taxes paid by workers and companies involved in the expansion. After construction a larger Heathrow means more employment therefore more taxed income. Expanding Gatwick may need less from the taxpayer but will also bring in less income.
I remind you once more that there are numerous essential works already required on public infrastructure across regional UK. There is no justification for those in the vicinity of LHR to jump the queue for scarce public funds.
Incorrect. Besides mainline rail, Manchester Airport is accessible by light rail (Metrolink), National Express coaches, independent coach operators, regional and local bus services, and (of course) by private cars and taxis. The bulk of MAN's catchment area is well-served by at least one of the public transport alternatives listed here. Such are the facts (since you raise the topic). However, note that I only reference Manchester Airport in this context in answer to you raising the subject. I have never argued the LHR R3 debate from a Manchester Airport perspective, although I'm sure you would like to portray that notion as some kind of ulterior motive on my part.
The LHR transfer option exists because it is considered useful by a proportion of the market. However, many customers prefer alternatives for a multitude of reasons. Each individual customer makes a travel choice appropriate to their own circumstances, location and budget. BTW, congratulations on reaching the T5 seating inside 45 minutes. You obviously caught the duplicated full security check at a very quiet time and didn't require an airside transfer to one of the other LHR terminals (so tedious).
Than again, who cares about the majority of the north as long as the people of the Lancashire and Cheshire can have local direct flights.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Until an accurate figure can be agreed upon for the taxpayer funded portion and this can be compared to projected income I really don't see how that can be correct.
There will also be significant income to the taxpayer and the economy from the main airport construction works in the form of VAT and other taxes
After construction a larger Heathrow means more employment therefore more taxed income.
National express?? Are you serious?
For too long people in the north have been only given Manchester as their long haul option (And paid a premium for it)
Those with easy access have enjoyed having these flights at the expense of the people in the other northern regions that are expected to use the methods you outline above to get there
Since you express dissatisfaction with the surface travel options available to those wishing to access MAN, you no doubt by implication recognise the importance of funding and constructing Northern Powerhouse Rail (formerly known as HS3) and a transpennine motorway linking Sheffield and South Yorkshire with the road network to the West. Both of these proposals deserve funding as a higher priority than LHR R3 and both will benefit UKplc as a whole and not just the immediate region. Plus, it is high time that a major new infrastructure project actually got funded outside the South-East.
Nobody wants to use the coach or light rail when they have bags to cart around.
So once again you are talking about a future development that will not be operational until after 2030 from first hand experience
Getting on the BA shuttle at LBA you can go straight down the fast lane to security avoiding the queue and walk directly onto the aircraft
EDIT: I've just realised that you're referring to flight boarding arrangements at Leeds-Bradford Airport. All my comments relate to the arrivals experience for domestic to international flights at LHR itself.
Nowhere near as tedious as waiting for a train on a cold platform with all your bags, especially after a long haul night flight.
Than again, who cares about the majority of the north as long as the people of the Lancashire and Cheshire can have local direct flights.
Last edited by Shed-on-a-Pole; 9th May 2016 at 12:54. Reason: Clarification of LHR Transfer Comments
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Kent
Age: 47
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But we already know the range of projected estimates and can make preliminary judgments accordingly.
Fares from regionals are often higher than corresponding offers from London but must be set against the cost of travel to London and incidental costs such as an overnight hotel stay.
National express?? Are you serious?
Totally serious. Do you have a genuine problem with National Express or are you exhibiting snobbery?
Totally serious. Do you have a genuine problem with National Express or are you exhibiting snobbery?
So your complaint is that people who live close to an international airport are better placed for air travel than those who live more distantly from the airport? Is that not equally true everywhere?
NCL and MAN both offer regular long-hauls. DSA offers occasional long-haul charters to MCO etc. LPL has offered JFK and YYZ flights in the past but the market didn't sustain these. LBA has runway length limitations. MME and HUY are small niche operations. What other alternatives do you envisage?
I am not expecting the NY, MCO etc. flights to disappear from regional airports. If any airport can give the pax numbers then an airline is likely to fly the route. Thats supply and demand. The fact remains however that even Manchester doesn't have the demand for a large number of international locations that an expanded LHR connected to multiple regionals would.
This is more about routes that currently require a change elsewhere and bringing the connection in to the UK. It's about routes that will only work when they are servicing the whole of the UK market. These routes then bring in connecting traffic from elsewhere outside the UK. The numbers of people flying to Amsterdam to connect show the market is there.
It is also not just about domestic connections even though I have been concentrating on that. There is a lot of money spent whilst waiting for a connecting flight. That's income direct into the UK which otherwise would not be there.
So once again you are talking about a future development that will not be operational until after 2030 from first hand experience
No, I was talking about LHR transfer arrangements in place at the present time from first-hand experience. Neither of us could know what to expect in 2030.
No, I was talking about LHR transfer arrangements in place at the present time from first-hand experience. Neither of us could know what to expect in 2030.
Well that option wasn't offered to me using the Shuttle from MAN. Were you on a special ticket? Anyway, what about the people who do have to join the queue? Do we just ignore their implied transit times? They're passengers too. All part of the equation.
EDIT: I've just realised that you're referring to flight boarding arrangements at Leeds-Bradford Airport. All my comments relate to the arrivals experience for domestic to international flights at LHR itself.
EDIT: I've just realised that you're referring to flight boarding arrangements at Leeds-Bradford Airport. All my comments relate to the arrivals experience for domestic to international flights at LHR itself.
As for the funding argument and HS2/3, Northern powerhouse etc. I am all for it. I hope to be working on it. If any project can give a return on investment to UK PLC then lets do it. You could build LHR, HS2, HS3, the Sheffield to Manchester tunnel and a new runway at LGW for less than the amount given to bail out the banks. All of these would pay for themselves and more in the long run IMO.
Hub?
Mining into the figures of passenger traffic at HAL.
1 in 3 are transfer pax, are these business or leisure travellers, HAL does not declare. How is a business traveller defined? I have travelled on business numerous times of behalf of the UK Govt on economy fares, so it cannot be just on the declared business fare class. I have had to use the Dubai hub to visit the far east, and an Asian carrier to NYC, both offering cheaper fares to save HMG money, both as a business traveller.
On a recent leisure trip to Barcelona for a cruise I was offered BA outbound and Vuelling in bound (both IAG group) from LHR, cheaper than gong to Gatwick (with car parking costs). Speaking to other travellers - one from Inverness, booked a cheaper fare to Gatwick, and used the agent to book the holiday from there to BCN, one took a coach from Glasgow to Manchester but discovered the flight was via AMS, the Belfast pax drove to Dublin as it was cheaper (IAG partner).
A large volume of leisure travellers throughout the UK have a wide choice of journey routes, and only the travel agents know which is the cheaper fare/route.
Middle East wealth funds have holdings in HAL, IAG and their own airline(s), the airlines part own NATS - conflict?
I recently had the opportunity of challenging HAL on why they only quote export figures of over £110bn in their promotion, how much is the import value? There reluctant reply was nearly half that value were imports.
1 in 3 are transfer pax, are these business or leisure travellers, HAL does not declare. How is a business traveller defined? I have travelled on business numerous times of behalf of the UK Govt on economy fares, so it cannot be just on the declared business fare class. I have had to use the Dubai hub to visit the far east, and an Asian carrier to NYC, both offering cheaper fares to save HMG money, both as a business traveller.
On a recent leisure trip to Barcelona for a cruise I was offered BA outbound and Vuelling in bound (both IAG group) from LHR, cheaper than gong to Gatwick (with car parking costs). Speaking to other travellers - one from Inverness, booked a cheaper fare to Gatwick, and used the agent to book the holiday from there to BCN, one took a coach from Glasgow to Manchester but discovered the flight was via AMS, the Belfast pax drove to Dublin as it was cheaper (IAG partner).
A large volume of leisure travellers throughout the UK have a wide choice of journey routes, and only the travel agents know which is the cheaper fare/route.
Middle East wealth funds have holdings in HAL, IAG and their own airline(s), the airlines part own NATS - conflict?
I recently had the opportunity of challenging HAL on why they only quote export figures of over £110bn in their promotion, how much is the import value? There reluctant reply was nearly half that value were imports.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Really? Then why do we have 3 different figures put forward for the access works.
If the train to London, tube transfer and hotel room was replaced by a 45 minute cheap shuttle flight though?
The last thing people want is to have to get on a coach after a long flight and sit on the motorway
You have already mentioned that people pay a premium to fly from Manchester. Add that to a coach/train ticket or expensive taxi fare and it is not even cheaper than the LHR option. Certainly a lot more hassle though.
It is, which is why connecting regionals that could never hope to have LH flights with LHR is such a good thing.
The fact remains however that even Manchester doesn't have the demand for a large number of international locations that an expanded LHR connected to multiple regionals would.
This is more about routes that currently require a change elsewhere and bringing the connection in to the UK.
The numbers of people flying to Amsterdam to connect show the market is there.
There is a lot of money spent whilst waiting for a connecting flight.
Talking about the setup in place at the moment though is pointless.
You could build LHR, HS2, HS3, the Sheffield to Manchester tunnel and a new runway at LGW for less than the amount given to bail out the banks.
All of these would pay for themselves and more in the long run IMO.
Strangely enough, by asking passengers.
Not everyone, obviously, but a representative sample by means of a regular survey. If you use Heathrow often enough, sooner or later you will be accosted by an eager person with a clipboard on behalf of either Heathrow Airport or the CAA. Among the questions they will ask is your reason for travel.
Not everyone, obviously, but a representative sample by means of a regular survey. If you use Heathrow often enough, sooner or later you will be accosted by an eager person with a clipboard on behalf of either Heathrow Airport or the CAA. Among the questions they will ask is your reason for travel.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 2 DME
Age: 54
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This argument applies equally to all other backlogged infrastructure projects which could share £18Bn of scarce public funding. Many of these offer far better value to the taxpayer than LHR R3.
Since you express dissatisfaction with the surface travel options available to those wishing to access MAN, you no doubt by implication recognise the importance of funding and constructing Northern Powerhouse Rail (formerly known as HS3) and a transpennine motorway linking Sheffield and South Yorkshire with the road network to the West. Both of these proposals deserve funding as a higher priority than LHR R3 and both will benefit UKplc as a whole and not just the immediate region.
For all its faults R3 (I do wish they would come up with a better name for it that captures the sheer scale of this project) does at least have a business case that has been subject to some economic modelling.
You also seem to overlook that increasingly TfL will have to fund its own projects so the taxpayers and service users affected will be those living and working (and running businesses) in London, not the rest of the U.K. In that case it is only natural that it will try to lump as much of its future project costs on to the back of any major development that gets put forward. There is no magic £18bn pot of money sat in the Treasury to fund the wish list of those wanting to secure investment for the regions. As you rightly say there are limited resources at the present time so investment will flow to those projects that generate the most growth (principally in the form of GVA and tax revenue).
Airports rightly are expected under State Aid rules to meet the costs of infrastructure from which they directly benefit. So far TfL (I suspect partly driven by their former political master) have been stretching the definition of direct benefit beyond reason and have included any and every project that is linked to Heathrow that might require investment in the next couple of decades.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK (reluctantly)
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Andy- well said.
Shed - I've read the earlier post again and I'm still none the wiser about the public bodies you claim have demonstrated the AC methodology is flawed. Quoting an obscure website & 2 ex-members of the AC isn't solid evidence. I've quoted from mainstream media sources, various industry associations & the evidence based AC report. Even your neighbours in Liverpool favour LHR expansion over connecting through their closest international airport.
I'd also question your assertion that investing £18bn across the regions would generate the same ROI to UK plc. As Andy points out, the only published business cases relate to LHR & LGW so please provide reputable sources of the ROI for the schemes you have in mind.
Shed - I've read the earlier post again and I'm still none the wiser about the public bodies you claim have demonstrated the AC methodology is flawed. Quoting an obscure website & 2 ex-members of the AC isn't solid evidence. I've quoted from mainstream media sources, various industry associations & the evidence based AC report. Even your neighbours in Liverpool favour LHR expansion over connecting through their closest international airport.
I'd also question your assertion that investing £18bn across the regions would generate the same ROI to UK plc. As Andy points out, the only published business cases relate to LHR & LGW so please provide reputable sources of the ROI for the schemes you have in mind.
"If you use Heathrow often enough, sooner or later you will be accosted by an eager person with a clipboard on behalf of either Heathrow Airport or the CAA. Among the questions they will ask is your reason for travel"
Most business travellers go straight to the lounges and ignore them. Not a very authorative way to assess business travellers. Personally I shimmy past them like chuggers in the High St.
Most business travellers go straight to the lounges and ignore them. Not a very authorative way to assess business travellers. Personally I shimmy past them like chuggers in the High St.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've answered your many repetitive questions ad infinitum, T&N, as readers here can testify. Likewise those of Prophead. Those earlier postings do address the relevant issues as other readers are free to check. The onus is now on you to back up your suppositions.
As for your point about Liverpool, bear in mind that I have argued this whole debate from a national (not Manchester) perspective. Prophead introduced the Manchester angle in the course of postings discussing his travel preferences.
Opinions in Liverpool are actually divided (although in some extreme cases driven by bitter historic rivalry). Liverpudlians are free to make whatever journey choices they like. However, urging another massive overspend on SE transport infrastructure at the expense of their own city's renaissance is a source of some bemusement. Are those R3 cheerleaders unable to cope with the maths, or does their hatred for all things Manchester override everything else? From my own perspective, I continue to lobby for a fair deal for Merseyside's own transport infrastucture along with that in other regional centres long deprived of transformational public funding.
By the way, whilst I'm flattered by your confidence in my extra-temporal abilities, producing documents (reputable or otherwise) which haven't been written yet is beyond my skill-set. Surprising, I know! If you have learned the secret of time travel I will be interested to read such future documents as you propose to retrieve.
As for your point about Liverpool, bear in mind that I have argued this whole debate from a national (not Manchester) perspective. Prophead introduced the Manchester angle in the course of postings discussing his travel preferences.
Opinions in Liverpool are actually divided (although in some extreme cases driven by bitter historic rivalry). Liverpudlians are free to make whatever journey choices they like. However, urging another massive overspend on SE transport infrastructure at the expense of their own city's renaissance is a source of some bemusement. Are those R3 cheerleaders unable to cope with the maths, or does their hatred for all things Manchester override everything else? From my own perspective, I continue to lobby for a fair deal for Merseyside's own transport infrastucture along with that in other regional centres long deprived of transformational public funding.
By the way, whilst I'm flattered by your confidence in my extra-temporal abilities, producing documents (reputable or otherwise) which haven't been written yet is beyond my skill-set. Surprising, I know! If you have learned the secret of time travel I will be interested to read such future documents as you propose to retrieve.
Last edited by Shed-on-a-Pole; 9th May 2016 at 22:53.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK (reluctantly)
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shed, thanks for confirming your posts are based on your opinion and not evidence-based as you often imply. Nothing wrong with posting an opinion on a rumour forum after all.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Liverpool, along with its sister airports, Doncaster Sheffield and Durham Tees Valley, support the 3rd runway at Heathrow. All three airports are majority owned by Manchester-based Peel Holdings who also support the Heathrow expansion.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shed, thanks for confirming your posts are based on your opinion and not evidence-based as you often imply.
Liverpool, along with its sister airports, Doncaster Sheffield and Durham Tees Valley, support the 3rd runway at Heathrow. All three airports are majority owned by Manchester-based Peel Holdings who also support the Heathrow expansion.
Oh, and 3 x A319 per day to LHR at the [considerable] expense of OPM would be lovely too!
Last edited by Shed-on-a-Pole; 10th May 2016 at 08:51.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Kent
Age: 47
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So your tactic is to challenge me to quote from documents which do not yet exist, then dismiss the entirety of my arguments when I remind you that I can't time-travel. Genius. I'm amazed you haven't made QC yet.
And of course, Manchester's opposition to R3 at Heathrow is not a vested intereste
The rest of the north should be happy with National Express travel to MAN for their flights and stop all this snobbery about luggage free connecting flights from over the hills.