|
Originally Posted by daz211
(Post 10315623)
I still don’t understand why an International Airport wants to brand away from its designated IATA code and brand itself using another Airports code LLA is the code for Luleå Airport (LLA) in Sweden. If an unsuspecting passengers Google’s LLA the top results show Luton Airport it is not inconceivable the someone could end up in LTN expecting to land at LLA. Is it even legal to Brand under another Airports code ? |
Originally Posted by ExpectmorePayless
(Post 10315691)
I wonder if Lulea Airport is such an inhospitable building site. Bet they wish they had bus shelters like ours.😉
|
Originally Posted by daz211
(Post 10315486)
Why not use LTN above the sign instead of LLA this can be very confusing for passengers from countries that use the code of the airport over the airport name this is a big pet hate of mine. you wouldn’t fly to JFK and see NYA as a code or what can be conceived as a code. |
Wizzair New route Krakow daily w/c 4 April then 2 x daily from 1 May. That will make Easy happy, they have only recently reintroduced the route from Luton |
Must have got a very good deal from the airport authorities.
|
Originally Posted by daz211
(Post 10315623)
I still don’t understand why an International Airport wants to brand away from its designated IATA code and brand itself using another Airports code LLA is the code for Luleå Airport (LLA) in Sweden. If an unsuspecting passengers Google’s LLA the top results show Luton Airport it is not inconceivable the someone could end up in LTN expecting to land at LLA. Is it even legal to Brand under another Airports code ? |
Originally Posted by pabely
(Post 10316409)
You are having a laugh now, you will find no airport if you were in Canada using such a scenario, most people using google search use descriptive terms and google is very good in knowing where you are and giving appropriate results.
But what ever you use it still doesn’t make sense to market and re brand LTN as LLA its madness and should have been brought up in the planning stages I’m not picking on Luton Southend is also a culprit but they have an excuse as they are new and probably don’t even know the importance of the IATA code. |
Photos taken from almost the same spot with the second photo taken a few paces back into the new build exactly 18 year apart to the day. A careful look at the ceiling in the second photo shows the red beams as reference. The first photo was taken with a slight telephoto lens while the second used a slight wide angle lens. In those days the terminal had a clear ceiling design with services below ground.
https://i.imgur.com/8W0LQyX.jpg https://i.imgur.com/Qx5sgyi.jpg |
I see that the old Monarch HQ has been sold for £4.26 million by the administrators. Secured creditors will be paid including Petrol Jersey Limited which is connected to Greybull will receive £50 million but unsecured creditors will get nothing!
|
Yes but we don't know to who. The site is fenced off but work has yet to start. There are no planning applications submitted so I doubt it would be sold for a change of use without getting the wink. At the moment the indications are that it will remain an office block and with its prime location inside the airport it could be speculated it will end up with a link to aviation remaining.
|
Originally Posted by LTNman
(Post 10321621)
Yes but we don't know to who. The site is fenced off but work has yet to start. There are no planning applications submitted so I doubt it would be sold for a change of use without getting the wink. At the moment the indications are that it will remain an office block and with its prime location inside the airport it could be speculated it will end up with a link to aviation remaining.
Apart from that no other information but will definitely stay as office block. |
Hampton Brook general & standard speculative office & warehousing projects.
|
Direct flights to India next year!
|
I'll believe it when I see it:
Direct Amritsar, London flight next year: UK MP - The Tribune India Anyone else able to add any more meat to this? They refer to providing low-cost and direct services to India from Luton, that really does not go hand-in-hand with the airport infrastructure... Low cost to me would mean a high density configuration aircraft and that along with an aircraft type that could fly direct/non-stop would struggle to operate from airports runway! |
Originally Posted by gilesdavies
(Post 10322560)
I'll believe it when I see it:
Direct Amritsar, London flight next year: UK MP - The Tribune India Anyone else able to add any more meat to this? They've been promising this route for about 2 years now but to STN not LTN. |
Originally Posted by daz211
(Post 10322587)
As long as it’s not Flypop . Com. They've been promising this route for about 2 years now but to STN not LTN. |
Originally Posted by pabely
(Post 10322630)
But whom might it be Jet Airways, can't see IndiGo or Spice having the correct equipment for such a route.
maybe looking at Luton as an alternative? |
Indigo were in the press recently about launching routes from India to the UK with a stop at I think Azerbaijan? Report mentioned Gatwick.
|
Originally Posted by Buster the Bear
(Post 10322852)
Indigo were in the press recently about launching routes from India to the UK with a stop at I think Azerbaijan? Report mentioned Gatwick.
If this route does indeed happen the likelihood is it will be Indigo. They will be taking delivery of their first A321neo at year end I believe and with their intention to fly to the UK already stated it does seem to make sense.Would be a long old journey though with the stopover, some what 10+ hrs in a single aisle, high density layout. Big Indian population around Luton so they will probably be hoping this does happen. |
I thought that I had deleted my post above, but looks like I didn't.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 22:32. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.