LUTON -8
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,861
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not only did the airport misjudge how busy the drop off zone would be but they also misjudged how many exit barriers they would need. This time though it is hurting them in their pockets as the 5 exit barriers can't cope causing long tailbacks. The only solution is that the airport keep having to raise the barriers to clear the long queus, which is costing £1000's each day in lost charges.
racedo - given that your opinions seem to very closely match those of Ryanair, I would have thought you would endorse an approach of keeping spending by airports to the absolute minimum. If airports are to invest in a more pleasant terminal, airport charges to airlines like Ryanair will inevitably increase...
Opinions I express on here are mine alone, nobody elses.
racedo - not trying to have digs at you, but your views have correlated for a long time very strongly with those in favour of Ryanair - I know I'm not the only one here who has noticed that. You're intelligent and more than capable of making a case for or against something - perhaps explaining in more depth the reasoning behind your opinions might help encourage the perception of independent thought ?
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: -
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to interrupt all you armchair architects and civil engineers, just thought I would change the subject...
Wizzair launch Luton as an official base this Sunday and will see the opening of Kutaisi, Pristina and Tel Aviv over the next few days. Exciting times!
Tel Aviv will now become a four airline route and will on some days see six flights a day, 2x easyJet, 2x ELAL, 1x Monarch and 1x Wizz.
Completely unscientific and rather flawed, but I looked at the number of seats available on Wizz Air's first flight to Tel Aviv and they have 70 seats available or people who have not yet checked in.
On the same day when you look at Monarch they had 107 seats still available or not yet checked in and on easyJet, 64 seats on the AM flight and 23 on the PM flight. Im unable to look at ELAL's, but Wizz Air's numbers seem quite favourable and they are not the cheapest on the route!
Wizzair launch Luton as an official base this Sunday and will see the opening of Kutaisi, Pristina and Tel Aviv over the next few days. Exciting times!
Tel Aviv will now become a four airline route and will on some days see six flights a day, 2x easyJet, 2x ELAL, 1x Monarch and 1x Wizz.
Completely unscientific and rather flawed, but I looked at the number of seats available on Wizz Air's first flight to Tel Aviv and they have 70 seats available or people who have not yet checked in.
On the same day when you look at Monarch they had 107 seats still available or not yet checked in and on easyJet, 64 seats on the AM flight and 23 on the PM flight. Im unable to look at ELAL's, but Wizz Air's numbers seem quite favourable and they are not the cheapest on the route!
Last edited by gilesdavies; 16th Jun 2017 at 23:16. Reason: granny
Tel Aviv
I've said it before (and been shot down !) but there has to be a saturation point in demand for London-Tel Aviv
There are 6 airlines flying London to Tel Aviv with 4 of these operating (at least in part) from Luton. Paris+suburbs has almost double the number of Jews as London+suburbs but Paris has just 5 airlines (with a 6th operating only around peak demand periods). At some point the weakest player on the city pair will presumably feel pain and consolidation should occur.
Paris has a few flights at reasonable cost leaving Paris just before midnight and arriving Tel Aviv about 5 am - these flights are well patronised (e.g. an A320 overbooked in the middle of November). Given Luton's lack of overnight stands, it puzzles me why Monarch, Easyjet or Wizzair do not trial this even just twice per week over a winter from late October to late March (even if it means putting crew in a hotel overnight).
There are 6 airlines flying London to Tel Aviv with 4 of these operating (at least in part) from Luton. Paris+suburbs has almost double the number of Jews as London+suburbs but Paris has just 5 airlines (with a 6th operating only around peak demand periods). At some point the weakest player on the city pair will presumably feel pain and consolidation should occur.
Paris has a few flights at reasonable cost leaving Paris just before midnight and arriving Tel Aviv about 5 am - these flights are well patronised (e.g. an A320 overbooked in the middle of November). Given Luton's lack of overnight stands, it puzzles me why Monarch, Easyjet or Wizzair do not trial this even just twice per week over a winter from late October to late March (even if it means putting crew in a hotel overnight).
Last edited by davidjohnson6; 17th Jun 2017 at 01:10.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,861
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Luton gives El Al flexibility to easily add extra flights to meet peak demand during Jewish holidays. Not sure who the weak player is amongst the other three airlines. EasyJet is getting a reputation of not being willing to fight any battles. Monarch are not Luton's strongest airline and Wizz are dipping their toe in the water so might get cold feet if they can't poach enough passengers.
racedo - not trying to have digs at you, but your views have correlated for a long time very strongly with those in favour of Ryanair - I know I'm not the only one here who has noticed that. You're intelligent and more than capable of making a case for or against something - perhaps explaining in more depth the reasoning behind your opinions might help encourage the perception of independent thought ?
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Luton
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ryanair
As stated in this forum before-it is a' predator' who simply looks to steal LTN business, pay less towards airport charges and thus airport development (simply to increase it's own profits) and therefore in my own words prostitutes itself to 'pimps' happy to subsidize the personal fortunes of it's senior management.
Luton in my view is now in a position whereby it could become in the next few years London's 3rd airport and the UK's 3rd airport with a bit more investment and faith.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 60
Posts: 3,801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on, be real! STN & MAN will always be 3rd & 4th, especially when STN gets a second runway if LHR doesn't pull it's figure out!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,039
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My understanding was that the BAA quietly acquired homes and land where the proposed new runway was to be constructed at Stansted over many, many years. When the BAA was sold off, these houses and land were not part of the deal. No idea who is the landlord now.
Tourism wise, Israel is being heavily marketed as the 'new' Egypt, so exponential growth could well occur. When Ramon opens, Eilat and Ovda ops will shift there and maybe some of the Tel-Aviv flights?
Tourism wise, Israel is being heavily marketed as the 'new' Egypt, so exponential growth could well occur. When Ramon opens, Eilat and Ovda ops will shift there and maybe some of the Tel-Aviv flights?
It is of my personal opinion that I wish Ryanair would leave LTN once and for all.
As stated in this forum before-it is a' predator' who simply looks to steal LTN business, pay less towards airport charges and thus airport development (simply to increase it's own profits) and therefore in my own words prostitutes itself to 'pimps' happy to subsidize the personal fortunes of it's senior management.
Luton in my view is now in a position whereby it could become in the next few years London's 3rd airport and the UK's 3rd airport with a bit more investment and faith.
As stated in this forum before-it is a' predator' who simply looks to steal LTN business, pay less towards airport charges and thus airport development (simply to increase it's own profits) and therefore in my own words prostitutes itself to 'pimps' happy to subsidize the personal fortunes of it's senior management.
Luton in my view is now in a position whereby it could become in the next few years London's 3rd airport and the UK's 3rd airport with a bit more investment and faith.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Milton Keynes
Posts: 1,070
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is of my personal opinion that I wish Ryanair would leave LTN once and for all.
As stated in this forum before-it is a' predator' who simply looks to steal LTN business, pay less towards airport charges and thus airport development (simply to increase it's own profits) and therefore in my own words prostitutes itself to 'pimps' happy to subsidize the personal fortunes of it's senior management.
As stated in this forum before-it is a' predator' who simply looks to steal LTN business, pay less towards airport charges and thus airport development (simply to increase it's own profits) and therefore in my own words prostitutes itself to 'pimps' happy to subsidize the personal fortunes of it's senior management.
If they are predators and pimps as you suggest they are very successful ones and millions travel with them every year
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,861
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it is clear that the council rather than Anea have a hidden agenda to expand Luton beyond its stated capacity of 18 million passengers.
All of the components, whether that be taxiway upgrades, terminal expansion, more stands and a new CTA layout with a multi story car park was meant to max out the airports theoretical limit due to size constraints but with the council funding a £200 million rail link for an airport that would grow to 18 million passengers without it I have to ask why.
It is worth remembering that Anea had said the airports limit was 16 million passengers but the revised limit of the new proposed CTA with two additional multi-storey car parks is up to 23 million. With the terminal enclosed by aprons on 3 sides and a CTA that looks like it will shrink expanding the terminal will be a challenge.
All of the components, whether that be taxiway upgrades, terminal expansion, more stands and a new CTA layout with a multi story car park was meant to max out the airports theoretical limit due to size constraints but with the council funding a £200 million rail link for an airport that would grow to 18 million passengers without it I have to ask why.
It is worth remembering that Anea had said the airports limit was 16 million passengers but the revised limit of the new proposed CTA with two additional multi-storey car parks is up to 23 million. With the terminal enclosed by aprons on 3 sides and a CTA that looks like it will shrink expanding the terminal will be a challenge.
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Luton
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only way which seems logical to me in order to increase Luton's capacity is to move the hangar line over to taxiway alpha while and extend the engine run up bay towards the east which could be accessed by the New Century Park. The old hangar line could be a satellite pier accessed via a bridge i.e Gatwick or an underground concourse. This is the only way I could see Luton progressing forward but like LTNMAN said, space is running out fast and the terminal can't really expand much further without going outside the CTA boundries unless Easy HQ was moved to the new hangar line.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,861
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The council gift Wigmore Park to LLAOL and the airport plan to turn it into a business park. Seems all very strange to me as this was the natural area for airport expansion. I try to think outside the box but I still can't see the councils big picture how they intend to increase the terminal capacity.
We then go back to the councils plan to spend £200 million on a rail link for a terminal that would reach its capacity without the rail link.
We then go back to the councils plan to spend £200 million on a rail link for a terminal that would reach its capacity without the rail link.
What is limited is terminal-accessed stands. That would not be improved if the hangar line or Easy's hangar was incorporated into the CTA. My view is that the only alternative is a second terminal, which would have to be on the area of the old Council tip, and linked to Parkway station and the M1 by an extended mass-transit link and road tunnel.
The alternative is to extend south of the runway, and there are LBC/Hertfordshire complications in doing that.
The alternative is to extend south of the runway, and there are LBC/Hertfordshire complications in doing that.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,861
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A new pier for a new apron in the spare part of the short term car park would give them 4 stands there plus another 6 of it was extended along the south stands.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: In a house
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There would be no room for additional car parking in the CTA, but the current multi-storey would be sufficient for pick-up/set-down on the ground floor, disabled parking, taxis and drop-off parking services.
Short-term parking would have to be relocated to a new multi-storey in the mid-term car park, but if adjacent to a free stop on the new rail transit, then it would be satisfactory. With the bonus of removing some road traffic from entering the CTA altogether.
It probably won't happen, since airport development usually proceeds with little thought for future growth, which is one of the reasons the CTA is under an almost constant state of re-design.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,861
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The airport have already laid out their plans for its final solution regarding the CTA with regards to a second multi-storey which creates space for an addition apron. Maybe the terminal could expand onto the bus station if the bus station moved to the EasyJet hangar site or to the mid term car park but it would just add to the list of money wasted on exiting projects that will have a very short life.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,861
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The fleet of National Express double decker coaches that were purchased to operate the London Victoria service have been dispatched to Wales after issues were found with their luggage handling capabilities.