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

Heathrow-2

Old 7th Jun 2018, 21:33
  #621 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/07/dont-worry-pretty-head-over-heathrow-third-runway-justine-greening-under-control?CMP=share_btn_tw&__twitter_impression=true

Excellent piece on the sheer incompetence of Grayling and his sibling.
Navpi is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2018, 21:45
  #622 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Jesse Norman has misled the House of Commons by implying the same clauses on bailing out promoters of other airport expansion schemes (i.e Heathrow Hub and Gatwick) were agreed. The bail out clause only featured in Heathrow's agreement. See 10.43 https://t.co/RtLcfTWd35
Navpi is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2018, 08:19
  #623 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Kent
Age: 47
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Navpi, you're clutching at straws now.

The owners of Heathrow have paid millions already towards a project that was approved years ago. This is down to governmental incompetence and political meddling. It costs huge amounts just to plan a project like this and the lifespan of the construction could run over multiple elected governments.

It is right that they should seek compensation should the whole thing suddenly be cancelled or sabotaged for political means. This is not just so HAL can pocket the cash, it's more about being able to pay suppliers and stop those suppliers and contractors going to the wall.
Prophead is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2018, 08:26
  #624 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Prophead
Navpi, you're clutching at straws now.

The owners of Heathrow have paid millions already towards a project that was approved years ago. This is down to governmental incompetence and political meddling. It costs huge amounts just to plan a project like this and the lifespan of the construction could run over multiple elected governments.

It is right that they should seek compensation should the whole thing suddenly be cancelled or sabotaged for political means. This is not just so HAL can pocket the cash, it's more about being able to pay suppliers and stop those suppliers and contractors going to the wall.
Pparliamentcan change the rules anytime it likes. No govt can bind its successors ...
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2018, 08:31
  #625 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Kent
Age: 47
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Pparliamentcan change the rules anytime it likes. No govt can bind its successors ...
It's not about binding parliament, it's about stopping multiple bankruptcies and job losses that would occur, should a project of this magnitude be cancelled in the future after work had already began.
Prophead is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2018, 10:57
  #626 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: London
Posts: 831
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We are not talking about the budget sector nor are we talking about holiday charters. When talking about LHR we are generally talking about scheduled services to cities worldwide. Many of which will never be viable from a single regional airport
  • That’s the narrative spun by HAL and some politicians but runs against many of the models in the industry.
  • HAL absolutely want access to the Flexible fares and Leisure business why do you think they are courting Easyjet !
  • BTW contrary to popular believe the majority of footfall is leisure based right now and one thing that I can’t denigh is a significant amount of that leisure traffic is INBOUND O&D into one of the planets largest holidaying destinations just a few miles east!


There is not the infrastructure in the north to support this. Hence taking a shuttle flight to LHR onto a dedicated runway with a good connection setup works better for a large part of the north than slogging it over to MAN. We know people are currently doing just this via AMS instead of travelling through Manchester.



  • The Northern Power House project of the former Chancellor was an attempt to evaluate reason identify and address many of the inequities associated with having a range of high hills through a relatively small area of the North of England and the negative effects that has on opportunity and investment in the wider economy.
  • I can’t dispute the M60/M56 are almost as poor as the M25/M4 corridors and for many similar reasons - they are orbital roads round major conurbations dominated by local traffic.
  • The rail connections are a mess due to incompetence by Network Rail and Grayling and vast over spend in the south east.
  • Just as the debate around the London Orbital needs sorting irrespective of R3 so do the similar issues around Manchester - These issues are for the DFT and will cost millions anyway
  • As for the last part couldn’t care less if some in Yorkshire or Northumberland feel that a flight via Amsterdam is more convenient that a trek over the moors. The number are actually quite small in the scheme of things and it’s their choice how they spend their money . A comparison to consider through Leeds/Newcastle/Durham/Doncaster and Humberside combined for the year 2016 handled 888, 000 combined on the Amsterdam route whilst Manchester handled over million alone in the same period.



With the modern rail network being built and connected to LHR it is the only sensible option. To build Crossrail, HS2 and the western rail link to LHR and then expand LGW instead would be absurd. My view is we should expand both as they both cater for different markets but if it has to be only one then it should be LHR.

Huge investment in a small corner of the UK, ignore the great pupulus at your peril thats why Brexit happened. HS2 is underway for sure (well least phase one) however how does dumping northerners and midlanders in Old Oak Common really benefit them significantly.

The Elisabeth line is more about getting the great unwashed from Essex into Central London and similarly those in Berkshire into the City oh and by the way the major Rail Station that is Euston connects to neither right now.

I generally support the HS2 long term project it will eventually relieve pressure on the existing rail corridors however its far more about the domestic connectivity than enhansing global options. It doesn’t even connect to HS1 directly



What test? The new runway is not built yet. The BA regionals are always the first to be canned when it stacks up at LHR so it isn't accurate to gauge interest in a project that isn't functional yet. I used to use this weekly to get back to Leeds and there were many people using it then and praising it. A handful of flights don't make a hub however.

The test is BA have provided those in Yorkshire an opportunity to connect to the world over Heathrow and yet they aren’t using it period stop












Last edited by Rutan16; 8th Jun 2018 at 11:10.
Rutan16 is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2018, 11:45
  #627 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Kent
Age: 47
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rutan, you are, again, trying to justify not expanding Heathrow based on the current situation.

The third runway will be a feeder onto the LH routes as well as bringing regional and European traffic into and out of London. This is only really viable in the planned form once the new runway is built and Crossrail is connected. To say it isn't popular or doesn't work now is irrelevant. Flights will be sold from LBA to LA which includes the shuttle in the price run by someone like EJ or Flybe. This will be the game changer and the MAN supporters know it which is why there is so much opposition from that area.

As for the last part couldn’t care less if some in Yorkshire or Northumberland feel that a flight via Amsterdam is more convenient that a trek over the moors.
This is exact;y the attitude of those local or within easy access of MAN. You get your LH flights and to hell with those who suffer a long and expensive journey to get there. It has been like that for years and more and more people have got wise to the fact they can transit through the likes of AMS instead. There are still a large number though who do not like the idea of being stranded abroad so the LHR option will be much more convenient.


The Northern Power House project of the former Chancellor was an attempt to evaluate reason identify and address many of the inequities associated with having a range of high hills through a relatively small area of the North of England and the negative effects that has on opportunity and investment in the wider economy.
The Northern Powerhouse and HS3 is about connecting the major cities of the north. It is not about making it easier for the people of North Yorkshire to get to MAN,


Just as the debate around the London Orbital needs sorting irrespective of R3 so do the similar issues around Manchester - These issues are for the DFT and will cost millions anyway
At least you understand that the road network arounf LHR would be upgraded regardless of a third runway. ANY major airport expansion would require road/rail improvements. It just so happens we are currently building multi £bn connections to the nations main airport.

​​​​​​​The Elisabeth line is more about getting the great unwashed from Essex into Central London and similarly those in Berkshire into the City oh and by the way the major Rail Station that is Euston connects to neither right now.
Crossrail was sold on it's ability to get people from Canary Wharf to LHR in 30 minutes. BAA paid a lot of money into the scheme and the Heathrow connection spur will be beneficial. Euston is only the final stop for HS2 into Central London. A large number of passengers will be going to the huge Old Oak Common interchange onto Crossrail. Together these new railways systems will provide a modern, world class transport network into the capital and it's major airport. So why on earth would we then expand Gatwick instead?
Prophead is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2018, 12:40
  #628 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 180
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Semi serious question: is there any estimate of how much the wait in the multiple stacks across the SE is likely to reduce for airliners wishing to land at LHR if R3 is built?
SamYeager is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2018, 12:54
  #629 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: London
Posts: 831
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by SamYeager
Semi serious question: is there any estimate of how much the wait in the multiple stacks across the SE is likely to reduce for airliners wishing to land at LHR if R3 is built?
Its not a semi serious question but one of the primary questions to be answered
That said those stacks are about segregated and grouping differing traffic flows onto base leg safely correctly spaced and to maximise landings.
They won’t actually go away even with R3 infact we may see rather more albeit further out over the North Sea to manage traffic flows on approach to the parallel landing runways even capped you could well see an extra 140000 slots created.
Thats an other Birmingham sized airport.
Now where does that traffic come from certainly not entirely organic growth imho, much would be sucked in from other middle sized airports and Gatwick is that in the national interest?
Rutan16 is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2018, 13:31
  #630 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: London/Fort Worth
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I for one am sick of the delays - just get on and build the damn thing. And if LGW, STN, MAN, BHX or whoever want more capacity then let them build it as well. It would be better money spent than on HS2
BAengineer is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2018, 14:42
  #631 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Bermuda Shorts and Cessna Caravans
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
North West born and bred
MAN based
Fully support this.
Despite the parochial and predictable moaning on here, MAN now has critical mass not to be affected and will ride the wave with LHR growth.
Bring it on; and soon.
160to4DME is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2018, 22:01
  #632 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Meanwhile away from the playground.

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/have-government-ministers-misled-parliament-over-heathrow
Navpi is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2018, 22:42
  #633 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ballymena
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The press seem to be starting to unpick various parts of this cabinet go ahead for the new runway. If they have not been completely above board on this, could it get politically very difficult for the government?
True Blue is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2018, 05:11
  #634 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
True blue is correct

The press are indeed picking at the carcass of Graylings career , a career going down the pan faster than the effluent emanating from Whitehall and the montain of money for The Thames Super Sewer.

Another Major infastructure project "IN LONDON" which due location is of course of "National Importance".

Thank goodness we do have journalists like John Grace from The Guardian

"Given Gayling’s obvious incompetence the day before on rail it was asking a lot for anyone to believe he had morphed into a functioning human being – let alone a cabinet minister – overnight:

AND Jay Mitchinson from the Yorkshire Post who consistently depicts Graylings Head skewered atop a sluglike snail wandering aimlessly around The North on a decrepid rail network unfit for purpose !

Their savagery is matched only by the gentrified , oh so timid , wishy washy nay pitiful commentary by the BBC London mafia

Laura Kuenssberg
Kamal Ahmed
and John Pienarr

They are of course from "OUR BBC" or msybe" Its Your BBC"

remember that jingle?

...their best efforts at 'telling it like it is" amounted to the suggestion of it being " a difficult week for the The Minister".

..blimey don't hold back Laura !

Last edited by Navpi; 9th Jun 2018 at 05:47.
Navpi is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2018, 08:54
  #635 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Kent
Age: 47
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Navpi, if you take that chip off you shoulder then you might actually see the benefits to the whole of the UK brought about by projects like so called 'Super Sewer'.

This project is financed in part by Thames Water customers and the rest by private investment. The tax income just from the construction of this £4.2bn project will be huge. Should any project anywhere else in the UK be able to secure finance this way then it would also go ahead. Privately funded large scale projects actually make money, create jobs and grow the UK's skillset. Compalining about a London centric government because they allow privately funded projects to go ahead makes no sense.

What we really need is more private investment in regional projects that can be made as attractive to foreign investors as the London based ones. This is actually one of the benefits of a LHR hub with good regional connections.

But don't let facts get in the way of a good north/south rant.
Prophead is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2018, 08:55
  #636 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 8,445
Received 68 Likes on 46 Posts
Now where does that traffic come from certainly not entirely organic growth imho, much would be sucked in from other middle sized airports and Gatwick is that in the national interest?
There's no guarantee that the extra slots available will generate any new routes for either regional or global connectivity.

How many new routes would EZY bring? LHR could just become the regional airport for West London, Thames Valley etc, saving them the tedious trek to LGW, LTN or STN for their short breaks.
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 9th Jun 2018, 09:15
  #637 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ballymena
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Prophead

Maybe sufficient of us over the years have seen all the PR.spin on big projects, how we would all benefit for it later never to materialise.

An extra runway around London has only ever been thought of as being at Lhr as when this idea got serious, BAA owned all the airports around London and were only interested in expanding Lhr as that was their pet project. They had no interest in making Lgw a successful competitor. That idea has never been seriously questioned since.

The airport commission used passenger figures for Lgw that were seriously wrong to try and prove a case. If the case for Lhr expansion is so strong, why were they never told to go away, correct their figures and rerun the report?

When you start out with the answer you want and start to construct a case, as was evident here, you then run into all sorts of problems as people start to see through the lies and deceit.

They will deserve everything they get in terms of flak. All this talk about regional connectivity, they have no idea if that would ever happen or not. Just one example of PR rubbish fed to the masses they think are stupid.
True Blue is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2018, 09:34
  #638 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Multiple flights per week available from China to Heathrow for years. Barely anyhing economic impact up North. The moment MAN got it's Beijing link, exponential growth in trade and tourism to/from China happened. That is why it's a fallacy to think that an expanded LHR is the answer to the North's socio-economic development. Those northern airports hankering for a London link are just in denial about what is best for their region.
Ringwayman is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2018, 14:11
  #639 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Kent
Age: 47
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Maybe sufficient of us over the years have seen all the PR.spin on big projects, how we would all benefit for it later never to materialise
So 20%+ tax income on a privately funded project is not a benefit to the uk?

An extra runway around London has only ever been thought of as being at Lhr as when this idea got serious, BAA owned all the airports around London and were only interested in expanding Lhr as that was their pet project.
Pet Project? Heathrow was based mainly on business travellers. Gatwick was holiday charters and Stansted Loco. That is how they separated them up Heathrow is also well connected to central London and when Crossrail came along, ideally placed for a connection improving access even more. Why would they choose any other to upgrade to a major hub?

Multiple flights per week available from China to Heathrow for years. Barely anyhing economic impact up North. The moment MAN got it's Beijing link, exponential growth in trade and tourism to/from China happened. That is why it's a fallacy to think that an expanded LHR is the answer to the North's socio-economic development. Those northern airports hankering for a London link are just in denial about what is best for their region.
Thank you, you have just explained why Heathrow expansion is such a good idea, Create easier connections to the regions and, as you say, growth follows. The fact MAN can support a Beijing link is good news and will hopefully lead to more investment. Other cities however are not viable from MAN. Other regional's cannot support a Beijing connection. This is why an easier transfer through LHR will be so important.

It seems to me that those around MAN want all this access and growth for themselves.
Prophead is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2018, 14:32
  #640 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 8,445
Received 68 Likes on 46 Posts
Create easier connections to the regions and, as you say, growth follows
Lets see how many of these regional connections actually appear. Sounds like snake oil salesman talk to me.
SWBKCB is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.