Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

Heathrow-2

Old 29th Jan 2018, 14:35
  #261 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 38
Posts: 6,168
This is not a decision that should be dictated by airlines. However, I'd guess far more airlines, or airline groups, have called for LHR to control its costs than anything else in this debate. Obviously that comes as no surprise.
Good point, just keen for us not to do a Stansted and build something the market won't use.
The problem LHR have is that, when the same model supported their position (i.e. LHR offers the strongest economic case) they trumpeted the finding. As they have now been found (using the same economic model) to offer a less advantageous outcome than LGW, they cannot criticise the model without looking opportunistic.
Again fair, but modelling is notoriously innacurate and open to scandalous mis-interpretation by all sides, see also #brexit
This is not a decision taken by airlines.
No but pointless building infrastructure if it's not used as intended, see Stansted.
If we had a larger LHR who exactly would be there who aren't using it today?
Ohh good question. I think we'd see more of the Chinese long haul players as well as China Airlines moving from Gatwick. Westjet would likely be tempted to move as well. easyJet for sure
Also a chance of LanChile, Aerolineas Argentinas, airlines to whom Gatwick would not be an option.
Cargo would also be opened up massively allowing some of the heavy traffic AMS gets and STN to a lesser extent to use LHR. Some would be net new, some would just hammer Gatwick. Time will tell.
Skipness One Echo is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2018, 14:51
  #262 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Leeds
Posts: 496
Fair points Skippy - time will tell!
Dobbo_Dobbo is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2018, 15:41
  #263 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Oban, Scotland
Posts: 1,097
One of the main environmental issues with LHR is the pollution caused by LGVs queuing at the cargo terminal.
inOban is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2018, 20:45
  #264 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 62
Posts: 8,784
I've said before - R3 will not be built. Not least of all, it's now waaay too late. The traffic has moved elsewhere and the traffic that would move in would not be enough. BUT if we could clear the stacks? That would be a huge environmental benefit.
PAXboy is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2018, 08:04
  #265 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 60
Posts: 454
"We started off with running out of runway capacity in the South East because of the rise of LoCo's and tremendous increases primarily in O&D leisure traffic."

So true.
Navpi is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2018, 12:12
  #266 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Where the next project takes me
Posts: 105
Hi guys I don't often transfer at LHR these days and not familiar with anything but your basic T5-T5 transfer but I have a trip coming up soon which will mean I transfer T5 - T2. Is this straightforward and how much time do I need?
I'm transferring BA to a non OneWorld carrier and not sure whether I will get a boarding pass at MAN for the onward. Any tips appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
FFMAN is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2018, 12:29
  #267 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 217
I don't know about the transfer at LHR as i've never done one. But with your non One World airline you may want to check and see if you can print a boarding pass out online and then you'll have it with you if you have to go through some sort of security checkpoint.
Jerry123 is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2018, 14:35
  #268 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 358
Is your travel on one ticket? ie: you can check your luggage all the way through?
It's fairly straightforward - follow the purple flight connections signs and you will end on an air-side bus transfer.
You will need to go through security again.

Otherwise you'll need to travel on the free Heathrow Express from T5 to T2/3 to check-in your luggage, go through security etc.

It's all here:
https://www.heathrow.com/flight-connections
SealinkBF is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2018, 05:03
  #269 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Where the next project takes me
Posts: 105
Many thanks, that's very helpful
FFMAN is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2018, 08:05
  #270 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,086
Heathrow Airport's control of building costs 'abysmal' - BBC News

Heathrow Airport has a "abysmal" record of controlling building costs said the boss of British Airways-owner IAG.

Willie Walsh told the BBC that other companies should be allowed to design and build any new terminals at Heathrow. Heathrow said it did not believe such a model was appropriate.
The government is due to publish final proposals for a third runway at Heathrow in the next few months. MPs will then vote on those plans. Mr Walsh called for an end to Heathrow airport's "monopoly" on its terminals. "Heathrow Airport Limited run an airport - they're not the best at designing or building the facilities," he said. "We believe that should be left to others who are much better, and who would have a greater focus on cost control."

Mr Walsh does not think that existing terminals should be sold off, but rather that competitors should be allowed to submit proposals for developing, designing and building new terminal facilities. "It's not rocket science, there are plenty of people who have been involved in this type of construction in other areas who would be interested," he said. "We know because we've been approached by many of them, who believe that they could do this in a much more efficient way than Heathrow."

Mr Walsh's call is the latest salvo in his ongoing war of words with Heathrow, which is ultimately owned by Spanish firm Ferrovial. IAG, which owns Iberia and Aer Lingus as well as BA, controls just over half the landing slots at Heathrow - Europe's busiest airport. Mr Walsh long been a vocal critic of the fees imposed on airlines by Heathrow, which stand at about £22 per passenger.

IAG said the proposed expansion of the airport could allow independent companies to build and operate commercial facilities at the airport, including terminals. "Heathrow's had it too good for too long and the government must confirm the Civil Aviation Authority's powers to introduce this type of competition," Mr Walsh said.

A spokesperson said Heathrow wanted to ensure competition and choice between airlines at the airport: "Expansion will open up opportunities for IAG, easyJet, flybe, Virgin and dozens of international airlines with whom we are working closely to deliver expansion at close to current charges." Heathrow chief executive John Holland-Kaye is due to give evidence to MPs on the Transport Select Committee on Monday afternoon.

The third runway was due to cost almost £17bn, but Heathrow argued that it could complete the project for £14bn. Airlines fear that the airport will increase landing charges to help pay for the third runway. IAG has threatened to call for a price cap on landing charges if they do not fall after the new runway is finished. "With more passengers and the introduction of internal competition, the airport's charges should go down," Mr Walsh said. "If they remain at current levels we, along with other airlines, support a price cap to ensure they cannot rise and have written to the Transport Select Committee to highlight this."
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2018, 09:39
  #271 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 6,138
Originally Posted by Heathrow Harry View Post

Heathrow Airport has a "abysmal" record of controlling building costs said the boss of British Airways-owner IAG.
This inevitably happens where you have a Regulator who sets the revenue (charges) in a form which takes the "costs" incurred into consideration. It then is in their interests to jack the costs up as high as possible - or more precisely, as high as the regulator will let them get away with. All sorts of extras get stuck into the price for which the operator can claim a rate of return on its "investment".

But Heathrow's chief executive John Holland-Kaye accused Mr Walsh of "a blatant attempt by Mr Walsh to maintain a dominant monopoly for BA at Heathrow and to frustrate the increased airline competition that should result from expansion".
Mr H-K is entitled to his opinion. But in saying this he has shot himself in the foot on charging the current airline operators a premium to start funding the expansion.

Last edited by WHBM; 5th Feb 2018 at 13:16.
WHBM is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2018, 19:46
  #272 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,077
Booker Prize candidate?

Heathrow today published the latest volume of its magnum fictional "Fly Quiet & Green" opus.

With 4 quarters' results now available from the revised scheme, trends are starting to emerge.

LHR has clearly got it in for China Southern, which yet again gets massively marked down, this time by 20 places, from the position in the "league table" that its performance actually merits. Air China similarly gets demoted by more than a dozen places, as does newbie to the "Top 50" Japan Airlines.

But Air Malta, on the other hand, for some inexplicable reason again gets pushed 10 places further up the table than it should be.

Delta is another airline that seems to have incurred Heathrow's displeasure. Robbed of its rightful Number One slot in Q2, and of second place in Q3, it again qualifies for first place in Q4 but is predictably demoted to 7th place.

El Al, as is traditional, gets awarded more than double the number of points that it actually deserves.

Perhaps most outrageous of all, Flybe, which according to LHR's methodology loses over 100 points each for both its CDA adherence and its track-keeping performance, nevertheless gets propelled into first place after being awarded 930 points out of a possible 1000!

Fly Quiet & Clean Q4 2017
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 17:39
  #273 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 60
Posts: 454
Social media is suggesting the DFT have this afternoon declared "that they will not pay a penny for tunneling, bridgework or widening of the M25".

It will be interesting to see HAL justify that cost to shareholders.

Suspect that would take Heathrow from mega profits to negative territory for decades ?

Last edited by Navpi; 7th Feb 2018 at 17:56.
Navpi is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 17:55
  #274 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 404
HAL have told me they’re paying for the M25 diversion,tunnel & runway on top. As they do not know the length of R3 anything can happen
Trinity 09L is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 18:01
  #275 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 60
Posts: 454
So if it's not the DFT and it's NOT HAL who is it ?
Navpi is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 18:32
  #276 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 404
Navpi.
HAL are paying for M25, A4, A3044 etc. But not rail links. They are showing runway use, with the centre runway on mixed ops only to avoid conflict. So noise will increase above current alteration.
Trinity 09L is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 18:33
  #277 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 60
Posts: 454
Well not according to this

Parliamentlive.tv - Transport Committee

Absolutely explicit at 1755. Costs of M25 remodelling and indeed the movement of other infastructure will be "bourne by Heathrow". The Government will however ensure via CAA that charges are not passed on to the airlines OR the passenger.

This will be news to HEATHROW who have been equally robust that their contribution is topped out at £1bn so who is paying the difference of £11bn or £17bn ?

Trinity I'm not interested in the noise issue, just cost !

Last edited by Navpi; 7th Feb 2018 at 19:06.
Navpi is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2018, 19:06
  #278 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,077
Originally Posted by Trinity 09L View Post
They are showing runway use, with the centre runway on mixed ops only to avoid conflict.
I think it's the other way round, unless there has been a recent change of plan.

The centre runway would be the only one that can't operate in mixed-mode, for safety reasons (because of the missed approach procedure).

The plan is that, at any given time, one of the two outer runways would be used in mixed-mode, with the other two used in segregated mode - one handling arrivals and the other departures.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2018, 08:24
  #279 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 404
Apologies, they are not using mixed mode on centre runway. However on their four mode plan it shows that 75% of landings on the same runway, twice on parallel runways, likewise for departures. This appears on page 32 of HAL Our approach to Noise document.


Originally Posted by Trinity 09L View Post
HAL have told me they’re paying for the M25 diversion,tunnel & runway on top. As they do not know the length of R3 anything can happen
HAL are paying for M25 etc.
Trinity 09L is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2018, 11:29
  #280 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,077
Yes, that's correct. Communities under the 09R/27L approaches would see their respite drop from 50% to 25%. The latter figure would also apply to those under the R3 approach.

The often-quoted figure of "33% respite" is a fairly meaningless average of the 50% respite that those under the 09L/27R approach would experience (as at present) and the 25% for the two outer runways.
DaveReidUK is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.