LUTON -8
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,039
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Allegedly new car park barriers, drop off charges (Speedy Drop-Off) and a reduction in the free length of stay in the mid-term car park coming soon! Basically if you want to avoid any drop off charges, take your passenger to/from the mid-term still seems wise?
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: London
Posts: 837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Runway08 I also think that a 787 could operate unrestricted from LTN but I just don't see the demand.
Both Thomson & Monarch have tried lomg haul from LTN in years past but it's never become a fixture and I can't see why that would change in the future for any long haul operator
Both Thomson & Monarch have tried lomg haul from LTN in years past but it's never become a fixture and I can't see why that would change in the future for any long haul operator
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 60
Posts: 3,800
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can;t see any runway extension being, done. Concentrate on what it is good at, (too much successfully). The terminal was built for... 8M? and will have to do 11M next year and I'm sure far more into the future.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: -
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Goodness, I don't visit the site for a few days and the haters have been out in-force regarding the airport!
I can be critical about the airport at times, but like to think those views are constructive.
I very much agree with LTNman, it is going to be a testing time for airport and the feedback they are likely to receive is likely to deteriorate further, as growth continues within the existing facilities and especially when the construction work starts...
I'd love to see a runway extension and long haul routes starting coming to the airport. But I doubt this will happen anytime soon. A few long haul charter flights and the odd new scheduled long haul service will never re-coup the costs of the extension...
Stansted and Gatwick both have runways capable of handling the A380... But probably only about 10% of flights at Gatwick require a runway longer than Luton for their ops, and Stansted it is probably closer to 1% with just their long haul cargo flights.
On a positive note, Airbus last week announced the A321LR, and aimed very much as a 757 replacement for the longer thinner routes, like to the east coast of the USA. The economics are supposed to be far superior to likes of current aircraft and as it has communality of the current easyJet fleet, maybe Long Haul could become more of a reality and the existing runway should be long enough!
I can be critical about the airport at times, but like to think those views are constructive.
I very much agree with LTNman, it is going to be a testing time for airport and the feedback they are likely to receive is likely to deteriorate further, as growth continues within the existing facilities and especially when the construction work starts...
I'd love to see a runway extension and long haul routes starting coming to the airport. But I doubt this will happen anytime soon. A few long haul charter flights and the odd new scheduled long haul service will never re-coup the costs of the extension...
Stansted and Gatwick both have runways capable of handling the A380... But probably only about 10% of flights at Gatwick require a runway longer than Luton for their ops, and Stansted it is probably closer to 1% with just their long haul cargo flights.
On a positive note, Airbus last week announced the A321LR, and aimed very much as a 757 replacement for the longer thinner routes, like to the east coast of the USA. The economics are supposed to be far superior to likes of current aircraft and as it has communality of the current easyJet fleet, maybe Long Haul could become more of a reality and the existing runway should be long enough!
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Gateshead, UK
Age: 25
Posts: 1,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It so far appears that the A321neoLR will lack takeoff performance of the 757, I'd have thought something more like this would have been a better idea if they were going for the 757 but we'll have to see what actually happens when it gets in the air.
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z...Stretch757.jpg
Airbus 320 NEO Concepts Photo by keesje_pics | Photobucket
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z...Stretch757.jpg
Airbus 320 NEO Concepts Photo by keesje_pics | Photobucket
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,859
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Luton has sat near its capacity for years and what we are seeing now is the start of the next round of growth in anticipation of the new facilities. This is exactly what happened while the exiting new terminal was being built.
If I remember correctly the old terminal had a capacity of 3.5 million passengers while the new terminal, for planning permission purposes, had an alleged capacity of 5 million. That capacity was busted in its first year of operation.
I would not be surprised that by the time the new terminal work has been opened Luton will have already passed the 12 million mark making for a rather unpleasant experience at certain times of the day, as the existing facilities creak. But that is at certain times of the day as most of the time Luton can appear half empty with minimal queues.
As for a runway extension the airport needs to keep a grip of its costs. The benefit would be minimal but the likes of easyjet and Wizz and its passengers would have to pay for it while not needing it.
The airport operator is about to spend £100,000,000 but is doing so because it hopes to make a return on its investment before the airport goes out to tender again. A runway extension would not come cheap. Realistically the extension could only go on the 26 end as even now the 08 end does not have a full set of approach lights because the valley and A505. The 26 end would be a massive task as the land dips sharply away but for for those odd aircraft that would need the extension the airport would never get its money back.
If I remember correctly the old terminal had a capacity of 3.5 million passengers while the new terminal, for planning permission purposes, had an alleged capacity of 5 million. That capacity was busted in its first year of operation.
I would not be surprised that by the time the new terminal work has been opened Luton will have already passed the 12 million mark making for a rather unpleasant experience at certain times of the day, as the existing facilities creak. But that is at certain times of the day as most of the time Luton can appear half empty with minimal queues.
As for a runway extension the airport needs to keep a grip of its costs. The benefit would be minimal but the likes of easyjet and Wizz and its passengers would have to pay for it while not needing it.
The airport operator is about to spend £100,000,000 but is doing so because it hopes to make a return on its investment before the airport goes out to tender again. A runway extension would not come cheap. Realistically the extension could only go on the 26 end as even now the 08 end does not have a full set of approach lights because the valley and A505. The 26 end would be a massive task as the land dips sharply away but for for those odd aircraft that would need the extension the airport would never get its money back.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Luton
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Runway extension
I honestly believe that any airport wants a longer runway because long runways attract new additional operators.
Whilst I appreciate that the new operator of Luton wants to re-coup it's investment quickly, it can not be disputed that a longer runway will attract more airline investment and thus more income!
I know I have said it before but from fence line to fence line runway 08 to runway 26 end is approximately 8900 feet and I am sure that an extension though modest can be viable with simple tweaking of the ground!
I am happy to accept that the new operator with several decades of leaseholder ownership may not seek this but at the end of the day Luton can compete with both Stansted and Gatwick if it aspires to do so!
Whilst I appreciate that the new operator of Luton wants to re-coup it's investment quickly, it can not be disputed that a longer runway will attract more airline investment and thus more income!
I know I have said it before but from fence line to fence line runway 08 to runway 26 end is approximately 8900 feet and I am sure that an extension though modest can be viable with simple tweaking of the ground!
I am happy to accept that the new operator with several decades of leaseholder ownership may not seek this but at the end of the day Luton can compete with both Stansted and Gatwick if it aspires to do so!
I know some would like to see Luton able to compete for long haul traffic. However, if Gatwick with treble the passenger count of Luton struggles to *retain* long haul scheduled airlines, is it realistic to expect Luton to be taken seriously by long haul scheduled carriers ? If not, can we be certain of a viable business case for a runway extension at Luton ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,859
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stansted has had a 10,000ft runway since it was an American airbase yet the only airlines at Stansted that need more than Luton's 7086ft are the odd cargo flight. OK there might be the odd passenger flight but that is it. As Luton only has two cargo stands I don't think Luton would want to attract anything bigger than what it gets now as those stands can't be expanded in number or size.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 60
Posts: 3,800
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And remember they would have to seek planning permission from Herts not Beds, can you think the uproar that would create in Hertford and the Rt Hon Peter Lilley is on record against expansion.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: LTN
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If there is a market there someone will exploit it in the future with newly developed aircraft like the 787. Bigger heavier planes that require really long runways are fading away. Lutons runway is fine. It is not worth the long term drama, hassel and money to extend it. Taxiways right to end of the runway in both directions however should be a no brainer.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 60
Posts: 3,800
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
La Compagnie
At least, if it does come here, it will be an old friend.... La Compagnie F-HCIE (Boeing 757 - MSN 27208) (Ex G-BYAT ) | Airfleets aviation
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 60
Posts: 3,800
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A321neoLR
EK77WNCL This new aircraft will do all the 757 missions, read up some more, the 737-900 will not so will be an excellent choice for existing Airbus airlines, an just in time for the Luton development. Luton might just have some Long haul in time.....?
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Gateshead, UK
Age: 25
Posts: 1,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope the A321neoLR does have the same capabilities as the 757 but I think Airbus said themselves there will be places it just can't do what the 757 did. Although Airbus' quotes are based on 206 pax config so with UA's 169 pax config or slightly less that should definitely help.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 60
Posts: 3,800
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EK77WNCL - I doubt anyone at Luton will worry about United Airlines flat bed passengers, I assume you have been reading Leeham's report.
The important thing is "We analyzed the A321neoLR’s capabilities and limitations when compared to Boeing 757-200W and we saw that it could do the international flights that the 757-200 does with about 25% better efficiency."
aka A game plan for Luton if the airlines wished it.
I summarize, why would Luton want to have a runway extension when the latest airplanes do not require it. In 5 years Luton might have Asia connections and US but if it does not, it will play it's roll whilst LHR and LGW redevelop in their own markets.
The important thing is "We analyzed the A321neoLR’s capabilities and limitations when compared to Boeing 757-200W and we saw that it could do the international flights that the 757-200 does with about 25% better efficiency."
aka A game plan for Luton if the airlines wished it.
I summarize, why would Luton want to have a runway extension when the latest airplanes do not require it. In 5 years Luton might have Asia connections and US but if it does not, it will play it's roll whilst LHR and LGW redevelop in their own markets.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,859
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just had a quick look at the arrivals board. Out of the first 30 arrivals for the day 22 of them are Wizz leaving just 8 arrivals to be shared by another 4 airlines.
During the winter at least Wizz must be Luton's biggest airline and with uncontrolled immigration set to continue Wizz can only grow their Luton operation in leaps and bounds to meet the every increasing demand.
During the winter at least Wizz must be Luton's biggest airline and with uncontrolled immigration set to continue Wizz can only grow their Luton operation in leaps and bounds to meet the every increasing demand.
Last edited by LTNman; 21st Jan 2015 at 06:20.
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The runway will never be extended - there is no business case for it. The cost of levelling the ground would be enormous and the public and the council would never accept it because of the perception of increased noise.
Frankly, its size keeping the big stuff out is one of LTN's saving graces. Operationally, heavies would screw up runway separation and would cause a lot of taxying issues (the 76 and 78 already do when they go into the sheds). Add the vast surges in passengers crowding the less than sufficient terminal and transport links, and it'd be thoroughly miserable for all.
With LHR, LGW and BHX all so close, and STN already having unused capability, it's just not going to happen. Why so many of you seem so desperate for it is beyond comprehension. LTN is a short haul hub and does well at it. It has carved out a strong niche and should stick with it.
Frankly, its size keeping the big stuff out is one of LTN's saving graces. Operationally, heavies would screw up runway separation and would cause a lot of taxying issues (the 76 and 78 already do when they go into the sheds). Add the vast surges in passengers crowding the less than sufficient terminal and transport links, and it'd be thoroughly miserable for all.
With LHR, LGW and BHX all so close, and STN already having unused capability, it's just not going to happen. Why so many of you seem so desperate for it is beyond comprehension. LTN is a short haul hub and does well at it. It has carved out a strong niche and should stick with it.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: -
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
During the winter at least Wizz must be Luton's biggest airline and with uncontrolled immigration set to continue Wizz can only grow their Luton operation in leaps and bounds to meet the every increasing demand.
Wizzair haven't announced any new routes in recent months fromLuton, but they have to other airports. I think at the moment the airline is very much joining the dots. Where Luton has always been one of the first airports to get a new route from their East European bases in the past, I think now they are looking to match demand from these bases to other European destinations.
They seem to be increasing their services from the UK regions with high frequencies (from maybe 3-5 times weekly) and recently added Bristol as new destination.
Their latest new base is Tuzla in Bosnia, this is not as of yet showing as routes to LTN. So we might see this open up in the next few months. Im not sure is their are visa restrictions between the UK and Bosnia?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: southern spain
Posts: 1,987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May I remind all little Englanders that it is not uncontrolled immigration but free movement of people to live and work where they choose. Over 2.5 million Brits have chosen to work and/or live in continental Europe so it is all not one way traffic. Whatever you may think or what politicians might say it is not going to change unless the UK leaves the EU and are you going to throw out all ´foreign Johnnies´who work in the NHS - of course not. Glad to see Wizz keeping the ball rolling in the quiet months of the year. End of rant from sunny Spain.