Luton-9
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Between the check-in desks
Posts: 445
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The most important factor is that jobs will be produced that will benefit the unemployed from Harpenden to Henlow, St Albans to Silsoe, Luton to Loughton, Stevenage to Sandy and all the other towns, villages and hamlets local to the airport.
You forgot to mention Latvia, Poland etc. I trip on the staff bus reveals most of the jobs don't go to the locals but to Eastern Europeans who will work for less.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 60
Posts: 3,793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But don't they live in UK, pay UK taxes and spend money locally?
Much the same as the Auf Wiedersehen, Pet years when the Brits invaded Germany & Spain, were they working for less than those locals?
Much the same as the Auf Wiedersehen, Pet years when the Brits invaded Germany & Spain, were they working for less than those locals?
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: bishops stortford herts
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree there is growth still & for 2018 but I am genuinely confused about the carve up of the MON "space" at LTN & wonder in some posts if there is a mistaken double counting factor at present.
Other issues stopping LTN`s development have been/are the very important factors of actual physical constraint & national & very importantly local politics.All well rehearsed tho in the forum with local politics already in the news again.
But anyways an interesting 2018 for STN & LTN....Happy days.
Other issues stopping LTN`s development have been/are the very important factors of actual physical constraint & national & very importantly local politics.All well rehearsed tho in the forum with local politics already in the news again.
But anyways an interesting 2018 for STN & LTN....Happy days.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The difference between say Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted and Luton is that Luton is owned by its council so will always have the full support of the council as they get much of the profits. This is why there are never any public inquiries regarding the airport.
Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted expansion is opposed by their councils so get bogged down for years in public inquiries.
Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted expansion is opposed by their councils so get bogged down for years in public inquiries.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: bishops stortford herts
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LTNman.
Yes elements of reality there but totally in the case of Luton Council as you state.
However say in the case of STN,Uttlesford District Council responsible for planning is on side nowadays after major long running public enquiries which approved growth to 35m together with all the required infrastructure & are only overseers nowadays regarding build within the boundary.
They will shortly however be approached for permission to go to 43.5m.MAG are conducting local presentations for feedback & have already amended the new max fig once.
I would hazard to suggest that a doubling of LTN`s traffic as per aspirations would be a decision that may well be removed from Luton Council`s remit this time so would go to a major planning enquiry...which as you imply takes many years & did in STN`s case.
I believe the latest growth to 18m at LTN only escaped major scrutiny/inquiry last time because of & with as you say support from the Council & then effectively being nodded thru by the relevant Government Minister.
National/Governmental politics I mentioned has always favoured the growth of STN & therefore has constrained LTN in the past.
With local politics I was really referring to Hertfordshire County Council in whose jurisdiction any logical breakout from LTN`s airfield boundary would be thus requiring their permission...& that ain`t never gonna happen.
As it stands HCC has already made statements this week to protect Herts residents from noise from LTN.
But overall growth & aspired growth for both STN & LTN can only be a good thing.
Yes elements of reality there but totally in the case of Luton Council as you state.
However say in the case of STN,Uttlesford District Council responsible for planning is on side nowadays after major long running public enquiries which approved growth to 35m together with all the required infrastructure & are only overseers nowadays regarding build within the boundary.
They will shortly however be approached for permission to go to 43.5m.MAG are conducting local presentations for feedback & have already amended the new max fig once.
I would hazard to suggest that a doubling of LTN`s traffic as per aspirations would be a decision that may well be removed from Luton Council`s remit this time so would go to a major planning enquiry...which as you imply takes many years & did in STN`s case.
I believe the latest growth to 18m at LTN only escaped major scrutiny/inquiry last time because of & with as you say support from the Council & then effectively being nodded thru by the relevant Government Minister.
National/Governmental politics I mentioned has always favoured the growth of STN & therefore has constrained LTN in the past.
With local politics I was really referring to Hertfordshire County Council in whose jurisdiction any logical breakout from LTN`s airfield boundary would be thus requiring their permission...& that ain`t never gonna happen.
As it stands HCC has already made statements this week to protect Herts residents from noise from LTN.
But overall growth & aspired growth for both STN & LTN can only be a good thing.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With local politics I was really referring to Hertfordshire County Council in whose jurisdiction any logical breakout from LTN`s airfield boundary would be thus requiring their permission...& that ain`t never gonna happen.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The blue areas are the enterprise zones all controlled by the airport. Zone 1B is most of Wigmore Park apart from the northern edge. The land is flat and at the same height as the rest of the airport. Zone 1C is the long term car park and Zone 1D is due to get a second taxiway. If zone 1C and 1D became airside then the airport would gain another 40 odd stands and a new terminal thus doubling the size of the airport.
If the DART link carried on in a straight line the next stop would be Wigmore Park.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,038
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any development to the north the Alpha taxiway will inhibit ground movements unless an additional taxiway is created north of Alpha. To shift 50 movements per hour requires numerous RETs and taxiways and not the Bravo extension cheap option.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They might not even want 38 million passengers and 50 flights an hour. In any negotiations you initially ask for more than you want and then settle for what you really want which could be a lot less.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,038
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fundamentally, the same problem exists whether it is 20 million or 38 million passengers per year, the entire taxiway system must be substantially upgraded. Adding another terminal north of the runway compounds the problem. Once you get interaction of inbound and outbound flights, taxiway delays are inevitable, thus the use as an example, of inner and outer taxiways.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are three places where a new terminal could go. Within the CTA on the only patch of ground left which is next to the proposed second multistory. It could then have a simple pier to the south stands and use the existing station for the DART and drop off area.
On the negative side the CTA can't cope with 15 million passengers let alone 38 million. All the other new stands required would have to linked by a tunnel or bridge across taxiways Delta and Foxtrot.
The other locations are either in the long term car park for a smaller development or inside Wigmore Park for the biggy but both these locations contain the towns former rubbish dump and are very toxic.
Also the local residents who bought homes knowing that a large park sat between them and the airport will kick off big time if the airport use the park although the airport would get away with a smaller development if it stayed within the airport boundary.
On the negative side the CTA can't cope with 15 million passengers let alone 38 million. All the other new stands required would have to linked by a tunnel or bridge across taxiways Delta and Foxtrot.
The other locations are either in the long term car park for a smaller development or inside Wigmore Park for the biggy but both these locations contain the towns former rubbish dump and are very toxic.
Also the local residents who bought homes knowing that a large park sat between them and the airport will kick off big time if the airport use the park although the airport would get away with a smaller development if it stayed within the airport boundary.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: A place you do not know
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eilat
Easyjet are rumoured to be at Eilat airport considering opening flights. Do wonder if this could be another route for LTN in the winter months and will take over from the ZB service.
The 2 old Eilat airports are due to be closed soon and replaced by the new single Eilat airport. The problem is that while not on the scale of Berlin, Eilat's new airport is somewhat delayed and there are various issues yet to be resolved around its day-to-day operation. If I was in the Easyjet team looking at Eilat, I would want to understand very carefully the plans for the new airport to be sure it would definitely be open by autumn 2018
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thomas Cook
Looks as though the Thomas Cook base for Summer'18 must have been nothing but a knee jerk reaction to Monarch going under as would appear to no longer be happening! Nothing but a few W patterns left in their booking system.
Maybe they couldn't get the aircraft to operate it but presumably it will just become another overnight aircraft absorbed by expansion from EasyJet or Wizz.
Maybe they couldn't get the aircraft to operate it but presumably it will just become another overnight aircraft absorbed by expansion from EasyJet or Wizz.