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

Luton-10

Old 12th Nov 2023, 20:43
  #3881 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 5,675
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes on 17 Posts
Originally Posted by LTNman
A race to the bottom then. If T2 does get permission why even build a terminal, as a nice unheated marquee will do with a few outside portaloos if it knocks a few quid off the ticket price.

As a society we should be raising the game not accepting ever worsening conditions as the new normal in various aspects of our lives.
We should be demanding improved conditions in the things that matter where you get bang for your buck across all stakeholders. But... sometimes priorities change and people often choose to cut one previous luxury (comfy seating at the airport from the days of flying once per year) which may have become less relevant in return for a different luxury (being able to see family regularly) which might be very important.

Spending 2 hours in a large unheated marquee in winter is not acceptable to any passenger, let alone for retaining employees. I don't think anybody is seriously suggesting such an idea. Beauvais airport management quickly realised many years ago that a marquee-as-a-terminal option was not viable long term.

Many people complained about the journey between the rail station and Luton airport... so hundreds of millions were spent on improving these conditions.. but you don't seem to think the money should have been spent.
If you want to improve comfort in the terminal... that means concreting over lots more green belt to get a bigger square feet per passenger number like that at Gatwick... but you don't seem to want that either.

Last edited by davidjohnson6; 12th Nov 2023 at 20:56.
davidjohnson6 is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2023, 20:51
  #3882 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by inOban
I've asked before but I don't recall an answer. Doesn't any building like an airport terminal have a limit on the number of people allowed inside, set by the Fire Brigade? Anyone know what that is?
It only becomes an issue if there is a fire and people die. Talking of fire exits, 5 fire exits in MSCP1 have been padlocked shut since the fire in the multi-story opposite with no fire exits on the western side of the car park usable.

Last edited by LTNman; 13th Nov 2023 at 05:16.
LTNman is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2023, 21:00
  #3883 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 5,675
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes on 17 Posts
Originally Posted by LTNman
B
It only becomes an issue if there is a fire and people die. Talking of fire exits, 5 fire exits in MSCP1 have been padlocked shut since the fire in the multi-story opposite with no fire exits on the western side of the car park usable.
Perhaps you (and others) should be screaming to the local fire brigade, council, press and others about this ?
Maybe also flag up the consequences of the fire in 1996 at Dusseldorf airport where many people died.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%BCsseldorf_Airport_fire
davidjohnson6 is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2023, 21:08
  #3884 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 59
Posts: 3,703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by LTNman
A race to the bottom then. If T2 does get permission why even build a terminal, as a nice unheated marquee will do with a few outside portaloos if it knocks a few quid off the ticket price.

As a society we should be raising the game not accepting ever worsening conditions set by greedy companies as the new normal in various aspects of our lives.
Let's triple your council tax so there is plenty of money to slosh about on vanity projects.
Kick out Ryanair & Wizzair and watch the place fill up with BA, Lufthansa & Air France.
Meanwhile in the real world.......
pabely is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2023, 21:10
  #3885 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by davidjohnson6
We should be demanding improved conditions in the things that matter where you get bang for your buck across all stakeholders. Spending 2 hours in a large unheated marquee in winter is not acceptable to any passenger, let alone for retaining employees. Many people complained about the journey between the rail station and Luton airport... so hundreds of millions were spent on improving these conditions.. but you don't seem to think the money should have been spent.
If you want to improve comfort in the terminal... that means concreting over lots more green belt to get a bigger square feet per passenger number like that at Gatwick... but you don't seem to want that either.
Why is spending 2 hours in an unheated marquee unacceptable, as I am sure many would accept it?

The money for the Dart should have been spent but not by the townís taxpayers when there has been a £187m write down. It has to be noted that the airport operator refused to fund it. Now I canít think why that would be. Maybe something to do with the £187m write down before it even opened.

As for building on green belt to give passengers more comfort. This is not needed, just cut the terminalís capacity to say twice what was said it would be when it was first built. 10m is a nice round figure. More comfort for passengers while almost halving pollution, noise disturbance and road traffic.

LTNman is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2023, 21:23
  #3886 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 5,675
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes on 17 Posts
LTNman - I get that you mean well. Really, I do. But in life we have to pick our fights and choose the ones that we and our supporters can win. Cutting passenger capacity at LTN to 10m just isn't going to happen - there will be far too many and powerful opponents. We have to deal with whatever reality may be every day of our lives... a major rewriting of the UK's planning laws isn't going to happen any time soon.

Fire safety at LTN is a fight worth fighting and a fight that people will support... opponents will be embarassed after MSCP1. Scream, shout, twist arms, cajole, do whatever needs to be done - this is something worthy of your time.
davidjohnson6 is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2023, 21:29
  #3887 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by pabely
Let's triple your council tax so there is plenty of money to slosh about on vanity projects.
Kick out Ryanair & Wizzair and watch the place fill up with BA, Lufthansa & Air France.
Meanwhile in the real world.......
Simple supply and demand. Fees would rise to match the demand and would balance out those airlines who won’t cough up. A bit like airlines pricing structures.

Why would council tax triple? LRT doesn’t pay the council any dividends anymore due to its massive debts while borrowing heavily from the Council while also having access to a £199m bailout fund.

Guess who is now looking like will fund the expansion to 21.5 million if approved. Here is a clue, not the operator so once again the risk falls on the town’s taxpayer. As with the Dart it could all end in tears even though the airport ends up with a nice new toy.

Last edited by LTNman; 12th Nov 2023 at 21:43.
LTNman is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2023, 21:38
  #3888 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by davidjohnson6

Fire safety at LTN is a fight worth fighting and a fight that people will support... opponents will be embarassed after MSCP1. Scream, shout, twist arms, cajole, do whatever needs to be done - this is something worthy of your time.

I am sure the issue with these doors will be raised at meetings with airport management by someone. So when is a fire exit not a fire exit? Answer, when they put a sticker over the green exit sign. Note the padlock.


Last edited by LTNman; 12th Nov 2023 at 21:50.
LTNman is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2023, 00:14
  #3889 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 59
Posts: 3,703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
By the direction of the pichure, exiting from that door you are going towards an area which is now deemed to be unsafe maybe? Another pichure through the window pointing downwards would be useful to see.
pabely is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2023, 05:38
  #3890 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes, I would say that is exactly the reason. So if there is a raging fire in MSCP1 what is more dangerous, MSCP1 or walking past the fire damaged but still standing MSCP2?

Looking at this Google street view, the fire exit route for MSCP1 hugs the outside of the building due to the railings so inside the building is deemed safe but outside the building is deemed dangerous. No doubt the railings were put up to stop people exiting the building in a hurry being run over. Oh and where are there a bank of EV chargers? Yes, on this side of the building 2 floors up.

Worth noting the identical building materials used for both car parks, built by the same company that went bust using the same construction methods. Now I wonder if the replacement MSCP3 will be a mirror of MSCP2?

Last edited by LTNman; 13th Nov 2023 at 06:01.
LTNman is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2023, 15:52
  #3891 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Under the flight path
Posts: 2,620
Received 11 Likes on 4 Posts
The issue with the airport operator's reluctance to spend out on the DART is because of the franchise structure. Why would they shell out £200m plus when their franchise, and their chances of recouping their outlay (never mind making a profit) expires in a few years' time. I am unaware of any other item of national infrastructure that is based on this flawed model.
If you accept the premise that the council taxpayers of Luton have no responsibility to provide an important part of national infrastructure, then you should accept that a new owner is preferable. That owner, whether public or (preferably) private, can plan for the long term in the knowledge that their investment can be recouped either through trading or resale.
It's also interesting to note that AFAIK the "franchise" has never been contested, merely extended.
In addition to that, local authority ownership brings with it positions of authority for local government politicians. People I wouldn't trust to run a bath, let alone an airport.
It's time for a proper trade sale, to allow the council to recoup their outlay and repay their debts, and use the balance to establish a kind of "sovereign wealth fund" for the benefit of Luton council taxpayers.
LGS6753 is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2023, 18:48
  #3892 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 59
Posts: 3,703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Maybe that is the long term idea, and why they don't want to upset AENA during covid. Get the approval for T2 then put the for sale or 99 year lease up for grabs? Begs the question on what the price would be.
pabely is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2023, 19:15
  #3893 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 59
Posts: 3,703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I see a new planning application has been put in for the Solar Farm after changes to it's footprint.
pabely is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2023, 19:16
  #3894 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No doubt not as much as they hope. The new franchise in I think 2032 is meant to clear LRT debts in one hit, which will pass £1bn if LRT have to fund phase 1. Pay LRT a fee per passenger and then they will be expected to stump up around another £3bn for something they don’t own.

LTNman is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2023, 19:32
  #3895 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by pabely
I see a new planning application has been put in for the Solar Farm after changes to it's footprint.
It’s not a planning application. Just like the DCO it would be classed as permitted development. This is why you shouldn’t get to excited about the detail of the DCO, as in reality it could be completely different, assuming it gets approved.
LTNman is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2023, 19:56
  #3896 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 59
Posts: 3,703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by LTNman
Itís not a planning application. Just like the DCO it would be classed as permitted development. This is why you shouldnít get to excited about the detail of the DCO, as in reality it could be completely different, assuming it gets approved.
Why is it in the Luton Planning Portal then and why would it be connected to the DCO, I would have thought that seeing this going ahead would be an advantage regardless of the DCO.
pabely is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2023, 20:02
  #3897 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 59
Posts: 3,703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In other news the UK next brand new Railway station Brent Cross West opens next month which puts proposed 6,700 new homes and new businesses in easy reach of Luton Airport.
Along with an upgrade to the existing Cricklewood Station this makes LLA more attractive to North Londoners.
pabely is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2023, 20:18
  #3898 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by pabely
Why is it in the Luton Planning Portal then and why would it be connected to the DCO, I would have thought that seeing this going ahead would be an advantage regardless of the DCO.
if you read the application in the planning portal it says it is permitted development. It is not connected to the DCO but the DCO, if approved, would also be then classed as permitted development meaning the detail in the application could be ignored, as they do something different.

As I said before, the car park that burnt down was permitted development so didn’t need approval.
LTNman is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2023, 20:28
  #3899 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 5,675
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes on 17 Posts
Originally Posted by pabely
In other news the UK next brand new Railway station Brent Cross West opens next month which puts proposed 6,700 new homes and new businesses in easy reach of Luton Airport.
Along with an upgrade to the existing Cricklewood Station this makes LLA more attractive to North Londoners.
Brent Cross is my local shopping mall... but I think everyone in the area was already aware of LTN being fairly nearby. Yes, it'll make it easier to reach LTN, but I think the area was well within LTN's catchment already :-)
davidjohnson6 is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2023, 21:59
  #3900 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Oban, Scotland
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Remember that there's no parking provided at the new station.

And of course it may be easy to get the train to LTN, but it's also easy to get the train to LGW....
inOban is offline  

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.