There is still the area in the short term car park where the council plan showed a new apron and another 5 stands. The new joint master plan does not have this apron. Both plans show a new multi-story car park in the same location to each other with the joint master plan stating that it will only be built when needed. Maybe it will be needed if they put an apron on part of the car park some time in the future.

That is not quite true. While part of the county boundary runs along the southern airport fence there is a large chunk of land around Someries that is part of Luton as the county boundary turns south east away from the airport. If measured the other way the land extends to the front of the new terminal.


I wouldn’t get to fixed on county boundary’s as these can be moved. Once upon a time the county boundary ran along the start of the runway at the 26 end. The ILS and airport fence was in Herts but this was changed years ago. If you look at an OS map you can see how the relatively straight line of the border now goes around the airport and not through it.


http://imageshack.us/a/img703/1223/boundary.png

God, what a busy little airport we were again today, would those nasty A&B liners go somewhere else so the VVIPs can park somewhere!!!

Does the Master plan cater for 50% growth across all airport users? At this rate the additional 15 stands will be taken up by Global's Legacy's & Gulfstream's alone!

No it doesn't and it looks to me that Biz jets will be squeezed. Signature will end up with a smaller apron than it has today. No plans and nowhere to expand Harrods. Maybe RSS Enterprises will end up with more apron as it only rents one or two stands on the South Apron at present.

It might be the case that initially biz jets will just overspill back onto stands 16 and 17 as not all stands will be needed for passenger aircraft until maybe a few years’ time but the difference will be that instead of Signature picking up the income from parked aircraft the money will go the airport providing the biz jet owners are prepared to pay the rates. One of the big moans at Monarch was the cost of parking aircraft that was in for maintenance as parking charges apply after 2 hours.

While Luton piles biz jets in nose to tail TAG aviation at Farnborough has no such problems. If they ever get permission to expand their opening hours you can see where many aircraft that would have liked to use Luton will end up.

If they ever get permission to expand their opening hours you can see where many aircraft that would have liked to use Luton will end up.

Its very unlikely Farnboro' will be allowed night movements in the short term. When the current phased increase in movements to 50,000 by 2019 was agreed to on appeal, the noise considerations based on the restricted opening hours formed part of that agreement.

Its not uncommon to see Farnboro' based aircraft at LTN at weekends and evenings because of this:ok::ok:

LTNman, amazingly at times Farnborough also has issues with a lack of parking available.

Worth reading the master plan for Farnborough then. They want to go from 28,000 movements to 50,000 movement but say the airfield can handle 100,000 movements with no major changes to its infrastructure.

http://www.tagaviation.com/LinkClick...g0%3d&tabid=60

Farnborough will increase over the years, it has the space but the locals will stop the full plans.
Luton picks up quite a few based aircraft as it does from City at weekends.

Lost oppertunity?

Was Luton represented at the Route Development conference in Abu Dhabi this week?

Worth reading the master plan for Farnborough then. They want to go from 28,000 movements to 50,000 movement but say the airfield can handle 100,000 movements with no major changes to its infrastructure.

50,000 annual movements has already been approved but will not be reached until 2019 as the increases are being phased year by year until then.

Plenty of very powerful NIMBY's around Farnboro' will ensure night movements won't happen there:=

New report states that after Heathrow Luton is the best location for a 4 runway airport.

The Press Association: UK needs four-runway airport: study

Heart failure at LADACAN !!!

I heard on the radio this morning that Luton should extend its runway! Why spend up to 80 Billion pounds on a new airport when for a few hundred million pounds Luton could easily alleviate Heathrow congestion!

Both LADICAN and HALE members must be 'imploding' on the news.

This is the full document:

http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/ima...%20quieter.pdf

Makes interesting reading - far too sensible for the likes of LADACAN and politicians!

Luton 2002 Masterplan expanded/modified to 4 runway Airport.Who has the money to carryout this project ?

Interesting reading indeed.

£20bn cost and the closure of Stansted with appropriate financial compensation. Can't see that happening and would it really solve the problem.

Highlights what we already really know.
LTNs catchment area,ease of access and STNs poor geographical location.
Wonder what this might do for STNs price tag in the immediate future.
Guess MAG have been asking these questions already but will they just persist( with Ryanair help of course)in getting passengers to use STN by lowering costs ?

Nice that outsiders have seen the potential at LTN which we have been talking about for ages!

With Luton Airport being on top of a hill it is non-runner for such a plan. Would have to move county boundary again as Herts is south and would love to get a piece of the pie.
Let Luton expand within its limits and live in peace with its Essex neighbour.
The best oppertunity was lost in the 70s with a plan in Bucks. UK plc will suffer in long run.

Come on Pabely lets have some enthusiasm...we have got used to life on the hill....was a problem many moons ago pre cat3 ILS days. Its not beyond mans capability to move a bit of earth around to fill a few holes and make a level playing field (not talking about Kenilworth Rd) But guess you are right probably will never happen, at least in my life time.

In China or Middle East it would be possible but in blighty it will not, move such amounts of earth to get a structred hub, all these trips by lorries & diggers, the greens would have a field day!
I was suprised at St. Pancras International when last visited, we can do it if the will is there but railway hubs are very different from airport hubs (but should they be so?).