LUTON -8
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ballymena
Posts: 1,438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was through Luton on Monday, the place especially outside is a shambles. I wish they would ask a stranger to follow their signage to let the powers that be see how pathetic they are. Useless.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,859
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am inclined to agree with you as there is no excess for as something as simple as a few good signs. For example anyone heading for priority parking won't hit the first signpost until they are opposite the multistory car park traveling parallel to taxiway Delta. The signage for the multistory ends by the drop off zone and these are permanent finished signage.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,039
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: -
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this is a little pie in the sky, wishful thinking...
But with the new A321 NEO's coming online with Wizzair next year, would be amazing to see them open up a Luton to Dubai route, like they operate from other bases.
But with the new A321 NEO's coming online with Wizzair next year, would be amazing to see them open up a Luton to Dubai route, like they operate from other bases.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: A place you do not know
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wizz haven't based any more planes this summer than their was going to be. By the looks of it we shall have one a321 for the summer and a320 which is all year round which has happened for the last year.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,859
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"For the scale and size of the business, the operating model is not efficient or sustainable. If we want to grow, we need to base some capacity there," Varadi told Reuters, adding that space at Luton was getting tight and Wizz wanted to book an overnight stand before rivals did.
Basing planes at Luton will give the airline more flexibility and allow it to open more routes, he added.
Basing planes at Luton will give the airline more flexibility and allow it to open more routes, he added.
So Wizz say they are grabbing an overnight stand while they can. Ryanair's loss is Wizzair's gain.
I don't see stands are an issue this summer unless the airport don't want to use the south stands for passengers until the pier is finished. Also the Pond has supposed to have gone back to the airport although you would never have guessed it. The northern hangar line has also gained 1 more stand from last year.
Runway capacity is limited by the capacity imposed by the taxiway to 08. Once that is finished later this year that should increase the capacity somewhat.
As for a lack of terminal capacity and CTA capacity the airport does not worry about that.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: -
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hypothetical question, could the airport increase throughput on the runway and gain further slots by making aircraft depart from the current taxiway entrances to the runway? This gives a runway length still longer than airports like Bristol and Southend...
For example if airlines wanted to operate a newly created slot with the above policy, they would have to ensure they operate an aircraft type that has the available take-off performance to operate from that amount of available concrete and not the full runway length...
I have watched the Flight Radar 24 app on and off and you can see from that where aircraft depart from on the runway, I would say about 80-90% of flights are currently doing this anyway, and only seems to be a few Monarch and Wizz Flights that back track.
When I flew to Copenhagen the other week, the Ryanair flight I was on departed from Runway 8 at the entrance point of the taxi way, I've previously only noticed it on Westerly departures.
If there was some kind of incident on a departing flight using the reduced amount of runway, I would imagine the press would have a field day, and claiming the airport/ATC forced the pilot to only use reduced amount of runway !
For example if airlines wanted to operate a newly created slot with the above policy, they would have to ensure they operate an aircraft type that has the available take-off performance to operate from that amount of available concrete and not the full runway length...
I have watched the Flight Radar 24 app on and off and you can see from that where aircraft depart from on the runway, I would say about 80-90% of flights are currently doing this anyway, and only seems to be a few Monarch and Wizz Flights that back track.
When I flew to Copenhagen the other week, the Ryanair flight I was on departed from Runway 8 at the entrance point of the taxi way, I've previously only noticed it on Westerly departures.
If there was some kind of incident on a departing flight using the reduced amount of runway, I would imagine the press would have a field day, and claiming the airport/ATC forced the pilot to only use reduced amount of runway !
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess it would be difficult to increase slot allocations based on reducing backtracking as it's near impossible to tell which aircraft at which time would need the additional length.
Pilots know exactly how much take-off distance they'll require based on the weight of their aircraft. The TORA for RWY26 from Taxiway A intersection is 1771m. For RWY08 from intersection B it's even less... only 1688m. That's actually quite a bit less than that of Bristol or even Southend.
Those distances would not nearly be enough for a fully loaded B737. In the middle of January/February you'd perhaps expect the loads to be much lighter than they are in say July/August, hence maybe a lower proportion of departures backtracking at the moment.
For those reasons it would be difficult to build backtracking requirements into slot allocations.
Pilots know exactly how much take-off distance they'll require based on the weight of their aircraft. The TORA for RWY26 from Taxiway A intersection is 1771m. For RWY08 from intersection B it's even less... only 1688m. That's actually quite a bit less than that of Bristol or even Southend.
Those distances would not nearly be enough for a fully loaded B737. In the middle of January/February you'd perhaps expect the loads to be much lighter than they are in say July/August, hence maybe a lower proportion of departures backtracking at the moment.
For those reasons it would be difficult to build backtracking requirements into slot allocations.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,859
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Luton makes the assumption that most aircraft, but not all, can depart from the intersections. One of the main issues with 08 is that the queue backs on to the apron
PDF here about Luton capacity
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...,d.d24&cad=rja
and here for London Luton Airport Scheduling Declaration for Winter 2016 plus stand capacity
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...,d.d24&cad=rja
PDF here about Luton capacity
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...,d.d24&cad=rja
and here for London Luton Airport Scheduling Declaration for Winter 2016 plus stand capacity
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...,d.d24&cad=rja
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It certianly seems some kind of procedure has changed though as gilesdavies says, there do seem to be fewer departures backtracking than in the past. That's probably just because the airport is getting busier and ATC are only permitting those aircraft that actually need the additional length to backtrack.
Quite often if there wasn't much other traffic waiting to depart and nothing on final approach, ATC would just let the pilot have the additional length even if they could have managed from the intersection (of course this could raise all manner of debate around OTP vs fuel efficiency, but pilots would generally prefer the greater length where possible). This doesn't seem to be the case so often anymore as the runway is catering for more ATMs.
STN has seen a similar change for similar reasons in that most FR aircraft arriving on RWY04 would often extend their landing roll right to the end of the runway in order to vacate nearer to Satellite 3 where they'd be parking. ATC are increasingly not permitting this as they need to maximise runway efficiency and instead the vast majority of arrivals are now vacating via the high-speed exits.
Quite often if there wasn't much other traffic waiting to depart and nothing on final approach, ATC would just let the pilot have the additional length even if they could have managed from the intersection (of course this could raise all manner of debate around OTP vs fuel efficiency, but pilots would generally prefer the greater length where possible). This doesn't seem to be the case so often anymore as the runway is catering for more ATMs.
STN has seen a similar change for similar reasons in that most FR aircraft arriving on RWY04 would often extend their landing roll right to the end of the runway in order to vacate nearer to Satellite 3 where they'd be parking. ATC are increasingly not permitting this as they need to maximise runway efficiency and instead the vast majority of arrivals are now vacating via the high-speed exits.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Milton Keynes
Posts: 1,070
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would not be possible with the current set up to give an airline a slot on the basis of an intersection departure in most cases.
Whether an intersection take off is permissible on any given day is dependent on many factors including but not limited to surface wind strength and direction, temperature, pressure, wet or dry or contaminated runway, pax load, fuel load (may vary if bad weather at destination leads to a need to carry extra fuel) etc. etc.
Whether an intersection take off is permissible on any given day is dependent on many factors including but not limited to surface wind strength and direction, temperature, pressure, wet or dry or contaminated runway, pax load, fuel load (may vary if bad weather at destination leads to a need to carry extra fuel) etc. etc.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Luton
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Intersection Departures
I have seen A300'S, 767-300'S and 777's depart from intersections.
Once the new extended taxiways are built and connected to the 'close' ends of each runway then I am sure more movements can be accommodated per hour.
Just six extra movements per hour could generate an extra 2.5 MPPA.
By the year end 15.2 million passengers will have used the airport. With approximately 6% growth each year until 2020 the airport will have met it's intended growth, until the next phase comes in.
I personally would like to see Luton reach 25 million passengers per year and believe it is possible once the infrastructure is put in place and we are considerate of our neighbors in other towns close to the airport.
Once the new extended taxiways are built and connected to the 'close' ends of each runway then I am sure more movements can be accommodated per hour.
Just six extra movements per hour could generate an extra 2.5 MPPA.
By the year end 15.2 million passengers will have used the airport. With approximately 6% growth each year until 2020 the airport will have met it's intended growth, until the next phase comes in.
I personally would like to see Luton reach 25 million passengers per year and believe it is possible once the infrastructure is put in place and we are considerate of our neighbors in other towns close to the airport.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Milton Keynes
Posts: 1,070
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have seen A300'S, 767-300'S and 777's depart from intersections
once the infrastructure is put in place
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: England
Posts: 762
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bear in mind that intersection take-offs have the advantage of having a fairly long TODA compared to TORA. This may allow most medium haul flights to depart from intersections, subject of course to weather conditions being favourable at the time.