LUTON -8
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Hitchin
Posts: 1,405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I've been using both Glasgow & Edinburgh flights from Luton extensively over recent months, and certainly all the first 6 to 8 rows, i.e. Up Front Seats, have had a very high proportion of "suits" on board, but I can't really comment on other routes. Glasgow is only 2 per day mid-week in summer, other weekdays 3, although this does tend to increase over the winter period. The terminal is always heaving and there is very little seating. I always use the Aspire lounge, which is great, but have noticed recently, that this seems to be getting extremely busy, as more & more pax seem prepared to pay, to escape the chaos of the terminal below.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: No fixed abode
Posts: 792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So that's the new income stream for the airport:
"Book your seat in the departure lounge in advance"
Guaranteed to be a winner!
But seriously as one of the customer feedbacks asked, I wonder just how many seats are available in the departure lounge (not including gates 1-4) for departing passengers considering the throughput per hour at peak is some 2500pax per hour
"Book your seat in the departure lounge in advance"
Guaranteed to be a winner!
But seriously as one of the customer feedbacks asked, I wonder just how many seats are available in the departure lounge (not including gates 1-4) for departing passengers considering the throughput per hour at peak is some 2500pax per hour
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would say in the region of around 150 free seats are provided now in the departure lounge that are not associated with food and drink outlets. In fact it might not even be that many.
Luton's old departure lounge back in the 80's used to be a green and pleasant land for that Southend experience but then it had only had one small newsagent and no duty free shop. It did allow the airport to provide more seats than it does now in the new terminal departure lounge.
1985
Same lounge but taken in 2016 from the far end of the first photo but looking back in the opposite direction after a mezzanine floor was added to the old departure lounge in the 90's. The carpet has been replaced by a laminate floor but if you know where to look there are still plenty of empty seats on two levels as I headed for gates 1-7. I took this photo at 6:52 in the morning, just a 5 minute walk away it was heaving.
Luton's old departure lounge back in the 80's used to be a green and pleasant land for that Southend experience but then it had only had one small newsagent and no duty free shop. It did allow the airport to provide more seats than it does now in the new terminal departure lounge.
1985
Same lounge but taken in 2016 from the far end of the first photo but looking back in the opposite direction after a mezzanine floor was added to the old departure lounge in the 90's. The carpet has been replaced by a laminate floor but if you know where to look there are still plenty of empty seats on two levels as I headed for gates 1-7. I took this photo at 6:52 in the morning, just a 5 minute walk away it was heaving.
Last edited by LTNman; 26th Jul 2017 at 05:17.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 60
Posts: 3,793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Parkway
Bedford's fast train services face being dramatically reduced as part of government plans | Bedfordshire News
So this makes less Midland Mainline trains stopping at Luton Parkway?
So this makes less Midland Mainline trains stopping at Luton Parkway?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Corby trains do not presently stop at Parkway but if they did and the timetable remained the same there would indeed be no peak time service with a 4 hour gap in the morning from Parkway and then an hourly service from after 10.00
It would not be the end of the world but it would kill off any idea of a regular 30 minute journey time between the terminal and St Pancras with an express type journey after the rail link is put in.
It would be though a major blow to the airport and the lobbyist supporters including easyjet, Luton Council, Bedfordshire Chamber of Commerce, Hertfordshire Chamber of Commerce and the CBI
I am sure that not in their wildest dreams or should I say nightmares could they have predicted a potential outcome that would leave the airport with a worse service when it is trying to get a substantial improvement at no cost to the government.
Train lengths on East Midland trains are much shorter than the west coast and east coast main lines so for the sake of adding coaches the potential solution is to cut services.
Also looking in the other direction Luton would lose its direct services to cities like Nottingham and Leicester.
Clearly if implemented without a 4 train per hour non stop service to London would cut the number of potential new passengers arriving by train but for that very reason seems to be the motive behind this proposal.
When I mentioned in the past my certainty that Luton would gain a major improvement some here pointed out the issues with the existing overcrowding of trains. It seems that their concerns were well founded. This must be the only country where a major airport that serves a capital city and has substantially rising passenger numbers gets a potential cut in service.
It would not be the end of the world but it would kill off any idea of a regular 30 minute journey time between the terminal and St Pancras with an express type journey after the rail link is put in.
It would be though a major blow to the airport and the lobbyist supporters including easyjet, Luton Council, Bedfordshire Chamber of Commerce, Hertfordshire Chamber of Commerce and the CBI
I am sure that not in their wildest dreams or should I say nightmares could they have predicted a potential outcome that would leave the airport with a worse service when it is trying to get a substantial improvement at no cost to the government.
Train lengths on East Midland trains are much shorter than the west coast and east coast main lines so for the sake of adding coaches the potential solution is to cut services.
Also looking in the other direction Luton would lose its direct services to cities like Nottingham and Leicester.
Clearly if implemented without a 4 train per hour non stop service to London would cut the number of potential new passengers arriving by train but for that very reason seems to be the motive behind this proposal.
When I mentioned in the past my certainty that Luton would gain a major improvement some here pointed out the issues with the existing overcrowding of trains. It seems that their concerns were well founded. This must be the only country where a major airport that serves a capital city and has substantially rising passenger numbers gets a potential cut in service.
Last edited by LTNman; 29th Jul 2017 at 06:48.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Milton Keynes
Posts: 1,070
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think the proposal is for two trains per hour to Corby formed on electric class 387 multiple sets with interchange to services further north at Kettering (but not that frequent). The electro diesels running from 2022 will probably be slower when diesel powered than the current HSTs so to maintain journey times stops will have to be cut.
Corby trains do not presently stop at Parkway but if they did and the timetable remained the same there would indeed be no peak time service with a 4 hour gap in the morning from Parkway and then an hourly service from after 10.00
It would not be the end of the world but it would kill off any idea of a regular 30 minute journey time between the terminal and St Pancras with an express type journey after the rail link is put in.
It would be though a major blow to the airport and the lobbyist supporters including easyjet, Luton Council, Bedfordshire Chamber of Commerce, Hertfordshire Chamber of Commerce and the CBI
I am sure that not in their wildest dreams or should I say nightmares could they have predicted a potential outcome that would leave the airport with a worse service when it is trying to get a substantial improvement at no cost to the government.
Train lengths on East Midland trains are much shorter than the west coast and east coast main lines so for the sake of adding coaches the potential solution is to cut services.
Also looking in the other direction Luton would lose its direct services to cities like Nottingham and Leicester.
Clearly if implemented without a 4 train per hour non stop service to London would cut the number of potential new passengers arriving by train but for that very reason seems to be the motive behind this proposal.
When I mentioned in the past my certainty that Luton would gain a major improvement some here pointed out the issues with the existing overcrowding of trains. It seems that their concerns were well founded. This must be the only country where a major airport that serves a capital city and has substantially rising passenger numbers gets a potential cut in service.
It would not be the end of the world but it would kill off any idea of a regular 30 minute journey time between the terminal and St Pancras with an express type journey after the rail link is put in.
It would be though a major blow to the airport and the lobbyist supporters including easyjet, Luton Council, Bedfordshire Chamber of Commerce, Hertfordshire Chamber of Commerce and the CBI
I am sure that not in their wildest dreams or should I say nightmares could they have predicted a potential outcome that would leave the airport with a worse service when it is trying to get a substantial improvement at no cost to the government.
Train lengths on East Midland trains are much shorter than the west coast and east coast main lines so for the sake of adding coaches the potential solution is to cut services.
Also looking in the other direction Luton would lose its direct services to cities like Nottingham and Leicester.
Clearly if implemented without a 4 train per hour non stop service to London would cut the number of potential new passengers arriving by train but for that very reason seems to be the motive behind this proposal.
When I mentioned in the past my certainty that Luton would gain a major improvement some here pointed out the issues with the existing overcrowding of trains. It seems that their concerns were well founded. This must be the only country where a major airport that serves a capital city and has substantially rising passenger numbers gets a potential cut in service.
As someone who uses the train a lot between the Luton stations and London, it is clear that a substantial number of people leave the service at St Albans. At the last count, more people used that station than all three stations in Luton combined, which surprised me. Considering the population is probably double in Luton and has a major international airport, its probably a result of usage.
It would not surprise me if LLAOL/LBC actually decide to postpone the £200m link project if these plans got the go ahead.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Luton
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
St Albans
I'd have my doubts as to whether these proposals ever come to fruition, as it just seems to create the opposite effect as to what was intended.
As someone who uses the train a lot between the Luton stations and London, it is clear that a substantial number of people leave the service at St Albans. At the last count, more people used that station than all three stations in Luton combined, which surprised me. Considering the population is probably double in Luton and has a major international airport, its probably a result of usage.
It would not surprise me if LLAOL/LBC actually decide to postpone the £200m link project if these plans got the go ahead.
As someone who uses the train a lot between the Luton stations and London, it is clear that a substantial number of people leave the service at St Albans. At the last count, more people used that station than all three stations in Luton combined, which surprised me. Considering the population is probably double in Luton and has a major international airport, its probably a result of usage.
It would not surprise me if LLAOL/LBC actually decide to postpone the £200m link project if these plans got the go ahead.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: -
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Train Proposals for the new MML Franchise Post 2019...
The newly proposed train services are causing a lot of controversy up here in Northamptonshire, and below what I have written is what I understand from the local press and further digging about, is what they are proposing and will be the new source of the increase in services to the airport. It pretty much seems like we are becoming an extension to the Thameslink commuter service, but not going south of London.
It seems any stations south of Market Harborough and St Pancras will no longer be served by long distance trains on the Midland Mainline (MML) going North, except for one train an hour calling at Kettering to act as an interchange for the more local services running between St Pancras and Corby.
As a trade off there is talk of train services increasing at Wellingborough and Kettering from two an hour to three or possibly four more longer term, at off peak times. North of Bedford to Kettering North junction where the MML splits to Corby, they have already re-instated all four tracks and the capacity is in place. Just now need the electrification, which is due by 2019!
It is suggested LTN Parkway will be served by three trains an hour from Corby and one long distance train an hour, which I assume will be the same train that calls at Kettering.
It seems all the three Corby trains an hour will also call at Bedford, Luton and Luton Airport, slightly increasing journey times and stops for Northamptonshire users... Would have been nice if the new third hourly service from Corby didn't call at Bedford or Luton, considering the shear amount of trains that already serve these other stations south of Wellingborough.
Peak time Wellingborough and Kettering will see trains decrease from the current five to four an hour, but as the trains will be originating from Corby, they are saying there will be far more seats available, as busy Sheffield and Nottingham trains will not need to stop and speed these services up. I am assuming some of the peak time Corby services will also stop at Bedford, Luton and LTN Parkway.
http://www.northantstelegraph.co.uk/...osed-1-8064752
It seems any stations south of Market Harborough and St Pancras will no longer be served by long distance trains on the Midland Mainline (MML) going North, except for one train an hour calling at Kettering to act as an interchange for the more local services running between St Pancras and Corby.
As a trade off there is talk of train services increasing at Wellingborough and Kettering from two an hour to three or possibly four more longer term, at off peak times. North of Bedford to Kettering North junction where the MML splits to Corby, they have already re-instated all four tracks and the capacity is in place. Just now need the electrification, which is due by 2019!
It is suggested LTN Parkway will be served by three trains an hour from Corby and one long distance train an hour, which I assume will be the same train that calls at Kettering.
It seems all the three Corby trains an hour will also call at Bedford, Luton and Luton Airport, slightly increasing journey times and stops for Northamptonshire users... Would have been nice if the new third hourly service from Corby didn't call at Bedford or Luton, considering the shear amount of trains that already serve these other stations south of Wellingborough.
Peak time Wellingborough and Kettering will see trains decrease from the current five to four an hour, but as the trains will be originating from Corby, they are saying there will be far more seats available, as busy Sheffield and Nottingham trains will not need to stop and speed these services up. I am assuming some of the peak time Corby services will also stop at Bedford, Luton and LTN Parkway.
http://www.northantstelegraph.co.uk/...osed-1-8064752
Last edited by gilesdavies; 29th Jul 2017 at 13:58.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dannyboy39 wrote
Not sure what St Albans has to do with anything regarding the franchise. Also out of interest Luton stations were used by 8,729,370 passengers at the last count v 7,451,430 for St Albans.
Luton have certainly made a song and dance about a terminal to London travel time of 30 minutes but the shuttle bus link is a disaster that needs to be removed
gilesdavies wrote
The consultation documents can be found here as a PDF download https://www.gov.uk/government/consul...rail-franchise
I can't find what you are reporting. All it talks about is cutbacks but the document states on page 31
So it hasn't been dismissed but neither has it mentioned anything other than 1 train an hour on a new semi commuter service unless I have missed something. On the same page it asks for comments regarding Parkway and airport connections.
The report makes a valid point that the service is really an intercity service that is used by commuters, which is causing overcrowding. Their solution is just to remove the closest stations to London rather than increasing the length of the trains.
Luton Airport in their submission produced this 31 page PDF https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...ZQEnL-iJs3Aaag why 4 EM trains an hour should and could stop at Parkway so they will be rather peeved to say the least if not only this opportunity doesn't happen but they end up with a worse service.
As someone who uses the train a lot between the Luton stations and London, it is clear that a substantial number of people leave the service at St Albans. At the last count, more people used that station than all three stations in Luton combined, which surprised me.
It would not surprise me if LLAOL/LBC actually decide to postpone the £200m link project if these plans got the go ahead.
gilesdavies wrote
It is suggested LTN Parkway will be served by three trains an hour from Corby and one long distance train an hour, which I assume will be the same train that calls at Kettering.
I can't find what you are reporting. All it talks about is cutbacks but the document states on page 31
Providing additional East Midlands fast trains to Luton Airport
Parkway might only be possible by reducing the number of stops
elsewhere, such as at Luton itself.
Parkway might only be possible by reducing the number of stops
elsewhere, such as at Luton itself.
The report makes a valid point that the service is really an intercity service that is used by commuters, which is causing overcrowding. Their solution is just to remove the closest stations to London rather than increasing the length of the trains.
Luton Airport in their submission produced this 31 page PDF https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...ZQEnL-iJs3Aaag why 4 EM trains an hour should and could stop at Parkway so they will be rather peeved to say the least if not only this opportunity doesn't happen but they end up with a worse service.
Last edited by LTNman; 29th Jul 2017 at 15:26.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The concept of separating the long distance flows from commuter and airport journeys makes a great deal of sense. Luton Airport Parkway already has faster journey times than [say] Stansted - which doesn't enjoy non-stop trains either. Thameslink and an enhanced Midlands commuter route is the best way to service Luton Airport. Stopping long distance trains - even more of them - is crazy when those trains are already overcrowded and end-to-end journey times are already longer than necessary. The East Midlands trains are also unsuitable for airport passengers with luggage as they have fewer smaller doors, narrower corridors and less space for luggage stowage than the new Thameslink trains - which leads to longer dwell times at the stations and results in unnecessary delays. The Luton Airport submission was totally self-centred and took little consideration of the needs of other travellers on the Midland Mainline. Well done DFT for finally seeing the sensible way out of this one...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EastMids
Can't argue any of your points as they are valid.
The consultation also says are also looking at ending the Cross Country franchise service to Stansted from Birmingham and switching the destination to Norwich.
Can't argue any of your points as they are valid.
The consultation also says are also looking at ending the Cross Country franchise service to Stansted from Birmingham and switching the destination to Norwich.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Milton Keynes
Posts: 1,070
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A simple solution to overcrowding on Sheffield etc expresses is not to advertise the stops and deny boarding during peak hours on East Mids trains at St Pancras and to stop no trains southbound during the morning peak.
This is what happens on WCML. It allows Virgin and London Midland to compete and lowers fares at Milton Keynes during the off-peak periods. Couldn't the same be done at Luton and Bedford?
This is what happens on WCML. It allows Virgin and London Midland to compete and lowers fares at Milton Keynes during the off-peak periods. Couldn't the same be done at Luton and Bedford?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is a sad state of affairs that due to a lack of investment in rolling stock and longer EM trains that many stations on the route will see a reduction in service and direct services removed from the timetable.
When Parkway opened in 1999 it opened with 9 trains an hour to London. At the moment it is 7 as 2 slow trains an hour now start and end at St Albans. This is not really a bad thing as the slow trains used to depart just before the semi fast with most passengers leaping on the first train to arrive only to be overtaken a short while later.
Luton has gained a new fleet of 8 and 12 car trains and an overnight service of 2 train an hour except on one night of the week at weekends so it isn't all bad news but the airport will be very disappointed at the proposal.
By following the links in the document individuals and airports for that matter have the opportunity to comment on the key questions asked but as the airport knows with its own consultations it is already probably a done deal.
When Parkway opened in 1999 it opened with 9 trains an hour to London. At the moment it is 7 as 2 slow trains an hour now start and end at St Albans. This is not really a bad thing as the slow trains used to depart just before the semi fast with most passengers leaping on the first train to arrive only to be overtaken a short while later.
Luton has gained a new fleet of 8 and 12 car trains and an overnight service of 2 train an hour except on one night of the week at weekends so it isn't all bad news but the airport will be very disappointed at the proposal.
By following the links in the document individuals and airports for that matter have the opportunity to comment on the key questions asked but as the airport knows with its own consultations it is already probably a done deal.
Last edited by LTNman; 30th Jul 2017 at 04:57.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 60
Posts: 3,793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Parkway
I think that's enough about Parkway for now, thanks for everyone's input.
Now as far as the 08 taxiway extension, once completed what will be the flow rates and will it enable more arrivals/departures between 6-9AM? To be completed after NOTAM night closure November 17?
Now as far as the 08 taxiway extension, once completed what will be the flow rates and will it enable more arrivals/departures between 6-9AM? To be completed after NOTAM night closure November 17?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maximum flow rate at the moment is 34. When both ends are complete it will increase to 40. I haven't seen a figure for just 08 but when that end is completed at the end of the year the flow rate will be set by runway 26 which then becomes the longer back track if required. The 26 taxiway extension is only a short one and will match the take off run for 08. The taxiway extension for 08 will be 540m long but the includes the right angle curve and the additional length from that bend to the runway
Just a guess for the interim rate but I would think it will be something like 37 or 38 but as I say that is a pure guess but crucially the bottleneck where taxiway Alpha and Bravo meet by the fire station will be no more which might help the numbers as well.
Just a guess for the interim rate but I would think it will be something like 37 or 38 but as I say that is a pure guess but crucially the bottleneck where taxiway Alpha and Bravo meet by the fire station will be no more which might help the numbers as well.
Last edited by LTNman; 30th Jul 2017 at 16:16.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would not have thought so but more runway slots means more opportunities for basing more aircraft if required. More likely to be a combination of landings and take offs including biz jets or the first wave of departures bunch up a little. Last year the first wave had departure times from 6am. This year it is from 5.50.
Just my humble opinion, forget the runway, the real flow rate is set by the number of cars the drop off zone can handle.
Just my humble opinion, forget the runway, the real flow rate is set by the number of cars the drop off zone can handle.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Luton
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
06.04am from London St Pancras
No! This is an important issue!
Today at 06.04am passengers left London St Pancras bound for London Luton Airport. The service was an all stopper service calling at all stations to Luton.
On arrival at St Albans Station all passengers were told to leave the train!
Many but not all passengers were lucky to board a bus (requested in an emergency situation) to collect them and take them to Luton Airport Parkway due to 'YET' a fault in signalling problems on this line!
On listening to conversations many passengers were concerned / panicky as to whether they will miss their flights!
BUT! I repeat BUT!
The train that offloaded them was then used and seconded to change from St Albans platform 2 and re-possition to platform 1 at St Albans to operate a service south bound to London!
In effect 'stuff' passengers bound for Luton Airport!
This is not acceptable! This is becoming 'common place'!
It is time for Luton Airport Management to either call for the franchise called Govia Trains to be terminated or it is time for London Luton Airport management to start advertising that the Govia trains operating on the Thameslink Line are not fit for purpose and that no passenger should depend on the service!
As someone who pays the community charges here in Luton and as I and all community charge payers in Luton have a vested interest in London Luton Luton Airport that gives me and everyone else the right to declare that the Thamesink Line is no longer fit for purpose!
The current airport franchise operator is starting to embarrasses me!
I will be contacting one airport Director (who I have known many years/ decades) to explain this mess in terms of the train services and lack of at minimum 1000 seats for passengers who use the terminal building! It is time the airport became a 'civilized' airport!
What I witnessed this morning equates to 'enough is enough'!