Airport Development in the south east.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airport Development in the south east.
The consultation on the development of Air transport has recently finished.
What is everybody's opinion of how it should proceed? Do we have an expanded Heathrow? Is Cliffe a red herring? Should we expand Gatwick, Stansted, Luton or even build a new airport in the Severn estuary?
This will become (even more of) a hot potato in the next year, when the white paper is published.
What do the people who actually fly into and work at these airports actually think?
What is everybody's opinion of how it should proceed? Do we have an expanded Heathrow? Is Cliffe a red herring? Should we expand Gatwick, Stansted, Luton or even build a new airport in the Severn estuary?
This will become (even more of) a hot potato in the next year, when the white paper is published.
What do the people who actually fly into and work at these airports actually think?
Last edited by Say again s l o w l y; 24th Jul 2003 at 22:52.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would be very surprised (let alone extremely disappointed) if LHR didn't get its third runway; ultimately, LHR is one of the biggest contributors to economic growth and with the additional demand for slots as a result of various issues - new bilaterals, US issues etc. - I think it has to be the No1 priority.
I think STN will get one, possibly two, with LGW getting its second, but probably not for completion/opening before 2019, as a result of the legal agreement.
Cliffe won't happen, but maybe other green-field sites like Abingdon will.
There should also be further emphasis on ground links between airports, with rail services to LHR being improved (hopefully from LGW as well - that's one route that really needs a rail link) to free up some slots. Also, I wonder if there will be pressure to maximise use of slots; for example, it hardly seems right to have c.20 flights a day from LHR-MAN, when many of these are 319/737 operations and other regional airports lose their access. Why not a Japanese style all Y configuration, using charter airlines' 757s/321s, releasing 4-5 slots for regional access.
When is the long spoken of change in runway usage (at LHR), which is estimated to produce an extra 6-10 flights per hour, supposed to be coming in?
I think STN will get one, possibly two, with LGW getting its second, but probably not for completion/opening before 2019, as a result of the legal agreement.
Cliffe won't happen, but maybe other green-field sites like Abingdon will.
There should also be further emphasis on ground links between airports, with rail services to LHR being improved (hopefully from LGW as well - that's one route that really needs a rail link) to free up some slots. Also, I wonder if there will be pressure to maximise use of slots; for example, it hardly seems right to have c.20 flights a day from LHR-MAN, when many of these are 319/737 operations and other regional airports lose their access. Why not a Japanese style all Y configuration, using charter airlines' 757s/321s, releasing 4-5 slots for regional access.
When is the long spoken of change in runway usage (at LHR), which is estimated to produce an extra 6-10 flights per hour, supposed to be coming in?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just off to work at Heathrow Tower,
Ummmmmmm, eh? What's this?
When is the long spoken of change in runway usage (at LHR), which is estimated to produce an extra 6-10 flights per hour, supposed to be coming in?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I assume Akerosid means the change to mixed-mode useage at Heathrow. Probably not a popular move with the locals tho'.
Akerosid, what is the Japanese Y configuration?
Akerosid, what is the Japanese Y configuration?
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, that's what I meant - mixed usage. Sorry!
What I call the Japanese Y configuration is basically an all economy layout, as operated by Japanese domestic carriers on peak routes; you certainly wouldn't get 737s operating 20 a day from Tokyo to Osaka. What I mean is, make best use of the slots available. If you can get the same capacity from 12-15 flights (which is a perfectly reasonable frequency) as you can get from 20 flights with smaller aircraft, then use the larger one and create more flights from regional airports.
What I call the Japanese Y configuration is basically an all economy layout, as operated by Japanese domestic carriers on peak routes; you certainly wouldn't get 737s operating 20 a day from Tokyo to Osaka. What I mean is, make best use of the slots available. If you can get the same capacity from 12-15 flights (which is a perfectly reasonable frequency) as you can get from 20 flights with smaller aircraft, then use the larger one and create more flights from regional airports.
?
The very thought of flying from LGW or LHR gives me the screaming willies. Distant, overcrowded, dirty, and I'm afraid with staff who often betray the frustration of working in such an environment.
The south east has various under-utilised runways which should be used fully before creating more mayhem on Hounslow Heath or the Sussex/Surrey border.
The first and most obvious contender is LTN. Rail link, 2 miles from M1, lots of capacity, under-utilised terminal capacity all point to an opportunity to better use an existing facility.
Then what about Northolt, Farnborough, Manston, Lydd, even Southend, Norwich and Southampton?
For anyone living north of the Thames (and that's most of us), Gatwick is a non-starter. Heathrow is fenced-off by M25 and its traffic, so we would prefer LTN or STN. Unfortunately, the east-west surface links in England are lousy, which disadvantages STN further. Also its rail link is essentially a branch line into London.
Another thought - is it right that the BAA should run LHR, LGW and STN? I would have thought everyone would gain from a competitive airport infrastructure rather than a near-monopoly.
So, what do y'all think about 'Fly Luton'?
The south east has various under-utilised runways which should be used fully before creating more mayhem on Hounslow Heath or the Sussex/Surrey border.
The first and most obvious contender is LTN. Rail link, 2 miles from M1, lots of capacity, under-utilised terminal capacity all point to an opportunity to better use an existing facility.
Then what about Northolt, Farnborough, Manston, Lydd, even Southend, Norwich and Southampton?
For anyone living north of the Thames (and that's most of us), Gatwick is a non-starter. Heathrow is fenced-off by M25 and its traffic, so we would prefer LTN or STN. Unfortunately, the east-west surface links in England are lousy, which disadvantages STN further. Also its rail link is essentially a branch line into London.
Another thought - is it right that the BAA should run LHR, LGW and STN? I would have thought everyone would gain from a competitive airport infrastructure rather than a near-monopoly.
So, what do y'all think about 'Fly Luton'?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: leeds
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BAA is an astonishing anomoly and a malignant monopoly.
Control by one company of most our airport capacity (and the vast majority of it in the South-East) is not in the public interest.
Market forces are now the norm for everything except airports.
It should be illegal to own more than one airport of any significance. BAA (&TBI) should be broken-up into independant airport companies.
The obvious choices for SE expansion are Heathrow & Luton simply because they are nearer to most of the rest of England
Control by one company of most our airport capacity (and the vast majority of it in the South-East) is not in the public interest.
Market forces are now the norm for everything except airports.
It should be illegal to own more than one airport of any significance. BAA (&TBI) should be broken-up into independant airport companies.
The obvious choices for SE expansion are Heathrow & Luton simply because they are nearer to most of the rest of England
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suppose it would be London West to Ryanair!!
I put Severnside in as an option to usual 'just expand heathrow.'
I'd never heard of Severnside until a few days ago and it seems a sensible option, well better than Cliffe anyway!
I agree that the BAA does seem to take the p*ss sometimes. I know they are a lot better up in Manchester now, but they had to be forced into it. Any company that has a profit margin of over 30% and yet still screams that charges should go up, is quite frankly having a laugh...
I put Severnside in as an option to usual 'just expand heathrow.'
I'd never heard of Severnside until a few days ago and it seems a sensible option, well better than Cliffe anyway!
I agree that the BAA does seem to take the p*ss sometimes. I know they are a lot better up in Manchester now, but they had to be forced into it. Any company that has a profit margin of over 30% and yet still screams that charges should go up, is quite frankly having a laugh...
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: U.K
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The fools removed the best runway in the south(eastish), when Greenham Common was dug up. Look at it's location. Good for the M4, in the heart of the South, and best of all, it was already there. It would certainly have been cheaper than any of the other current options. I guess the locals would have been a tad incensed though.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: South East UK
Age: 69
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting point about the BAA profit margin. However, the figure after interest, tax and dividends is around 8% I think. Their annual report shows £158m carried to reserves which goes toward funding the £11.9 billion investment programme, so it looks like there's a gap to be plugged somehow - more borrowing ?? And that's probably a big issue in any break up of the monopoly - who could afford to a) buy one of the airports and b) put in the investment required, without jacking up the charges still further - back to the old Retail vs Operations argument.
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Say again slowly,
The Severnside suggestion has been around for many years, sometimes as a replacement for CWL and BRS, sometimes as an adjunct to these airports.
Over the years various groups have put forward suggestions for an airport 'in the Severn', some vaguely serious, others just pie in the sky.
At present a consortium of business people and others is attempting to persuade the government that a brand new intercontinental airport should be built near Newport in South Wales. The runway would be on a man-made island in the estuary with the terminal buildings on part of the Corus steelworks property at Llanwern.
Last January this consortium submitted to the Secretary of State for Transport a 92-page proposal prepared by HOK, one of the world’s largest firms of architects and airport planners. The proposal envisages a £2 billion airport that would in effect be Britain’s third major intercontinental airport, but away from the crowded south-east skies.
They believe that BRS and CWL would co-exist as European airports alongside their younger but infinitely bigger brother.
See: http://www.severnside-airport.com/
The government’s own consultation document talks vaguely of a new major airport at Pilning, which is on the English side of the Severn estuary just to the north-west of Bristol, but this would only be considered if no meaningful increase in runway capacity could be achieved in the south-east.
The Severnside suggestion has been around for many years, sometimes as a replacement for CWL and BRS, sometimes as an adjunct to these airports.
Over the years various groups have put forward suggestions for an airport 'in the Severn', some vaguely serious, others just pie in the sky.
At present a consortium of business people and others is attempting to persuade the government that a brand new intercontinental airport should be built near Newport in South Wales. The runway would be on a man-made island in the estuary with the terminal buildings on part of the Corus steelworks property at Llanwern.
Last January this consortium submitted to the Secretary of State for Transport a 92-page proposal prepared by HOK, one of the world’s largest firms of architects and airport planners. The proposal envisages a £2 billion airport that would in effect be Britain’s third major intercontinental airport, but away from the crowded south-east skies.
They believe that BRS and CWL would co-exist as European airports alongside their younger but infinitely bigger brother.
See: http://www.severnside-airport.com/
The government’s own consultation document talks vaguely of a new major airport at Pilning, which is on the English side of the Severn estuary just to the north-west of Bristol, but this would only be considered if no meaningful increase in runway capacity could be achieved in the south-east.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do like the idea of Severnside. All the positives (apart from being next to London) are there, Airspace, Workforce, Transport links (M4/5 and railway) aswell as space for future expansion. If there was ever an area in need of regeneration.....
That is another problem with somewhere like Heathrow, what happens in a few years time, do you expand again??
Do we have to expand at all? Apart from BA, is there really a need for extra capacity. I know BA are seeing their world market share shrink at Heathrow with the expansion of places such as CDG and Frankfurt. They won't entertain the idea of a split-hub after what happened with Gatwick. So they are the real driving force behind the desire for expansion.
That is another problem with somewhere like Heathrow, what happens in a few years time, do you expand again??
Do we have to expand at all? Apart from BA, is there really a need for extra capacity. I know BA are seeing their world market share shrink at Heathrow with the expansion of places such as CDG and Frankfurt. They won't entertain the idea of a split-hub after what happened with Gatwick. So they are the real driving force behind the desire for expansion.
In reply to Woofrey:
The BAA could be broken up in a number of ways - it doresn't necessarily have to be 'bought'. Debt associated with (for example) the gold-plated terminal at Stansted would go to the company operating Stansted, likewise with LHR and LGW. Shareholders could initially receive shares in three (or more)separate companies, and the markets would do the rest, in terms of valuations. Government would have to intervene, but not necessarily legislate a) to start the process, and b) to ensure that the companies were prevented from merging in future.
In the case of TBI, I don't consider that a threat. Its three UK airports are in very different parts of the country (Luton, Belfast & Cardiff) and don't operate as a cartel. Neither do Manchester Airport's operations, or Peel.
In reply to Say - Again - S l o w l y:
For a new airport on Severnside to succeed, you would need to close both Lulsgate and Cardiff, and perhaps also Filton. Apart from the destruction of existing runways, there is the immense cost of new infrastructure, possibly reclaimed land, and compensation to the above three airport operators. Is that really going to happen? More important - who will be willing to pay? Also, Bristol is a very vibrant labour market, and labour would be both scarce and expensive. To say nothing of the fact that it's 120 miles from London, and the M4's very long and thin! Ryanair may view it as London - West, but no-one else will.
Chris
The BAA could be broken up in a number of ways - it doresn't necessarily have to be 'bought'. Debt associated with (for example) the gold-plated terminal at Stansted would go to the company operating Stansted, likewise with LHR and LGW. Shareholders could initially receive shares in three (or more)separate companies, and the markets would do the rest, in terms of valuations. Government would have to intervene, but not necessarily legislate a) to start the process, and b) to ensure that the companies were prevented from merging in future.
In the case of TBI, I don't consider that a threat. Its three UK airports are in very different parts of the country (Luton, Belfast & Cardiff) and don't operate as a cartel. Neither do Manchester Airport's operations, or Peel.
In reply to Say - Again - S l o w l y:
For a new airport on Severnside to succeed, you would need to close both Lulsgate and Cardiff, and perhaps also Filton. Apart from the destruction of existing runways, there is the immense cost of new infrastructure, possibly reclaimed land, and compensation to the above three airport operators. Is that really going to happen? More important - who will be willing to pay? Also, Bristol is a very vibrant labour market, and labour would be both scarce and expensive. To say nothing of the fact that it's 120 miles from London, and the M4's very long and thin! Ryanair may view it as London - West, but no-one else will.
Chris
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Middlesesx
Posts: 2,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For confirmation: I read at the time that the possible construction of runway 3 at LHR would put pay to RAF Northolt due to converging landing paterns from the west. Which indeed appears to be the case as often the Northolt a/c can be seen and a Kingair pilot told me it was hairy getting in sometimes. To confuse the situation the locals according to my free rag are agreeing to more flights from Northolt.
I always felt to that are greaters and betters will always want the RAF to remain there just in case they need to run for it.
I always felt to that are greaters and betters will always want the RAF to remain there just in case they need to run for it.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was/is a plan to use Northolt as a feeder runway for Heathrow, utilising the rail-link that already exists between them to move pax. This would probably mean the reorientation of Northolts runway, which would slightly defeat the object!!
In replyto LGS 6753, I don't believe that both Cardiff and Lulgate would be closed, I can't see an awful lot of use for them but I'm sure they would find a role. As to the workforce, I know Bristol has no problem with unemployment, but what about South Wales?? There is still massive unemploment in the area and there would be no problem finding labour there. The Severnside plan would only work if there was an expansion of the transport links, but the basics are already there....
In replyto LGS 6753, I don't believe that both Cardiff and Lulgate would be closed, I can't see an awful lot of use for them but I'm sure they would find a role. As to the workforce, I know Bristol has no problem with unemployment, but what about South Wales?? There is still massive unemploment in the area and there would be no problem finding labour there. The Severnside plan would only work if there was an expansion of the transport links, but the basics are already there....
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Age: 44
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
more options than that
Given that the SERAS team (civil service guys running the consultation) got 150,000 responses, I'd hazard the following:
1. A whole lot of people wrote in to voice objections to one or many of the existing options, especially LHR as it will blight another few hundred thousand homes, and LGW because (familiar?) the government will be reneging on a promise if they build there.
2. Government's decision will be very much more political than the forum debates on here seem to reflect - they'll take the line that offers the least public resistance and does the minimum to get airlines off their backs ie one new runway at STN to start with, then delay other decisions for say 5 years - typical cop-out.
3. There are many more ideas being considered by them than have been released into the public arena. For example Redhill went as far as getting their MP to get the DfT to state on public record that their submission would be treated as confidential. Given that this site seems to be the home of the airline industry's free thinkers, I'm sure we could ask around and come up with quite a few neat ideas.
4. Further to the above, I think Cliffe is a smokescreen designed to split the NIMBY lobby - historic building people are against 4 runways at STN, eco-warriors against Cliffe, legal eagles against LGW, London liberties people against LHR. Divide and rule!
Any thoughts?
1. A whole lot of people wrote in to voice objections to one or many of the existing options, especially LHR as it will blight another few hundred thousand homes, and LGW because (familiar?) the government will be reneging on a promise if they build there.
2. Government's decision will be very much more political than the forum debates on here seem to reflect - they'll take the line that offers the least public resistance and does the minimum to get airlines off their backs ie one new runway at STN to start with, then delay other decisions for say 5 years - typical cop-out.
3. There are many more ideas being considered by them than have been released into the public arena. For example Redhill went as far as getting their MP to get the DfT to state on public record that their submission would be treated as confidential. Given that this site seems to be the home of the airline industry's free thinkers, I'm sure we could ask around and come up with quite a few neat ideas.
4. Further to the above, I think Cliffe is a smokescreen designed to split the NIMBY lobby - historic building people are against 4 runways at STN, eco-warriors against Cliffe, legal eagles against LGW, London liberties people against LHR. Divide and rule!
Any thoughts?
And while we're at it , with such a time scale , why not plan for a high speed or other , circular , connecting rail link between Heathrow , Gatwick, Stansted and Luton with two directional services every 15 minutes , or so. Just a thought!