Does the number of US flights justify it? It will be mega quiet for much of the year other than a few summer months.

A valid point. A question that only EDI management can answer. They will have done their homework and obviously see this as an opportunity. It’s also an application supported by business from a cargo/trade point of view. Presumably they will have held discussions with airlines to sound them out about more year round services.

Where is there space to expand? Either another level or continuing past Gate 29 into the Long Stay car park?

The check-in area is in dire need of expansion. It can barely handle the current number of flights/passengers as it is. Glad I have no plans to fly out during peak summer.

Theres plenty of space where the old runway was, could easily add a pier heading towards the cargo ramp. Parking / gates really wouldn't be too hard to add, but as you point out, the core of the airport really needs expanding.

I can't see them spending that much, they probably need to for customer experience BUT it's always about shareholder ROI and that's not clear to me as core winter would likely be one United and one Delta flight per day. So unless it's rolled into a genuine terminal expansion for wider use, seems a challenge IMHO.

Great way to generate PR and advertise summer 23 though! 🇺🇸

[QUOTE=Skipness One Foxtrot

Great way to generate PR and advertise summer 23 though! 🇺🇸[/QUOTE]

and generate interest for a sale.

if you go to edinburgh skyscrapercity page 61 post by kenspeckle there is an image of the current airport expansion plans

Do you have a link to the page and images? Unable to find.

great. Thanks

Looking at the 2024 land use image, the terminal looks to be the exact same.

I'm guessing their next natural expansion would indeed be to turn due south and into the car park (which looks to add maybe 3 more "heavy" gates?). The east pier extension would be a bigger investment.

As many of said, the biggest issue with EDI is the terminal and that it’s been extended over and over again.

A new terminal (replacement or additional) would certainly be an asset but I doubt the owners would be willing to spend that kind of money.

Especially when it is supposedly up for sale. Getting any sort of meaningful caped for expansion I would expect to be very difficult while the ownership is up for change unless it drives significant value increase to the proposition with increased revenue- something the proposed Pre-clearance may bring but again only seasonally.
Don’t get me wrong I would love for both to happen as I fly regularly to the US and the 1-2hr waits at immigration are dull!

IMHO EDI will not be the first of the two central belt airports to be sold…

Qatar W23

QR increasing from previously published 7 x weekly to 10 x weekly. Double service on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday. 789 aircraft.

Why is the fact the terminal has been extended over and over again such a problem? It's been refurbished numerous times, so it's not like parts of it still look like the 1970s.
What specificaly is wrong with the current terminal, other than it being a bit small? Further extensions would soon sort that, no need to build a whole new terminal.

The only part of the terminal that drastically needs attention is the check in area. Now that traffic is no longer permitted immediately outside the airport terminal, there is an opportunity to expand the terminal out, creating more room for check in area on the ground floor, and more room for retail facilities on the upper floor.

If you ever used LHR T1 in it's later years you'll know why add-ons are a pain.
It's an overcrowded and incoherent mess with no logical flow, long walks and way too much bussing. The South East pier can happily do all departures but international arrivals need a bus to the UK Border. The check in area is massively overcrowded in summer and is only going to get worse. The layout was never intended to push so many people through that little terminal, you would not ever clean sheet design it this way.
Take one example, will my Ryanair flight depart from Gate 1 or the furthest end of the South East pier? It's just painful in my experience. Add-ons only get you so far, there comes a point you need to think strategically and not tactically. BUT it won't happen as the ROI likely isn't there without the taxpayer stepping in.
AND before anyone leaps to defend EDI, I say this only in the hope that they can better the customer experience, not just to attack the airport....

The EDI check-in hall is a mess and I say that as someone who generally quite likes the airport. They have tried every trick in the book to get maximum value out of the limited space - from the pods, to extending it into arrivals to twilight check-in. In a sense, it's quite admirable what they've managed to do with a very limited design but we are really, really pushing at the limits of that now.

As I said, that can easily be fixed now that trafifc no longer uses the road outside, apart from busses. Re-route the busses, then expand out across where the road used to be. That will provide a lot more space in the check in area.

They built new immigration and customs facilities a few years back next to the new widebody stands. The South East pier could easily be modified to allow access in to this by building a second bridge over Gogar Burn for arrivals.

I really dont think a new terminal is needed, there's plenty that can be done to address issues with the current terminal should they wish to.

Which is horrific, like a shed or prison block. I wouldn’t promote any more of that sort of add-on as a welcome to international arrivals