Was still at Valencia in 2019, but don’t recall hearing it at Madrid this year.

Could it be a reminder to travellers to stop browsing the shops or taking their time for other reasons and make their way to the departure gates so the flight is not delayed? Every minute of delay causes extra costs to an airline and frustration for those passengers who are considerate to others by turning up on time. If people find announcements annoying I can only assume they are extremely sensitive!

Not just the terminal but also the Dart people mover. For a 2 minutes 38 second journey they manage to cram many announcements in. Maybe they could announce the cost of the journey per metre as a fun fact.

FlyOne swap to daily 10:30 arrivals tomorrow and already 2+ hours ETA.
Interesting if the new late STN service is very regular, been very poor keeping to shedules at Luton, eating up nighttime slots.

I wonder how sustainable this operation is - they seem to be using two Jordan Aviation A320s and two SkyUp 738s. The only aircraft of their own has been an infrequent visitor lately.

FlyOne are even more exotic - they have an aicraft from Mongolian Airways flying around their network as well

Meanwhile, Titan Airways are covering for one of Wizzair's airframes again today. This has been happening a lot lately. Does anyone know if Wizz are short of aircraft or have been experiencing tech problems? According to me reading of the schedules, they are due to add an extra based aircraft at Luton from Monday (11 to 12).

5hr 40min arrival delay now into Luton, as the same SkyUp aircraft is due to run the STN route later, let's see if that gets canx or just eats up one of their valuable night time slots!

I know Brasov starts this Monday.

I still only see 11 W9 departures in first wave, with the new Brasov service, does it mean another route has been handed over to W6?

Me too. When I checked the schedules earlier in the year there were 3xdaily flights to Iasi, including one W9 departure in the first wave. This has now fallen away, and we now have 2xdaily both with W6.

I did wonder, with no slot trades done through ACL.
I think the re-timed FlyOne is using an ex Blue Air slot but had to give up the evening slot due to 18m constraints, hence that has gone to STN.
Be interesting how Wizz Air move to all A321 with this constraint which stops quieter and more less polluting aircraft. Same can be said of Easyjet, there was talk of basing a 321 at Luton and more 319s are retired once more NEOs arrive next year.
Routes like AMS will have to drop to x4 from x5 daily which reduces customers choices.
They are going to have a smaller footprint at LGW next year as leased slots are returning to IAG, others like BHX & MAN will benefit.
With the whole world is ordering record numbers of new aircraft, Luton could loose out having airlines using older/smaller/noiser/more polluting aircraft.
Increase the 18m cap to 22.5m with say 25% terminal increase being a condition, not the small tweaks currently in the plan so it is a win, win with actually no extra flights.

The A321Neo is a noisy aircraft and doesn’t live up to the manufacturers claims.

For a win win situation those new stands would not be required.

Luton can’t physically accept a 25% increase in terminal size but could just make more people stand up to increase capacity with its current DCO proposal, which involve I would guess a 5% physical increase to the existing terminal.

But you agree less CO2 emissions from NEO/Max?
There is plenty of space but just a bit challenging in old terminal to go upwards. If T2 gets turned down then that might be the next plan.
The extra stands give relief to the night stands 15-10 area and make tenants more attractive in the hangers, who actually owns the ex MAEL facility?
I know Tecknic looked at them at one stage as they look after Wizzair fleet, saves subcontrating to the Diamond Hangar at STN.

Only if the total number of flights don’t increase and that’s not the plan. The plan is to increase CO2 emissions by limiting only the emissions from the airport.

So we agree, abandon the 18m limit to speed up the deployment of newer aircraft which produce less CO2. Obviously terminal & runway utilisation limits would still apply.
Would save customers an necessary treak to another airport because a 319 or 320CEO is full and actually generates a little more income for the airport owner.

Sorry, you have drawn the wrong conclusions. Aircraft that produce less CO2 per capita produce more CO2 if there is more of them. The proposal is to increase passengers from 18m to 32m so we are looking at a massive increase in CO2. If that wasn’t the case LRT would be proposing a legally binding “Green Growth” proposal. The fact that aircraft are excluded speaks volumes that LRT has little interest in the planet despite the smoke and mirror claims.

Random noise isn't at all helpful, over a short period most people learn to block them out. Hence if the 20th announcement is relevant to you, there's a good chance you won't register it. And many people do genuinely despise the never ending racket and are wound up. There's a good reason most airports don't do it and it's another reason many people cite as poor customer experience on the railways. It's like that one kid that never shuts up....

I think you will find no airports do this so why impose such restrictions when no-one else in the world does this.
Take a look a Munich Airport who have been battling the greens for years on operating hours, noise & polution yet can still expand using latest Substainable Development Goals.