LUTON -8
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is something I have been commenting on for sometime. The bus station does have a quick exit route that crosses the dual carriageway but it has moveable barriers across it to prevent its use. I can only speculate it is for safety reasons but as has already been pointed out a set of traffic lights could control the junction. Another reason could be to stop cars doing a U turn inside the CTA to avoid the pay barriers.
The main issue with the barriers is that the closest 2 to the multi story are meant to be also used by lorries and coaches but very few use the first barrier. As there is always a constant stream of coaches cars can't get to the first barrier as it is blocked by coaches queuing for the second lane so despite long car queues the lane remains empty.
A couple of months ago the kerbing was altered to reduce the short term car park exit barriers from 4 to 3 while the drop off barriers were increased from 5 to 6. The extra lane has been coned off ever since, as the pay machine is now the wrong type and only works with pre payment tickets and not cash or credit cards.
The barriers are often lifted to remove the backlog, which costs the airport £1000's in lost income but they are due to be moved early next year anyway and increased to 7.
Worth noting that the existing barriers are only handling the traffic from just one drop off lane and can't cope and that due to the design of the new CTA road layout all public transport including car park coaches are for the first time now caught up in traffic jams while trying to exit the CTA.
The main issue with the barriers is that the closest 2 to the multi story are meant to be also used by lorries and coaches but very few use the first barrier. As there is always a constant stream of coaches cars can't get to the first barrier as it is blocked by coaches queuing for the second lane so despite long car queues the lane remains empty.
A couple of months ago the kerbing was altered to reduce the short term car park exit barriers from 4 to 3 while the drop off barriers were increased from 5 to 6. The extra lane has been coned off ever since, as the pay machine is now the wrong type and only works with pre payment tickets and not cash or credit cards.
The barriers are often lifted to remove the backlog, which costs the airport £1000's in lost income but they are due to be moved early next year anyway and increased to 7.
Worth noting that the existing barriers are only handling the traffic from just one drop off lane and can't cope and that due to the design of the new CTA road layout all public transport including car park coaches are for the first time now caught up in traffic jams while trying to exit the CTA.
Last edited by LTNman; 22nd Aug 2017 at 05:46.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems that the route for the airport owned proposed Century Park on Wigmore Valley Park from New Airport Way through the back of the airport is indeed staying and that access from Eaton Green Road is an additional access route.
The initial planning application will be for the access roads only and not what will be built on the park. Terminal 2?
The initial planning application will be for the access roads only and not what will be built on the park. Terminal 2?
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LTN can't be significantly improved without starting with a clean sheet. The design was fundamentally flawed from the start, and all the additions and modifications just compound the trouble. If a serious attempt at sorting it out was to be made, it'd start by building a new terminal and apron on the south side, made in a way that can be expanded in the future without causing major disruption, with the intent of turning the north side over to maintenance and support facilities and a business park.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 60
Posts: 3,803
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In an ideal world yes, but that land is Hertfordshire who get no direct financial benefit so unless central government overruled, and it would got to the courts no doubt, it is not going to happen.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: No fixed abode
Posts: 792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could always try and incentivise Hertfordshire.
After all they will have the noise generated from 18 Mil pax already, what's another seven between friends.Could even lengthen the runway as well.
Done deal!!
How much land do you actually think the airport would need including all the infrastructure to make it happen- obviosly no second runway included.
Ok back from fantasy , let's get the kettle on ��
After all they will have the noise generated from 18 Mil pax already, what's another seven between friends.Could even lengthen the runway as well.
Done deal!!
How much land do you actually think the airport would need including all the infrastructure to make it happen- obviosly no second runway included.
Ok back from fantasy , let's get the kettle on ��
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 60
Posts: 3,803
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could always try and incentivise Hertfordshire.
After all they will have the noise generated from 18 Mil pax already, what's another seven between friends.Could even lengthen the runway as well.
Done deal!!
How much land do you actually think the airport would need including all the infrastructure to make it happen- obviosly no second runway included.
Ok back from fantasy , let's get the kettle on ��
After all they will have the noise generated from 18 Mil pax already, what's another seven between friends.Could even lengthen the runway as well.
Done deal!!
How much land do you actually think the airport would need including all the infrastructure to make it happen- obviosly no second runway included.
Ok back from fantasy , let's get the kettle on ��
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: No fixed abode
Posts: 792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah yes I remember that well!
I am not thinking of such a grand scheme
But seriously the question that has to be asked is that even with the remotest chance that the area to the south of the runway could be used (and parts of Hertfordshire snatched).
If a terminal could be built there how would you get access to it?- via a road past Century Park and around the extended 26 end of the runway , via underground link?
The costs would be unrealistic unless you talked massive expansion and who would fund that?
No I think the only real option available for modest expansion is Century Park but we will have to wait and see what's finally planned there.
I am not thinking of such a grand scheme
But seriously the question that has to be asked is that even with the remotest chance that the area to the south of the runway could be used (and parts of Hertfordshire snatched).
If a terminal could be built there how would you get access to it?- via a road past Century Park and around the extended 26 end of the runway , via underground link?
The costs would be unrealistic unless you talked massive expansion and who would fund that?
No I think the only real option available for modest expansion is Century Park but we will have to wait and see what's finally planned there.
If a serious attempt at sorting it out was to be made, it'd start by building a new terminal and apron on the south side, made in a way that can be expanded in the future without causing major disruption, with the intent of turning the north side over to maintenance and support facilities and a business park.
Sounds very much like an airport about 35 miles to the East!
Sounds very much like an airport about 35 miles to the East!
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Luton
Age: 75
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This plan is very similar to plans produced by Sir Frederick Snow and Partners in a report commisoned by The County Borough of Luton as to the best way forward for the Airport. I cannot remember the exact date but was around 1970.+_ a couple of years.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Work has started to modestly increase the size of border control. I did hear that an outside terrace area might open on the roof area of the border control building which is at cockpit window height of the bottom photo.
Last edited by LTNman; 27th Aug 2017 at 12:23.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any truth to the rumour that the multi story car park is sinking?! Also a new surface was put on the bravo taxiway a few days ago and it's already visibly breaking apart
No sprinkler system was installed. The other one was that the lifts were not waterproof.
With expansion plans in mind, and the noise the locals seem to harp on about, does the constant noise from the M1 not bother these residents !
LUTON Liberal Democrats
26 August at 20:29 ·
There have been a very large number of complaints about noise from the airport over night and some of the calls have been from residents who live more than two miles from the airport. Liberal Democrat councillors have investigated. The noise is from piling work on the extension to the terminal building and we have been able to extract a promise that the work will not continue over the bank holiday weekend. Obviously we will be resuming our investigations during the coming week. Meanwhile, we can advise that Council Environmental Protection officers have carried out noise monitoring and they report that the noise level is at around 102db which is close to the legal maximum of 110db. The feeling is that the topography serves to amplify the noise.
The work is being carried out by the operating company over which the Council has no control but some influence. The company says the piling has to be carried out when there are no aircraft flying for health and safety reasons and Liberal Democrat councillors for the area are asking them what they are doing to protect the health and safety of local residents. The works are expected to take up to three weeks to complete.
The airport company has received what it calls a tsunami of complaints but that is clearly not enough. We recommend residents call the airport company on 01582 405100, press option 2 and then option 7. You will be asked to leave a message on the answering system. Local Liberal Democrat councillors have done this and will be carefully monitoring the responses they receive.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think we need a comment from Constructor as to why a pile driver is needed rather than a boring machine? I assume it has something to do with the foundations of the extension.
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Luton
Age: 75
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, cannot answer that question with the info available. I can give an Insight into the different types of pile and their selection. Firstly piled rivers are used for banging in steel sheet piles or precast concrete piles. Steel sheet piles are used as a method of supporting the ground. Is there a deep basement going in ? If it is a foundation operation going on it could be either a driven precast pile or lineing tubes for a bored pile system. These systems are generally used in bad ground situations. The precast driven piles have the advantage that it is a complete operation in one. Apart from noise the other problem with driven piles is vibration. Computers and other sensitive equipment are at risk. As to an H&S issue well what can you say.? Hope this helps you to get an answer. The choice of pile can either be made by the designer or the piling contractor.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,039
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably the same source that said the multistory needed an after thought sprinkler system as fire engines could not gain access to fight fires. No sprinkler system was installed. The other one was that the lifts were not waterproof.
Correct on both counts. Not heard about the multi-storey sinking, but at least the boffins overcome the ILS issues.
A lot of effort went into Wow'ing' a certain airline, but they decided to compete directly with Primera.
Correct on both counts. Not heard about the multi-storey sinking, but at least the boffins overcome the ILS issues.
A lot of effort went into Wow'ing' a certain airline, but they decided to compete directly with Primera.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wonder in fact how hard Luton has tried to attract new airlines with the terminal running at over capacity? If it has been trying it has been remarkably unsuccessful this year but Luton is only focused on one type of airline and passenger while ignoring the rest of the market with its poor facilities.
When the new build finally opens then work can start remodeling the check-in area to create a bigger security hall and the baggage reclaim area.
I am thinking there is still another 18 months of work to be carried out on the terminal. With a massive over run on the building work I would think the airports final bill will be somewhat higher than the £110 million quoted, which is already £10 million higher than the original figure when work first started.
The next major moan from passengers will be the length of walk from the new drop off zone. Passengers already complain about the existing walk even though for many it isn't too bad depending where they stop. The new zone really will be a major hike for those carrying luggage as they walk along the perimeter fence by Taxiway Delta. It will be even worse when it rains. I hope the airport puts up signs telling passengers that it is only a temporary arrangement although temporary could mean a few years.
When the new build finally opens then work can start remodeling the check-in area to create a bigger security hall and the baggage reclaim area.
I am thinking there is still another 18 months of work to be carried out on the terminal. With a massive over run on the building work I would think the airports final bill will be somewhat higher than the £110 million quoted, which is already £10 million higher than the original figure when work first started.
The next major moan from passengers will be the length of walk from the new drop off zone. Passengers already complain about the existing walk even though for many it isn't too bad depending where they stop. The new zone really will be a major hike for those carrying luggage as they walk along the perimeter fence by Taxiway Delta. It will be even worse when it rains. I hope the airport puts up signs telling passengers that it is only a temporary arrangement although temporary could mean a few years.
Last edited by LTNman; 29th Aug 2017 at 07:57.