Luton-10
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But you would have thought that the person who posted it would have made it more clearer in the first place 🤔
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 60
Posts: 3,803
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shortly before I finished working at the airport in 2019 I had an unpleasant encounter with one of the airport airside ops staff. I was inside the gate facing stand 7 waiting for an aircraft I wanted to photograph. Presumably someone saw the camera on CCTV and this ops person was despatched to intercept the offender. He arrived outside the gate and came in to inform me I was not allowed to take photographs. Having been doing so for over 40 years I queried the reason why. His reply was “it was prohibited under the airport byelaws because terrorists look for airport photos online to identify weak spots. And if he saw me trying to take a photo he would confiscate both the camera and my airport ID pass”. I thought better of voicing the reply I quickly thought up, which was along the lines of “the airport handles 18m passengers per year. That’s nearly 50,000 per day. Of those at least 45,000 will be carrying a smart phone. Probably at least 40,000 will use their phone to take photos and/or videos while they are here. Which then appear on social media. Are you going to confiscate 40,000 smart phones every day to thwart the terrorists?”. No it wasn’t worth the stress. Especially if I’d resisted his attempts to confiscate the camera – armed police would have been summoned in seconds. Happy days.
"2.30 No person shall, in the course of business, take photographs or participate in filming or sound recording at the airport without permission."
Plenty of ramp staff do though.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably because you were working at the time.
"2.30 No person shall, in the course of business, take photographs or participate in filming or sound recording at the airport without permission."
Plenty of ramp staff do though.
Back in the late 1980's I had an offical letter from the airport signed by Mr Bates (the manager at the time) permitting airside photography. The only stipulation was that I didn't climb on airport property!
Plenty of airport staff back then were seen wandering around with cameras. Dave (Gearbox) Gearing from ATC was one of the regulars. He also acted as a traffic cop regularly hollering at various vehicles he felt were going too fast!
"2.30 No person shall, in the course of business, take photographs or participate in filming or sound recording at the airport without permission."
Plenty of ramp staff do though.
Back in the late 1980's I had an offical letter from the airport signed by Mr Bates (the manager at the time) permitting airside photography. The only stipulation was that I didn't climb on airport property!
Plenty of airport staff back then were seen wandering around with cameras. Dave (Gearbox) Gearing from ATC was one of the regulars. He also acted as a traffic cop regularly hollering at various vehicles he felt were going too fast!
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Luton
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The important word here is "business". The airport byelaws were intended to prevent commercial photography or filming at the airport without permission i.e. if you are making money out of it the airport wanted a cut. Unfortunately, the byelaws were frequently misinterpreted by a minority of over-zealous airport security staff who would jump on those who just wanted a photo for their own personal collection. I used to be discreet and take photos from inside the ramp car I used to drive. I only got stopped once and had the car ransacked. And on that occasion I didn't have the camera with me!
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly the point I made to the two airport policeman who I doubt had even a basic understanding of the airports byelaws. I on the other hand had read them several times over the years, as I knew this day would come one day so I was ready.
Even the FBO's were accommodating, as long as I removed the registrations, which I did. I took this way back in 2015.
It always surprises me that the airport doesn't seem to object to people taking photos from the top floors of both multi-stories although this is limited to just one for now.
Even the FBO's were accommodating, as long as I removed the registrations, which I did. I took this way back in 2015.
It always surprises me that the airport doesn't seem to object to people taking photos from the top floors of both multi-stories although this is limited to just one for now.
Last edited by LTNman; 6th Nov 2023 at 11:46.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 60
Posts: 3,803
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DCO Updated documents @ 03 Nov 2023 from gov planning inspectorate site:
Make of it as you like but irrespective on the next decision, 4 more Code C stands are on their way East of Foxtrot, yet to see maps of these new stands & taxiway Gulf, still going through the 220 updated documents.
Work No. 2a (01) – New stands/taxiway to east of Foxtrot
4.6.5 New stands would be provided in assessment Phase 1 to provide sufficient aircraft parking capacity to accommodate up to 21.5 mppa to be serviced from the existing terminal (T1). 4.6.6 The new stands comprise four Code C2 aircraft stands (wingspan up to 36m) accessed via a new taxiway connection from the east side of Taxiway Foxtrot.
4.6.7 An additional Code C stand would be created adjacent to the existing Engine Run Up Bay (ERUB) as described in Work No. 2e. The existing ERUB bund would be removed, and a new blast deflector barrier provided enabling parking of two Code C aircraft within the Bay.
4.6.8 The new stands would be designed as rigid pavement construction (typically pavement quality concrete, of a suitable quality for use as the surfacing on airfield pavement) with the exception of the northernmost stand to the east side of Taxiway Foxtrot which would be constructed with an asphalt surface as a temporary measure, to mitigate the impact of settlements from the landfill under this stand.
4.6.9 The proposed apron including stands, taxiways and equipment areas would cover an area of approximately 76,830m2 with a surface level ranging from approximately 151.9m to 155.5mAOD to tie into the existing airfield, reflecting the variation across the large area.
4.6.10 An additional area of pavement would be provided for parking of GSE and a new link road north of the apron to provide a vehicular route across Taxiway Delta to T1.
4.6.11 The new stands would be equipped with High Mast Lighting around 25m in height but no other aircraft servicing facilities.
4.6.12 The drainage from the new stands would include linear drainage systems with catch-pits, an oil separator and attenuation storage, all located beneath the pavement (but not encroaching into the former landfill site) as described in this Work.
4.6.13 To access the four northern Code C stands, a section of new Taxiway Golf would be constructed with a link taxiway connecting this to Taxiway Foxtrot.
4.6.14 An extension to Taxiway Foxtrot to the north would be constructed to allow aircraft to bypass the existing T1 East Apron to minimise taxiway congestion.
4.6.15 The taxiway works would be constructed in asphalt concrete and incorporate the necessary drainage and aeronautical ground lighting (AGL).
4.6.16 The existing storage area for de-icing fluids associated with Taxiway Foxtrot deicing stands is located within the clearances of Taxiway Foxtrot and proposed Taxiway Golf. This area would be relocated to a service yard area north of the proposed stands adjacent to the GSE area. Vehicular access for material delivery would be via the proposed new link road to T1.
Make of it as you like but irrespective on the next decision, 4 more Code C stands are on their way East of Foxtrot, yet to see maps of these new stands & taxiway Gulf, still going through the 220 updated documents.
Work No. 2a (01) – New stands/taxiway to east of Foxtrot
4.6.5 New stands would be provided in assessment Phase 1 to provide sufficient aircraft parking capacity to accommodate up to 21.5 mppa to be serviced from the existing terminal (T1). 4.6.6 The new stands comprise four Code C2 aircraft stands (wingspan up to 36m) accessed via a new taxiway connection from the east side of Taxiway Foxtrot.
4.6.7 An additional Code C stand would be created adjacent to the existing Engine Run Up Bay (ERUB) as described in Work No. 2e. The existing ERUB bund would be removed, and a new blast deflector barrier provided enabling parking of two Code C aircraft within the Bay.
4.6.8 The new stands would be designed as rigid pavement construction (typically pavement quality concrete, of a suitable quality for use as the surfacing on airfield pavement) with the exception of the northernmost stand to the east side of Taxiway Foxtrot which would be constructed with an asphalt surface as a temporary measure, to mitigate the impact of settlements from the landfill under this stand.
4.6.9 The proposed apron including stands, taxiways and equipment areas would cover an area of approximately 76,830m2 with a surface level ranging from approximately 151.9m to 155.5mAOD to tie into the existing airfield, reflecting the variation across the large area.
4.6.10 An additional area of pavement would be provided for parking of GSE and a new link road north of the apron to provide a vehicular route across Taxiway Delta to T1.
4.6.11 The new stands would be equipped with High Mast Lighting around 25m in height but no other aircraft servicing facilities.
4.6.12 The drainage from the new stands would include linear drainage systems with catch-pits, an oil separator and attenuation storage, all located beneath the pavement (but not encroaching into the former landfill site) as described in this Work.
4.6.13 To access the four northern Code C stands, a section of new Taxiway Golf would be constructed with a link taxiway connecting this to Taxiway Foxtrot.
4.6.14 An extension to Taxiway Foxtrot to the north would be constructed to allow aircraft to bypass the existing T1 East Apron to minimise taxiway congestion.
4.6.15 The taxiway works would be constructed in asphalt concrete and incorporate the necessary drainage and aeronautical ground lighting (AGL).
4.6.16 The existing storage area for de-icing fluids associated with Taxiway Foxtrot deicing stands is located within the clearances of Taxiway Foxtrot and proposed Taxiway Golf. This area would be relocated to a service yard area north of the proposed stands adjacent to the GSE area. Vehicular access for material delivery would be via the proposed new link road to T1.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Various at the moment
Posts: 1,171
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
1 Post
I often used to take photos for my own personal "spotting" use after I walked through the hangar to the ramp adjacent stand 10 and over to the terminal. Used to go out to the taxi-ways too with one of the marshaller's in order to get some snaps.
Mind you, in 1985 we could do things that would be unheard of these days !!
Mind you, in 1985 we could do things that would be unheard of these days !!
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 60
Posts: 3,803
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some more gems within the updated DCO documentation:
However, as set out above there are multiple constraints on the number of slots that can practically be scheduled at the airport. The total number of slots is
ultimately limited by the declared runway capacity. As noted at paragraph 7.5.8 of the Need Case [AS-125], the current declared runway capacity in part
reflects the constraints on the number of stands available. In 2019, 42 stands were used to accommodate 18 mppa (Need Case [AS-125], paragraph 7.5.21).
The capacity declaration for Summer 2023, appended refers to 45 stands being available to support 19 mppa. Once the Project Curium works are complete
there will be 46 stands available and this would allow a marginal increase in declared capacity but not to the full extent of the latent capacity of the runway at
40-42 movements per hour (Need Case [AS-125], paragraph 7.5.11). The Need Case [AS-125] identifies, at Table 7.2 that 52 stands are required for
commercial aircraft to support 21.5 mppa
Ok we have 45 commercial stands now, or will have once the +3 come online, the 21.5m requires an extra 7 stands, where will they be, presto, new taxiway Gulf linking new 4 stand apron and +3 near runup bay. Plan below and note new taxiway almost to the end of 25 threshold to aid 40-42 movements per hour.
I think all this will be built regardless of next phase of DCO decision.
However, as set out above there are multiple constraints on the number of slots that can practically be scheduled at the airport. The total number of slots is
ultimately limited by the declared runway capacity. As noted at paragraph 7.5.8 of the Need Case [AS-125], the current declared runway capacity in part
reflects the constraints on the number of stands available. In 2019, 42 stands were used to accommodate 18 mppa (Need Case [AS-125], paragraph 7.5.21).
The capacity declaration for Summer 2023, appended refers to 45 stands being available to support 19 mppa. Once the Project Curium works are complete
there will be 46 stands available and this would allow a marginal increase in declared capacity but not to the full extent of the latent capacity of the runway at
40-42 movements per hour (Need Case [AS-125], paragraph 7.5.11). The Need Case [AS-125] identifies, at Table 7.2 that 52 stands are required for
commercial aircraft to support 21.5 mppa
Ok we have 45 commercial stands now, or will have once the +3 come online, the 21.5m requires an extra 7 stands, where will they be, presto, new taxiway Gulf linking new 4 stand apron and +3 near runup bay. Plan below and note new taxiway almost to the end of 25 threshold to aid 40-42 movements per hour.
I think all this will be built regardless of next phase of DCO decision.
LTN-PFO is listed on the TUI website as starting on 7 May 2025... so it seems TUI really do plan that far ahead.
https://www.tui.co.uk/flight/timetable
https://www.tui.co.uk/flight/timetable