Luton-9
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Southampton
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great photo update as usual LTNman but what I find surprising is that the area where the new Multi Story is going to be built was never safeguarded for extra aircraft stands. What's the occupancy like in the existing Multi Story as I'm surprised that an additional one was actually needed but I'm sure that your give me an appropriate answer. (as long as it's not racist) And I'm joking with that last comment as I'm not soft and sensitive as others seem to appear on here!
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are we talking about (old) Alpha taxiway that was changed to Bravo earlier this year?
For most passengers they will be thinking that the building work is now coming to an end. Little do they know!
20 years later the temporary route for alpha can still be seen although part of its width was grassed over
What's the occupancy like in the existing Multi Story
Last edited by LTNman; 21st Jun 2018 at 06:40.
People do indeed need to be very careful of accusing others in print of racism or they may find themselves in trouble but in this case the accusation was so wide of the mark as to be silly. As we all are, LTNman is entitled to voice his opinions on all aspects regarding his home airport and if some find his remarks offensive they should protect their sensitivities by blocking him. I always enjoy his informative posts even if I don't agree with him on occasions and I doubt we will ever think as one regarding SEN!
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I probably have very similar views about SEN but from afar. I try to see the bigger picture and also look at the weak links that should not be ignored because it is inconvenient, not that you actually ignore the big picture. Rumour, debate and information is what PPrune is all about. I was one of those that dismissed any thought of Ryanair coming to Southend so it is safe to say that folk should take all my posts with a pinch of salt as I know next to nothing.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Daws Heath Essex
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I probably have very similar views about SEN but from afar. I try to see the bigger picture and also look at the weak links that should not be ignored because it is inconvenient, not that you actually ignore the big picture. Rumour, debate and information is what PPrune is all about. I was one of those that dismissed any thought of Ryanair coming to Southend so it is safe to say that folk should take all my posts with a pinch of salt as I know next to nothing.
I think most people dismissed any thought of Ryanair coming to Southend, me included and I had no inkling of it whatever until the announcement was made.
Paxing All Over The World
I object. No one has been more negative about LTN than me!! Having used the airport since 1984, I cannot remember saying anything in it's favour from the first time I visited the (then) new terminal when it opened. With great saddness, I have to use my local and conveniently placed airport in August. I now try to use LHR whenever possible - and that is saying something.
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yesterday, whilst on the easy staff bus, there were two cars dropping off on the 'new' bus lane. They managed to block the lane and all for the sake of saving £3.00. This needs to be stamped out very quickly before the usual LTN chaos ensues.
And whilst I'm in rant-mode, what is it with the new arrival/departure doors now seeming to have become the new smoking areas? Even at 0400 in the morning, there were at least 20 people smoking and vaping. Now I'm a non-smoker (I know...we are the worst !) but I hope the airport are also going to deal with this as well. It really doesn't portray a good image for the 'New and Improved' LTN experience. I shall now crawl back under my stone in Hangar 89 !
And whilst I'm in rant-mode, what is it with the new arrival/departure doors now seeming to have become the new smoking areas? Even at 0400 in the morning, there were at least 20 people smoking and vaping. Now I'm a non-smoker (I know...we are the worst !) but I hope the airport are also going to deal with this as well. It really doesn't portray a good image for the 'New and Improved' LTN experience. I shall now crawl back under my stone in Hangar 89 !
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Smoking under the canopy was predicated here before it opened as it was inevitable. I have already had a moan about it and was told that even though it was banned it was unenforceable because of the shear numbers. The second canopy to open doesn’t even have no smoking signs not that it would make any difference. If you think it is bad now just wait until it starts to rain as many people do stand outside in the open. It is safe to say that the canopies serve no purpose apart from offering smokers protection from the elements.
i don’t think all the people dropping off in the bus lane are doing it to avoid payment as some just pull to the left at the first opportunity as that was the side of the drop off zone last week. It will be when you see people waiting to be picked up standing in the bus lane that you will know they are doing so to avoid payment. No doubt the camera car will be moved if it is decided there is more money to be made rather than monitoring the bus stop outside the Holiday Inn.
i don’t think all the people dropping off in the bus lane are doing it to avoid payment as some just pull to the left at the first opportunity as that was the side of the drop off zone last week. It will be when you see people waiting to be picked up standing in the bus lane that you will know they are doing so to avoid payment. No doubt the camera car will be moved if it is decided there is more money to be made rather than monitoring the bus stop outside the Holiday Inn.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,038
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The DfT has rejected a call from the owner of Luton Airport for more East Midlands trains to call at Luton Airport Parkway station.
The station is currently served by Thameslink trains and just one East Midlands Trains service an hour. The airport wanted the DfT to increase East Midlands train services to four an hour in the new franchise, which is due to commence in August 2019.
The station is currently served by Thameslink trains and just one East Midlands Trains service an hour. The airport wanted the DfT to increase East Midlands train services to four an hour in the new franchise, which is due to commence in August 2019.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The DfT has rejected a call from the owner of Luton Airport for more East Midlands trains to call at Luton Airport Parkway station.
The station is currently served by Thameslink trains and just one East Midlands Trains service an hour. The airport wanted the DfT to increase East Midlands train services to four an hour in the new franchise, which is due to commence in August 2019.
The station is currently served by Thameslink trains and just one East Midlands Trains service an hour. The airport wanted the DfT to increase East Midlands train services to four an hour in the new franchise, which is due to commence in August 2019.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The train service has been cut back over the years despite soaring numbers. When first opened there was a standard service of 9 trains an hour in each direction, this became 7 with the removel of 2 slow trains each hour that now start from St Albans. Now East Midland don’t stop during the peak.
Also noticed that the weekend service was halved when I used it due to operational issues with the so called improved timetable. At least Luton has an overnight service unlike most other London Airports.
Also noticed that the weekend service was halved when I used it due to operational issues with the so called improved timetable. At least Luton has an overnight service unlike most other London Airports.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you stand up as the 3x3 seating or was 3x2 seating has been replaced by 2x2 seating to make more standing room but yes the trains are 50% longer
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/tran...-a3255236.html
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/tran...-a3255236.html
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Oh Cavey
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So the Airport consultation document is online and they have whittled down all the options for expansion to the preferred option below....
https://futureluton.llal.org.uk/wp-c.../nsc_luton.pdf
https://futureluton.llal.org.uk/wp-c.../nsc_luton.pdf
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: No fixed abode
Posts: 792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So Wigmore Valley Park is mostly moving into Hertfordshire- only got to move the boundary slightly.That might prove interesting!!
Noticed in the Bartlett Square section (Page 92) they have a Multi Storey planned for next to Parkway Station and the Hotel.
Was that always planned as i haven't seen it mentioned before?
Noticed in the Bartlett Square section (Page 92) they have a Multi Storey planned for next to Parkway Station and the Hotel.
Was that always planned as i haven't seen it mentioned before?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They will have a fight on their hands to pull this off. The planned business park that covered much of Wigmore Park was just a big lie to allow a planning application for a dual carriageway to serve a second terminal. Not only does the park disappear but so does a large county wildlife site. The car parking extends well into Hertfordshire and crosses what was supposed to be the new Wigmore Park, which according to a park Facebook page ends up being by the Fox pub at Darley Heights.
Page 44 lists the scores for each of the options. All bar one scheme fails completely when it comes to carbon emissions. Surely if you have a -20 it should be completely disregarded, as it is “currently unworkable”.
It also looks like they have completely disregarded strain on the highway network.
It also looks like they have completely disregarded strain on the highway network.