HEATHROW

[DenhamPPL]

I love aircraft and I love flying as a PPL but I cannot see how a third runway at Heathrow is going to solve any long term problems with capacity.

I've lived in Fulham below the 27L and 27R approaches ever since I was born and even I now get fed up with the noise from aircraft flying over every 2 mins from early morning till late at night. The recent 777 incident at Heathrow also concerns me. Had it "landed" any earlier it could have killed hundreds of people on the ground as well as those in the aircraft.

I wish they'd just bulldoze Lydd and turn it into the new "London Airport" and move all the Heathrow flights there. Failing that why not reclaim some land from the sea like they did in Hong Kong and build a new airport in the Thames Estuary.:ugh:

[SLF3b]

There is an interesting article in the Economist that argues the real answer is to let the 30% of passengers who transit Heathrow (rather than originate or complete their journey there) go elsewhere (FRA, AMS, CDG). The UK does not derive any real economic benefit from transit passengers, although BA and BAA might.

The 'Heathrow needs a third runway or the City of London dies' argument collapses if you take out transit passengers.

The logical place for Heathrows third runway is the Continent.

[jackharr]

I'm a member of the RSPB and several other wildlife protection societies. But when these bodies complain about destruction of existing habitats (eg the Thames Estuary) they conveniently forget to mention all the new wildlife habitat that is being created, eg old gravel pits, the Great Fen project in Cambridgeshire, coastal marshes.

Win some, lose some. I cannot accept that any wildlife objections should take precedence over building a new airport in the Thames. The corollary to a new airport there would be the downsizing of Heathrow over the next century which would release huge areas of potential habitat. Even with the inevitable building of housing, think of all that heathland that could be created for the benefit of wildlife.

Go for the Thames, ignore the views of the RSPB and other wildlife bodies. We "conservationists" do not always agree with everything our "leaders" say.

Heathrow is in a daft place (but a lot of fun for pilots - well I used to enjoy the views of London)

Jack

[Unwell_Raptor]

I was born and bred in Hayes, and as a schoolboy spotter I watched London Airport start its growth into Heathrow.

I thought then and I think now that there are few bits of Harlington and Sipson that would not be improved by a four-foot thick layer of concrete.

[747-436]

There is an interesting article in the Economist that argues the real answer is to let the 30% of passengers who transit Heathrow (rather than originate or complete their journey there) go elsewhere (FRA, AMS, CDG). The UK does not derive any real economic benefit from transit passengers, although BA and BAA might.

The 'Heathrow needs a third runway or the City of London dies' argument collapses if you take out transit passengers.

The logical place for Heathrows third runway is the Continent.

Ok, so if you take out the transit passengers and let them go elsewhere then the direct flights then become unviable, so some of those too would go.
Of course the UK gets economic benefit on from them, a lot of them travel on UK airlines which if I am not mistaken pay money to the UK and benefit the economy. Take the transit passengers out and then the economic benefit will go elsewhere and not the UK!!
If the passengers went elsewhere so would some of BA's operation, meaning job loses in the UK! Maybe Open Skies is going to do some of that, but that is another debate!

[Skipness One Echo]

I love the way people from all over have opinions here, well I'm a local boy thesed days so here's my view. To builld a whopping new airport in the Thames Estuary would do a lot of damage to the wildlife lets be honest, I have no doubt of that. There are genuine sites of rare wildlife, the decision becomes is it worth concreting it over?This new mega airport would also be on the wrong side of London. Furthermore, the Heathrow site itself would still be a concrete nightmare, this time of housing and probably shops.....Slough and the surrounding area is what is generally called a "dump" anyway. Richmond is a bit noisy but hey it's gotta be quiter than the BAC111s and Tridents of old. So third runway it is for me. The airport's been there for 60 + years, no one was forced to live under the flightpath and the only real option is to chuck concrete into the ocean on the wrong side of town. If you think Terminal 5 was a wee disappointment, the new London Thames Gateway would set records I have no doubt.....

[Walnut]

Why not use the existing R/W at Northolt with a high speed link from there to LHR. To demolish 700+ homes in order to build a 3rd R/W anywhere near a general election would be political suicide for Brown & his friends. The M4 M25 is regularly gridlocked around this point at present so whats the point of expanding Heathrow capacity when the ground transport links are inadequate.

[old,not bold]

Bringing Northolt into better, productive use was among the excellent ways of improving quickly and cheaply the runway capacity around London, by using non-BAA properties, that the BAA managed to get the Dept for Transport to kick into touch in the 2003 White Paper.

Another was the scheme, that was entirely financed by the private sector, to place a 2000ft runway, parallel to LGW at Redhill with an 8-minute suspended monorail connection to LGW South to feed connecting traffic. The owners of Redhill already owned all the land needed for this project. The runway and terminal would have relieved LGW of 125,000 ATM by short-haul and UK regional services, thus allowing LGW's long-haul traffic to grow, and thereby removing the need for LHR to have a third runway. Opposition was confined to a relatively low number of people who lived close to the present airfield.

When BAA realised that the Redhill scheme was

(a) Very feasible and a very sound business proposition and,

(b) Being taken seriously by DfT

they pulled out all the stops to get it killed, including enlisting NATS (which had just been bailed out of bankruptcy by BAA) to make outrageous statements about operational viability, such as "You cannot operate a parallel runway at Gatwick", later necessarily modified to "we don't know if it can be done without studying it, and we are not going to study it". When they were asked about the plan for a BAA-owned parallel runway at LGW they said ...............

"No problem".

And the Secretary of State concurred. Now he is the Chancellor of the Exchequer; I wonder why the British economy is rapidly collapsing?

[VAFFPAX]

Paxboy, as much as I understand the reasoning, Thames Gateway would, once Crossrail is complete, make much more sense... That's why Crossrail was demanded in the first place (i.e. shift lots of SLF from one end of London to the other without bothering with UG/Bus/Taxi/Car/OG). Thanks to parliamentary inaction and the like, Crossrail's been sitting around gathering dust for at least a decade (well, the bill was finally passed, but that still doesn't mean they'll jump into action anytime soon).

This eternal dithering is going to cost London a lot more than 12 billion for a new runway at LHR, a proposed fourth runway around 2020 (for probably another 25 billion if the 12 billion is anything to go by), or a brand new airport for around the 12 billion mark.

The Economist has a great piece on this... I don't have my copy on me, but if you go to a newsagent that stocks it, you can't miss it... it has a huge headline on this on the front cover. Perhaps I should scan it in and post it.

S.

[Torquelink]

Mixed mode is the answer . . . . . on the M4: alternate aircraft and cars. Just need traffic lights and a bit of taxiway - simple.

:ok:

[airborne_artist]

Another was the scheme, that was entirely financed by the private sector, to place a 2000ft

I think that 2000 feet might be a tad short for public transport flights in anything bigger than a Twotter? :E

[littco]

The new airport in Hong Kong cost $20billion in total, ok that was a few years back but even so, that was a WHOLE airport in the sea! £12billion for 1 runway is ridiculous!

[ara01jbb]

Why a 3rd runway? With the rising cost of oil, Heathrow will soon not even have enough traffic for two runways. Visions of a ghost airport with tumble weed blowing around :E

Now what does that remind me of? Perhaps the airport that was (until recently) the largest in the world by area... built for the dozens of Concordes that were expected to transit through it...

http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=45.676442~-74.032059&style=h&lvl=13&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1 (http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=45.676442%7E-74.032059&style=h&lvl=13&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1)

:ugh:

[Contacttower]

I know the current operating rules don't allow it on a regular basis but is mixed mode really not an option for Heathrow?

[Skipness One Echo]

It would have *MASSIVE* implications for people living nearby. No respite at all from 18 hours of constant noise.....

[Bobbsy]

A question and a fact:

First the question: how would tunnelling a motorway save any emissions? They'd still be generated and would have to be pumped somewhere.

Second, the fact: the new runway at Kansai cost approximately $8 billion (about £4 billion) and they had to build a whole island for it. I can only assume the £12+ billion figure must include Terminal 6...or all the lawyer and consultant fees as discussed.

Bob

[118.70]

I think the plan was to have big scrubbing towers through which the tunnel gases were passed - thereby stopping the NOx getting out to poison West London !

[old,not bold]

I think that 2000 feet might be a tad short for public transport flights in anything bigger than a Twotter? :E

Whoops, apols all round, gallons for litres, feet for metres, we old farts have trouble.........

It was of course 2000m!

[VAFFPAX]

Bobbsy, but that's including an island. :-)

Same with Chek Lap Kok... and that price tag was around the 12 billion STG mark.

S.

[Momentary Lapse]

I believe that the powers that be ought to stop doing more of the same and start doing something different.

For me, that is:

- continue to develop inter city rail to reduce domestic flights to LHR
- cap LHR at its current size and make BAA focus their investment on making it work properly and delivering proper customer service
- Discourage transit passengers (by taxing them) at LHR for reasons so well described above. That may alter the viability of some other flights but hey do we stand still just to protect marginally profitable routes?
- work with other European countries (that's what the EU should be about) and deliver a European gateway airport somewhere central (e.g. central or eastern France, the German border, Poland etc.) and link it to the high speed rail network to feed pax to/from neighbouring countries. It worked with Airbus, and companies like Peugeot Citroen, VW etc. also have experience of cross-EU working, so it can be done.

Then again, being even more radical, I believe that many flights are discretionary (second/third holidays, VFR, "business meetings" a.k.a. "dirty weekends" etc.). A good dose of aviation fuel tax will weed those out and then we'll see if there's really demand for more runways.

[Skipness One Echo]

Well we can witter on about good railways and taxing poor people off the airlines but it's gonna be simple. There will be a sixth (by then only a fifth) terminal at Heathrow, there will be a third runway. If you don't get why this needs to happen please get back to reading the Guardian and playing with your train set imagining the new wondrous London to Belfast railway line......:ugh:

[13 please]

skipness one echo, If you're local, then why are u mentioning Slough..??
It's going to be Sipson, Harlington, Harmondsworth and Longford that will be massively affected. With Sipson, where I happen to live, being wiped off the map.And if they say 700 homes, you can bet it's going to mean a hell of a lot more than that.We've got one of the best primary schools in the country here. Just won an award for the third year running. Always full, and has a waiting list.It isn't a dump here, it's like living in a little village.Everyone says hello to each other when you're walking to the post office,(yes we've still got one of those), or the local butcher, or the 16th century pub.
I'm finding it quite refreshing to read a lot of these posts, I thought everyone on here would be pro the 3rd runway. To be the best, Heathrow doesn't have to be the biggest.

[13 please]

Oh just spotted that from Backoffice, plebs in Sipson, thanks very much. Charming. What have we ever done to you??.. wouldn't you fight for your home??

[Momentary Lapse]

Skipness One Echo - you don't appear to get why this doesn't need to happen.

We can all share our opinions without personal insults. You know nothing about my politics, my newspaper preferences nor my hobbies, so don't presume to quote them in your posts.

Many people on here are expressing valid opinions without insults. You could try joining them.

And before you "ho ho ho" criticise rail links to Belfast, for example, take a breath and think about how travel to Belfast could be achieved without flying. Bridge? Tunnel? It's been done in other countries - don't be as narrow-minded as the British Govt and the airport/airline industry in dismissing any solution other than flying, out of hand.

[13 please]

Actually sorry Backoffice .Reading your post again I don't think it was meant how I took it...:O...sheepish sorry....

[Skipness One Echo]

Momentary Lapse, you enjoy living in an idyllic paradise next to a very busy airport ! You don't want to move, I understand that, but I admire the French way where the rights of a few hundred are fairly balanced against the needs of the country. So you get cracking on digging that tunnel to Ireland.....

[VAFFPAX]

I've been to that pub in Sipson... it's fabulous!

S.

[13 please]

The way I see it, it's the rights of a couple of thousand of people against a few businesses.I know,those businesses include peoples' jobs, but NOT having a 3rd runway hasn't seemed to turn LHR into a ghost town has it?? Against the "needs of the country??" I don't think so. When I was at Parliament a few years ago meeting MPs regarding this, one of the MPs from Liverpool said they were supporting us, as they were crying out for expansion up there.She said they had the space, needed the jobs, etc,and why should so many people add hours onto their journey just to transfer through Heathrow.There are many people all over the country questioning how a third runway would benefit themselves. I know it would benefit some busineses, but not so much "ordinary Joe public".

Yes it is a great old pub.And in Harmondsworth we have the Great Barn, which was used by Henry viii.

Safe and happy flying to all..

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Media reports say the current BAA boss is leaving and will be replaced by a gent from London Underground.

Tunnels in the Sky anyone??

[darrylj]

just seen that on BBC news 24 too.

what about Willie Walsh?.
Surely he should be following suit.

[VAFFPAX]

Especially after him getting a 700K payoff^H^H^H^H^H^Hbonus.

:ouch: :oh:

S.

[Capt.KAOS]

Heathrow Airport Boss Quits (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/may/13/baa.theairlineindustry)

[WHBM]

Hopefully the new boss from London Underground is not the idiot who designed the new Underground links to T5 etc. Half the trains to T123 now take a longwinded route via T4 which means they get overtaken by at least one if not two following trains operating direct to T123 then T5. The Underground keep very quiet about the fact that not only is the T4 loop such an extra travelling time, but these trains are timetabled to spend up to 10 minutes sat at T4 waiting for their departure time back to London.

As very shortly once BA moves out T4 will be very quiet for some considerable time it means there are actually far less useful Underground trains to Heathrow than previously.

[Captivep]

Sitting in the BA galleries lounge yesterday, idly watching arrivals on 09L (excellent view from there, by the way) and noticed that there is a fence on the grass between the apron and the taxiway. The fence appears to be new, is not on the perimeter of the airport, and is walk-roundable.

What's it for?

[point5]

To stop any FOD blowing onto the runway?

[Capot]

Good news for all pilots and airlines using Heathrow.

The worst is over. Here's an extract from a news report (credit to ABTN)

Matthews said: "Mark Bullock has made a significant contribution to BAA and to Heathrow Airport in particular and has led the airport through a particularly challenging period. I am grateful for his efforts.”

He will be replaced by the current chief operating officer at London Underground Mike Brown, who will join BAA in September.
Mark Bullock has been there since 2004, and his reign can only be described as a total disaster, or in code, " a particularly challenging period".

Mr Brown brings a wealth of knowledge and expertise about running underground trains to the airport business, and I am certain that this is exactly what Heathrow needs to heave itself out of the mire and start functioning as a world-class airport.

Hurray!

[king surf]

Back in time for tea and medals:ugh:

[Flightman]

Heathrow's problems go well beyond Mark Bullock!! :ugh:

[N1 Vibes]

hmm,

london underground - that bastion of british management efficiency - every time i have come back to london for the last 3 years, they have been tearing up the tracks of the metropolitan line on saturday and sunday. which runway do you think will be sacrificed?

Regards,

N1 Vibes

[gofer]

It took LT 25+ years to find Heathrow (and they were starting their search from that bastion of India (Houndslow ?).

It took them a full year of closure to install some points to explore from T4 to T5!

Why should we be overjoyed at the change. When you think things can't get worse - they usually do. :ugh:.

[BOAC]

At least we can presumably expect the LHR underground will work properly...................we can, can't we......................:}

[Skipness One Echo]

..........dealing with a captive audience of disgruntled punters. More of the same then?:)

[Viewedfromabove]

At least the LTE experience won't point towards having hundreds of useless and grossly overpriced shops. Just a few useful ones instead to do with travel only, he said optimistically.

[Richard Taylor]

Worrying thought, if the BAA bod is running the prison service.

Missing bags one day, missing prisoners the next...:eek:

[fflyingdoguk]

"The plane now leaving at gate 17 is the delayed BA### calling at .................BAA would like to apologise for this delayed service which was due to leaves /B777 on the runway"

[ukdean]

News coming out of BBC stating the airport is looking at increasing charges to 86%. It comes as the airport wins an award for being the wosrt run airport and a national embarressment. Can it ever improve with such a monopoly that the parent company has, yer right!!!!!

[green granite]

Service levels at Heathrow Airport are "a national embarrassment", Giovanni Bisignani, head of International Air Transport Association (Iata) has said.

Full article here http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7430883.stm

[VAFFPAX]

Not TO 86%, but by 86% over five years. That's an average of 17% p/a... less than the APR on some credit cards.

But I agree that that is a rather hefty amount of money.

S.

[Curtis E Carr]

Also, The IATA CEO's speech in full here (http://www.iata.org/pressroom/speeches/2008-06-02-01)

This year’s Worst Regulator Award goes to the UK Civil Aviation Authority.

[G-CPTN]

Service levels at Heathrow Airport are "a national embarrassment", Giovanni Bisignani, head of International Air Transport Association (Iata) has said.(from:- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7430883.stm )

[MUFC_fan]

I've just been reading about CO who are estimated to have paid near $150,000 per slot pair!

Please can somebody explain to me how they plan to make profit off of this when there is also fuel, landing fees, handling, ATC etc. to pay?!

Cheers.

[Skipness One Echo]

Because yields up front are much stronger at Heathrow than Gatwick and over time the investment will pay itself off. Business is business and the price was WAY more than the one you quote.

[Golf Charlie Charlie]

$150,000 per slot pair sounds too cheap and I think it's a mistake. The going rate for a slot pair at a peak time could be over $5 million.

[OliWW]

Whats the first date on which Emirates use there A380's, I know its not until 2009, but unsure when.

[OltonPete]

OliWW

EK001/2 on 1/12/08 still showing as the 380 as planned, in 1135 out 1345.

I suppose this is subject to no further delays in delivery.

Pete

[akerosid]

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/transport/article4152227.ece

David Cameron is quoted in the Times as having all but ruled out a third runway at Heathrow and having accused Brown of being pigheaded in pursuing a political point.

He decries the economic argument in favour of R3 as flawed.

Interesting, "courageous" (as Sir Humphrey might put it) move ... how the business community will react to this, let alone LHR based carriers is another issue; will DC give any assurances to regional UK destinations which are likely to lose their LHR access if growth is blocked.

Alternatively, did DC actually rule out R3, or is he being quoted by the media as going further than he intended to (seems unlikely?) ...

[Serenity]

Well, this countries transport and infrastructure are already well behind other parts of Europe and the Far East, why not continue dragging our feet!!!

[anotherthing]

What is the perceived benefit of giving Heathrow a 3rd runway, may I ask?

[northern boy]

At least he dropped his daft plans to heap even more tax on air travellers as advised by a well known and extremely wealthy trustafarian. As for Heathrow, they should have abandoned it years ago and built another airport in the Thames Estuary complete with proper transport links, (fifteen quid one way to Paddington with no onward connections because the bloody jubilee line is always closed at the weekend or an hour on the Piccadilly line with the hoodies does not constitute a proper transport link). If they insist on keeping the wretched place then at least extend the supposed "high speed rail links" into it and give the rest of the country a chance to get to and from it. Last time I looked, the majority of the country does not live in Oxford, Windsor or Chiswick although it may feel that way with all the traffic (trying to get to LHR no doubt). That should be a precondition to the go ahead for any third runway.

[Dont Hang Up]

Heathrow is in the wrong place. Making it busier and bigger is just making matters worse and compounding the error. The really "courageous" decision would be to build a completely new airport with better infrastructure potential.

[ZH875]

Heathrow is in the wrong place. Making it busier and bigger is just making matters worse and compounding the error. The really "courageous" decision would be to build a completely new airport with better infrastructure potential.

Why build a new airport, when there are large areas of concrete and tarmac at Alconbury, Woodbridge, Bentwaters, etc

[The Trappist]

ZH875
Have you any idea how difficult it is to get from Woodbridge/ Bentwaters to any other part of the UK? Let alone London!
Alconbury may have some merits, however, it wouldn't half upset the residents of Huntingdon/ Cambridge to the east or Kettering/ Northampton to the west!:eek:

[shortfinals]

It would be fine for Cameron to say no to a 3rd runway at LHR, but only if he tells us what his alternative plan would be. Just saying what he wouldn't do is the most pathetic form of political point-scoring, and it could rebound on him severely.

The City, Lloyds, the London Stock Exchange etc and all the industries whose life flows from the wealth the financial sector generates would die a death if (no - WHEN) all the available airports that can realistically serve London become totally clogged.

A major world city is no longer a major world city if it cuts itself off from the world.

Sure, Heathrow's in the wrong place for lots of reasons, but it's too late to do the estuary thing now. You could do it AS WELL, of course, but it will take so long to create the new airport and the high speed road and rail links it will need that Heathrow will have to be operating its third runway and Gatwick its second for years before "son of Maplin Sands" opens. If it were to open, with all its six parallel runways, Heathrow can be closed.

[Goffee]

Don't worry, I'm sure that when (more likely that 'if') he becomes PM he will be led into a dark room and shown a nice map of alternative airport schemes, all going through Tory strongholds.

Failing that 10 minutes with Big Gerald and his pet/friend/soulmate "Mr Truncheon" usually brings them around.

"We have ways of making you do what we want."

[manintheback]

At least Cameron is consistant.

Unlike Robber Brown who has backed the 3rd runway and rqstd the EEC to drop their pollution laws for 5 years so it can go ahead, at the same time as backing a new tax to reduce the number of planes 'on environmental grounds'.

Anyway who thinks BAA will just have that third runway nice and empty for use as a bit of overspill. They wont just max it to capacity as soon as they can, no sirreee surely not. Given the new ways of the world in aviation, costs are going to severely reduce the number of planes in the sky anyway. Will it even be needed?

[Prophead]

Why not use Southend? Build a high speed rail link out there, maybe combine it with crossrail and send there all the stuff that was going to use the 3rd runway.

Then gradually build the new airport up as Heathrow is scaled down.

[timelapse]

Monorail to Northolt!

[MarkD]

Here's my take
Improve rail links into LHR with AirTrack (http://www.heathrowairport.com/portal/page/General/Heathrow%5EGeneral%5EOur+business+and+community%5EHeathrow+t ransformation%5EHeathrow+AirTrack/100046e4daa55110VgnVCM10000036821c0a____/448c6a4c7f1b0010VgnVCM200000357e120a____/) and better connectivity from the west and northwest.
Make LHR rebalance its landing fees so that smaller planes are further dissuaded from flying there.
Create dedicated access and transitways for ground shuttles between LHR and LTN (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&hl=en&geocode=&saddr=LHR,+UK&daddr=LTN,+UK&sll=43.703319,-79.412894&sspn=0.34698,0.601501&ie=UTF8&ll=51.86038,-0.428295&spn=0.074104,0.150375&z=13), if not a full blown light/heavy rail link


Edit: SEN's catchment is 1/3 English Channel...

[TwinAisle]

Folks - there is one BIG problem in building a new airport to the East of London....

Please remember that LHR is not JUST a London airport, but also serves as the main gateway for those of us in the South, Southwest, West, Wales and the Midlands...

How the hell would we get to Southend??

[Dont Hang Up]

If London airports only had to serve London travellers all would be fine. Unfortunately the centralising effect of airline economics leaves many outside London extremely ill served. Millions from the sticks have to treck, ever so reluctantly, to London airports for their flights every year. I am forty minutes from Birmingham and have been extremely dischuffed recently to find myself in Luton to get to Vienna, and LHR to get to Bucharest.

[rubik101]

Reading other threads here and the news from around the world, I am forced to the following inevitable conclusions.

Ryanair is about to fold, soon to be followed by easyJet and other LOCOs because of their unsustainable business models, or so I am told.

With fuel now at $140.00 a barrel, soon to be $200.00 or more, all long haul carriers will be unable to attract passengers with fuel surcharges reaching $350.00 and will be making mass redundancies, followed by bankruptcy.

Oil rich Gulf airlines will continue to operate.

Established, non Gulf national carriers will be forced to curtail their operations due to the world-wide recession, followed by mass redundancies, followed by bankruptcy.

The deserts will overflow with unused and unsold aircraft. Airbus and Boeing will fail in the next twenty years.

Heathrow will soon be closed due to gross inefficiency when compared to FRA, AMS, CPH before they too will close due to lack of airlines.

So why, pray tell, does anyone in their right mind think that we need another runway in LHR, or anywhere else in the South East of UK? Or anywhere in UK come to that?

In a few years, when all of the above has come to pass, I will remind you that you read it here first!

Thinking of becoming a pilot? Try training in the black art of financial advice for the unemployed.

[Dont Hang Up]

TwinAisle. How the hell would we get to Southend??
</p>Birmingham will suit me fine thanks! Just give me the route options.The rest of the country should not have to trek all the way to the bottom right corner for flights to any locations that are not major hubs in their own right.</p>

[anotherthing]

Again, I pose the question - what benefit a 3rd runway at Heathrow?

It might reduce holding delays at particularly busy times -

it will not mean a huge increase in the amount of aircraft using it - the airspace cannot handle it.

BAA will not pay for a third runway unless they see any chance of a big increase in revenue - they are a business, they would be stupid to do otherwise.


Southend is not an option for an increase in the manner that is alluded to in the above posts - again the airspace cannot handle it.

Traffic in the LTMA is increasing as it is - trying to shoe horn extra traffic beyond the projected figures into an already full sky is not going to work... :ugh:

[TwinAisle]

Don't Hang Up:

Nothing I would like more than to say no to Heathrow and use my local airport - but the fact remains that the economic powerhouse of the UK is London - not Birmingham, Manchester, Cardiff or Edinburgh, but London - and so unless we force airlines out of London (and risk them saying "Stuff you, UK, let's go to FRA/CDG/AMS") then London will be the prime hub of the UK for a very very long time to come.

TA

[Rainboe]

<Again, I pose the question - what benefit a 3rd runway at Heathrow?>

You keep asking that! There are not many large cities in the US that do not have 3 or more runways. The airspace can handle it quick easily- you redesign the airspace to handle it! But if the UK wants to remain in the Business First World, we had better provide improved facilities quickly. that includes a smaller extra runway to handle feeder traffic and take the load off the big aeroplane part. The alternative is to become such a PITA place to fly to that we lose business in the UK, and that will have us in deep deep recession.

[ZULUBOY]

Don't Hang Up
"I am forty minutes from Birmingham and have been extremely dischuffed recently to find myself in Luton to get to Vienna, and LHR to get to Bucharest"

I am off to Bucharest in July flying from Birmingham (10 minutes train journey from me). Flight is 5 hours via Frankfurt. Surely that can't be a lot different from a trip to Heathrow and then a direct flight.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

anotherthing. You asked a very fair question and we all ignored you. An extra runway, theoretically, allows you to launch and recover more aircraft per hour. Machines aren't then burning expensive AVTUR at the holding points or the inbound stacks for so long. It should also make the tree huggers happier (but it won't) because less unproductive Carbon Dioxide is generated.


ZULUBOY. Enjoy your visit. If a bloke calling himself the Coach of the Romanian Rugby Team offers you "special deal on change Lire Sterlina to Lei", tell him to sod off. Better still, nut him!

[SR71]

Investment which is 10-20 years too late is not investment, its keeping up!

The question should be,

"Does LHR need an extra TWO runways?"

It's a curious British phenomenon to p**s about for year after year trying to make do with the status quo, instead of getting off our asses and building the bloody infrastructure our country needs to avoid becoming a banana republic...run by the eco-nazis amongst us...

What a &&*^^%%$ shambles.

:mad:

[Skylion]

Let's not forget that the original and far sighted plan for LHR circa 1948 was up to 9 runways , with 3 between the A 4 and where the M 40 now is. In fact the then planned M40 was shifted north to accomodate this and its alignment past the airport represents where the airport boundary would have been. Think about that when you next drive along it. There was some vision in immediate post war Britain but unfortunately anything of that scale became unaffordable when the previously uncosted costs of the welfare state kicked in by the early 50s. Britain had chosen social engineering to real engineering and much of what has (not) happened since has its origins at that time.

[Taildragger67]

Oh for f:mad:'s sake do we have to have ANOTHER thread about this?

Reporting that Cameron had apparently said something about EGLL R3 is one thing; it's not an invitation to waste more bandwidth on it.

It's almost as bad as the plethora of threads on another board, about a year which dare not speak its name...

Skylion,

One assumes you mean the M4?

The M40 runs along the bottom edge of Northolt, rather to the north of Heathrow. It would have been one BIG airport...

[kellyoldsmunt]

what about manston ? yes i know its a long way east but if they got the digit removed from the preverbial and built the rail/road links, it could work.the infrastructure is already there.
as for heathrow, it is now part of greater london,fully surrounded by housing and industry, not in the same position as when first built with plenty of room to expand, so expansion now would be to the detriment of those around it, so why not bite the bullit, shut up shop and move.Look at Changi and Hong Kong, most of the worlds airports are far outside the city. think outside the box.

[llondel]

A couple of extra runways at Stansted and a dedicated high-speed rail link between it and Heathrow ought to do the trick. It'll cost a lot less than the public inquiry into the third runway at Heathrow, plus T6 when they decide that's necessary.

Now back to the real world...

[Flapping_Madly]

Can anyone tell me how many flights into Heathrow are freight?

Would it "improve" LHR if all freight was moved out to Stansted or somewhere else.

Bananas surely would not mind a longer journey to the shops. People might.

PS Not trying to stir anything by the way. It has always seemed odd to use a scarce resource for goods not people.:)

[Flightrider]

There are very few pure freight flights into LHR. For the winter ahead, there are 28 flights (14 departures and 14 arrivals) per week using pure freighters, only operated by EVA Airways (2), Cathay (3), JAL (3), Korean (2), Royal Jordanian (1) and Singapore (3). Of those 28 flights, less than half operate on weekdays and the majority operate on weekends when slots are generally available anyway due to the scheduled service cutbacks by short-haul operators versus weekday flights. Throwing cargo flights out of Heathrow would perhaps free up a maximum of one daily pair of slots, which would undoubtedly help the lucky winner of those slots in the allocation lottery but not produce sufficient tangible benefit for UK PLC to justify the legal costs to support such a move.

Tories apparently prefer putting a new airport somewhere in the Thames Estuary rather than expanding LHR, but they stopped short of saying so.

[James 1077]

Build an extra runway at LGW and put in a high speed shuttle train between LHR and LGW. That way you will easily be able to transit from one to the other and can remove some of the congestion around LHR.

[Geffen]

Flightrider,

Are you implying that all the DHL flights are ceasing to operate at Heathrow this winter? or do parcels etc. not count as freight? Just wondering.

[Peter47]

The reason the airlines want a third runway at LHR is because thats where they get high yields. Why? Because thats where high yield traffic wants to fly. But, I do believe that there is an element of circularity in the argument.

Increase flights at LHR and it becomes even more of a monopoly supplier. Develop another airport such as LGW so that it matches the number of flights and its yields will start to match LHR. There are of course problems. A second runway would be politically difficult to build but what about close parrallels? Half a LAX or ATL. It wouldn't require much more concrete, although I can see a few comments on the ATC forum! (Thinking back I wrote an M.Sc. thesis on that topic fifteen years ago!)

No prizes for guessing a major problem. It would take a good few years to develop critical mass during which time airlines would lose a packet.

I have strong doubts about building a third runway for two reasons. Firstly, unless LHR became a totally separate airport taxi times would increase still further increasing costs and sector times (think of JFK and how you want to avoid connecting there). Secondly a lot of people travel long distances to get to LHR at inconvenience to themselves whilst creating road congestion. I myself live near the airport and get continually frustrated by poor local links. They want more local flights.

I certainly have doubts about building a high speed rail link to LHR. Wouldn't a better solution be more non stop services from Manchester avoiding the need to change at Heathrow. (Yes I know, airline economics will conspire against this).

Lastly a rather depressing thought. Can we extrapolate the growth of aviation over the last few years into the future? Pax numbers have been increasing due to higher load factors which can't continue rising, lower costs such as distribution, ditto and low fuel prices. One hopes that oil will come down. (I certainly don't claim to be an expert on the subject but from what I read some of the problem is lack of refining capacity and that there is a particular shortage of "sweet" oil and this may well ease over the next few years). However prices are most unlikely to go back to where it was before. Aviation has remained at around 1% of GDP was several decades. Is this likely to significantly increase? Sure it will go up in line with GDP and that means high growth in India & China, but maybe only an annual increase of 2-3% in the UK. We will certainly need a LHR with a capacity of 90m pax pa which is possible with two runways. We may not need a third runway for a while longer.

[flying brain]

Yields are high at LHR due to the large affluent point to point market from the SE of the UK and the connectivity offered to the global market via the 5 terminals.

The real competition to LHR are the European hubs - and with the ever extending range of long haul aircraft - the Middle East hubs.

Simply linking LHR and STN with a high speed train or whatever misses the prize - a one stop world class single location for international connecting traffic that beats the best in the world.

LHR by it's historic location can never achieve this without huge social upheaval and disruption - the chance passed in the decades after the 1948 plan referred to earlier was let go.

BAA / Gordon Brown also cannot achieve a one stop world class single location for international connecting traffic by adding up runway capacity at LGW STN and LHR and claiming sufficient future capacity - this exercise simply misses the very core of the hub connectivity requirement.

If the UK wants to stay in the global game as a lead player it is time to map out the future of a 150m+ annual PAX single location without short term political influences.

[CHINOOKER]

Considering all the opposition/aggravation both the Government and BAA are having over the proposed 3rd runway at LHR,i personally have always believed that the simplest solution lies with the development of Northolt!
Anyone who has ever driven alongside Northolt on the A40 will know how long and straight this bit of road is....virtually the same length as the existing runway and parallel to those at LHR.
All that would be required,is for the A40 to be repositioned south through the mix of sports grounds/farmers fields etc.....The existing A40 relaid as a runway and the existing airfield developed accordingly!
As the "approach and departure profile" would be roughly in line with the remaining parts of the A40,then the noise problem would be allieviated to some degree. Throw in a fast rail link,(either a direct tunnel link or a monorail above the M25),to LHR and hey presto!!
This plan would also benefit both communities....No destruction of houses and homes in Harmondsworth/Sipson and no more aircraft flying over the built up areas of South Ruislip/Hillingdon etc!.

[anotherthing]

Golf Bravo Zulu

Thank you for your reply

Rainboe - thank you for yours even though it contains incorrect statements!

A third runway at Heathrow will not mean that even more aircraft will use the airport. There may be a tiny increase in percentage of users but not much... the main reason is that the airspace cannot handle it - Rainboe states that you just re-design the airspace... all very well but not simple. Certainly in the LTMA it is not possible, unless of course you advocate closing some of the surrounding airports that add to the complexity.

Believe it or not, handling large amounts of aircraft is easier on the ground than it is in the air (notwithstanding the complexity of such a small manouvring area at EGLL) - you can tell a/c to hold position... the problem with trying to increase numbers at EGLL is mainly down to airspace, or lack thereof.

Rainboe - it's not the fact that 3 runways on their own would cause a problem - it's the fact that within a small area you have so many busy major airports that causes the problem with airspace.

People (business suits) are advocating a 3rd runway to allow Heathrow to grow - a third runway will help in times when one of the other runways is out of use for whatever reason, but will BAA be prepared to pay that sort of money when there won't be a financial benefit? Of course not, and who can blame them??

Chinooker - Although Northolt may seem a good solution on paper, it does not solve the airspace issue.. you can lay as much tarmac as you want, the problem lies above the ground, not on it!

[befree]

To make the max money with least investment the airport should allow just one operator or group of airlines to operate each route. The airlines which put in the highest bid would run the route and then need to fill its planes to make it work. We would then get more direct flights from Manchester and Brimingham from the airlines that did not win the bidding. LHR can be made better by taking out a little traffic.

[hatters united]

Befree

What planet are you on, or what have you been drinking ? :confused:

From your comments you obviously don't know how aviation works.:ugh: The rule or regulations.

Perhaps you should go back to silverjet bashing, oh, of coarse they don't exist any more do they. You were right with all your stirring there then !

[befree]

I know it could never happen but to make Heathrow work better a little space is needed in the schedule, maybe just take out 1-2 planes per hour. Plenty of routes are operteded by two or more carriers with smallish planes only 60% full. The best, quickest and most profitable thing for the industry is to fly a fewer but fuller planes.

[simfly]

To which the airlines could then charge, say, £1000 per seat in economy on a flight from LHR-AMS, because they don't have any other competition..... :=

[beamender99]

BA releases first in Terminal 5 poster campaign - Brand Republic News - Brand Republic (http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/836876/BA-releases-first-Terminal-5-poster-campaign/)

e.g

http://offlinehbpl.hbpl.co.uk/newsattachments/MAC/0408master%5B1%5D1.jpg

[Jox]

Nice to know however the major complaint is not flights but the time it takes for the bags to arrive. Still a major problem with those from what I read and see from within. Looks like "spin" to me !

Profits going down, open skies looming, disharmony in the work place,

“Help Nigel, looks like the cheese board has had it” :\

[Carnage Matey!]

Still a major problem with those from what I read and see from within.

What are you reading and seeing? I've never had to wait more than a few minutes for my bags at T5 and the internal info suggests very high delivery rates within 15 mins of arrival.

[keel beam]

When Gate Gourmet were on strike, the quality of food on my BA flights were superb, my sandwiches came from Pret a Manger!

[AvroLincoln]

I usually need my bag fast because I have a train or bus to catch for an onward flight at another airport, especially now that check-in times have been considerably lengthened due to all this security!

[zubediah]

After experiencing a combination of lethargy, chaos, and disorientation (the last one due to lack of sensible signage) at T5 in early May BA will need a lot more than some advertising and the passage of time to get this place sorted out for international passengers arriving here for connections

[Rwy in Sight]

How does that figure compares with the other Terminals in LHR, LGW or other airports? A figure does not mean a lot by itself.

Rwy in Sight

[Goldfish Jack]

Got into T5 yesterday am at 650am. WOW what an experience! Most impressed. Time from TOUCHDOWN to the M25 was just under 40 mins.

For such a big building I was most impressed how everything seemed to flow and work and it was a pleasure compared with the other terminals>

They seem to be getting it right - well done BAA and BAW !!!

[cwatters]

Humm... not a chair in sight, kids having to sit on the floor... perhaps not the image I would have choosen.

[anartificialhorizon]

I would suggest a trip to your AME for an eyesight test. At least one chair in the background....

I think it's a very nice touch to see the kids sitting on the floor as it gives the impression of calm and saftey....

You wouldn't set your kid down on the floor in T3, lest he/she was run over by a trolley, bowled over by maruading masses meeting/greeting/checking in or got stuck to the sticky carpet....

Good advert BA !:D

[PAXboy]

I have not yet paxed through T5 but, when taking my sister there last week I found it was just another modern terminal - designed by architects and accountants. I am leaving detailed comments in SLF forum to explain how the poor signs and unhelpful staff wasted our time.

Goldfish JackWOW what an experience! Most impressed. Time from TOUCHDOWN to the M25 was just under 40 mins.May I suggest that the reason for that is T5 is only working at half(??) it's capacity.

[Xorthis]

I had the pleasure of T5 back in May, not in the conventional sence however. I had been for a weekend visit to Chicago from Heathrow T4 and only realised upon checking in that our return flight was landing in Gatwick while our car was stuck at Heathrow T4/5 Parking... Not good since I was supposed to be at work within 4 hours of landing!

So on landing in Gatwick we got the national express coach to Heathrow T5. The building itself was very nice and open, not like the busy T3 or Gatwick South, but I guess on hindsight this is because no one wants to fly from it!

Back to my point, after leaving the coach all we knew is that we had to get to stop 50something for our airport parking shuttle and stepping into T5 there was NO airport staff to ask for directions, NO maps and NO signage to point us in the correct direction. I tried asking the person on the Costa coffee counter but they were Polish and didn't understand much English other than Grande Latte (Notice the irony?). In the end I was helped by a nice BA check in counter lady after wasting 10 minutes looking for BAA employees.

In short; nice building, useless staff if you can even find them.

[WHBM]

Could we also know the percentage of connecting bags which are being mishandled ?

[Re-Heat]

I found it was just another modern terminal - designed by architects and accountants.
Close shave that they got the right people in to deisgn and finance a building then, isn't it?!

[whiowhio]

It seems to me that much of the problem with the areas of inefficiency in T5 is directly related to its vastness, coupled closely with the dismal LACK OF SIGNAGE and LACK OF STAFF (who in their defence are hopelessly frustrated).

Whereas I always try to be positive and give fair credit, all of the points made in previous posts are to my mind, valid.

On the plus side, I recently returned from YVR as SLF and was impressed with baggage delivery, however;

.. finding my way to the Central Bus Station by "Train" (ha, not "Underground" as it turned out) was dreadfully frustrating after a long flight. I also tried and failed to get directions from the only people around who spoke a foreign language (at least it was difficult for me to understand). When I got back into T5 from the Underground and found BAA staff and made comment, their reply was "WE KEEP TELLING MANAGEMENT".

I could go on and say how time consuming and frustrating using the TRAIN (London Express(?) to Central Bus Station was, but I am in relax mode and intend to stay that way.

I fear it is the same ole problem of the typical british non-listening management who still have not learn't to listen to the "sharp-end" :{

Whio.

[Stall Inducer]

According to the 'Times' today '9 pax on every BA jumbo lose their bags'. and 'BA customers were 80% more likely to lose their luggage than average in the first half of 2008'
Now I assume this takes into account the lost bags during the opening few weeks of T5 - in which case the Times is not really reporting the true figures if you were to use T5 today. Still makes good reading :ugh:

[Guest 112233]

Is the whole place coloured in retro Aeroflot Blue

Remember the phrase "Lies , Damned lies & Statistics" - An MP featured on BBC R4, this afternoon had apparently lost some of her luggage at T5. I hope the Ads encourage people to use the place but has the damage been done - In two years the delays will be history.(I hope).

[Carnage Matey!]

'9 pax on every BA jumbo lose their bags'. and 'BA customers were 80% more likely to lose their luggage than average in the first half of 2008'

Soooo, has The Times got a complete breakdown of lost bags per aircraft type, or are they just making it up?

Could we also know the percentage of connecting bags which are being mishandled ?

IIRC from a recent press interview with Willie Walsh approximately 5 bags in every 1000 are being mishandled and of those around 80% are transfer bags from other airlines which BA are not receiving on time.

[Taildragger67]

:confused:

Sorry but I am still wondering how Singapore, KL and Hong Kong manage to move entire airport operations overnight and BAA c0cked up moving one terminal...

[Carnage Matey!]

I think you'll find the Hong Kong and KL moves didn't exactly go smoothly.

[Fargoo]

I had the pleasure of T5 back in May, not in the conventional sence however. I had been for a weekend visit to Chicago from Heathrow T4 and only realised upon checking in that our return flight was landing in Gatwick while our car was stuck at Heathrow T4/5 Parking... Not good since I was supposed to be at work within 4 hours of landing!

So on landing in Gatwick we got the national express coach to Heathrow T5. The building itself was very nice and open, not like the busy T3 or Gatwick South, but I guess on hindsight this is because no one wants to fly from it!

Back to my point, after leaving the coach all we knew is that we had to get to stop 50something for our airport parking shuttle and stepping into T5 there was NO airport staff to ask for directions, NO maps and NO signage to point us in the correct direction. I tried asking the person on the Costa coffee counter but they were Polish and didn't understand much English other than Grande Latte (Notice the irony?). In the end I was helped by a nice BA check in counter lady after wasting 10 minutes looking for BAA employees.

In short; nice building, useless staff if you can even find them.

This debate will run and run I feel , just like to comment on the poster above who couldn't find his way from one bus stop to another without asking someone - are you for real? :ugh:

To call the staff useless is a bit below the belt, especially as one of those staff helped you out. :suspect:

[Globaliser]

Make of these what you will, but FWIW:-Analysts' presentation slideshow (http://library.corporate-ir.net/library/69/694/69499/items/302793/Q1_2008_09_Analyst_presentation.pdf) - see pages 40-45 Presentation Transcript (http://library.corporate-ir.net/library/69/694/69499/items/303039/Q1_2008_09_results_presentation_transcript.pdf) - see pages 11-12These are from last Friday's Q1 results.

[Skipness One Echo]

So the 4 B777-200s replace the oldest non ER B777s and the airframe written off in January.

[PAXboy]

I wrote:
I found it was just another modern terminal - designed by architects and accountants.Re-Heat observed:Close shave that they got the right people in to deisgn [sic] and finance a building then, isn't it?!Well ...!! I am fairly sure that you know I was saving bandwidth. If not, here is the full answer:

Architects like to make buildings which win them awards (fair enough, don't we all) but the buildings are not always what is wanted. Here is part of my sister's view from last week: Even if my back pack had not been so heavy I would still have liked more chairs available inside T5 - and having shops on two floors is a pain as well. As to getting to the gates, that was another story. 'A' is fine - it is right there. I hate to think where 'C' is as the board indicated it took longer to get there than gate 'B'. I needed B33 which involved a walk, a lift, walk, a 'tube' train, escalators, more escalators and then walking. By which time I was completely disorientated as there were no windows during most of the transfer!

That sounds as good as the brand new swimming pool in my town. The architect put in 3m high windows so that everybody walking by on the street could look in to 'see how good it was and inspire them to join'. Before it opens on Saturday, they have had to put frosting and blinds on the windows as they discovered that people in their swimming gear do not like total strangers gawping in the windows at them and their children. Another triumph.

Accountants? Well, as I understand it they persuaded the CAA to allow inbound and outbound pax to mix freely - just so that they could have one set of shops instead of two and that would make the shop keepers happier. This, despite that every airport I know has been installing barriers to separate in/out pax. (Correct me if I am wrong on this).

The Flight Information display boards follow most of the other new air terminals in the world, which means they are very poor. The old style 'ticker-board' has not been replaced with screens of the same size - but small flat screens (set up vertically) and these have the great advantage of being cheap for the airport and the great disadvantage of being too small to read unless you are standing within 2m of them. Rather than finding an out of the way place to watch the board - you have to keep walking up to it to read the information. A big board with characters that can be seen at 100m works better but is more expensive.

Etcetera. :rolleyes:

[llondel]

So if you've got a good tailwind across the Atlantic and turn up half an hour early, does that not count as on time? That's what their wording suggests.

[L337]

Sorry but I am still wondering how Singapore, KL and Hong Kong manage to move entire airport operations overnight and BAA c0cked up moving one terminal...

I think you need to do a little more research.

[L337]

I needed B33 which involved a walk, a lift, walk, a 'tube' train, escalators, more escalators and then walking.

For heavens sake your sister needs to get a life.

The lift is down. The walk is 20 feet to the tube. You stand on the escalator, or take a lift if you want. Then you .. yes walk to the gate...

How can you possibly complain about that. It is a remote terminal for goodness sakes.

You and your sister seem to want to complain for complaining sakes.

[Ametyst1]

At least the lifts and escalators at Terminal 5 are working. She would have something to complain about if she flew through Manchester then.

[Skylion]

Correct,- Hong Kong and Kuala Lumpurs openings were disastrous - as was Bangkok so difficult opening days are not new. Hong Kongs press reaction was also similar to T5s,- ie hysteria. Hong Kongs baggage system collapsed almost from the beginning, partly because the system did not recognise the previous days mishandled bags from Kai Tak when they were inserted for their new flights.The computerised system also sent bags en masse to the wrong spurs and the insisted that they were where they should be - and they weren't. Most flights left very late and with little or no baggage. To compound this the entire flight information system collapsed so there were no flights , stand numbers or anything on any screen either in the airline offices or on the concourses, so nobody knew where anything was and when.
There was massive and heroic improvisation by the handling agents and despite the rolling knock-on effects of stands being fully occupied while outgoing flights tried to find their passengers and baggage there were few cancellations.
Cargo was an even bigger disaster and promptly moved back to Kai Tak for six months with everything being trucked to and from the old cargo buildings, a good hours drive away in the meantime.

The reality is that T5 is now working very well and the signs are that it will accomodate the rest of BA's transfered services in September and October with little pain.

The problem of misconnecting transfer bags at LHR is not a purely BA one and much of it is down to;

a) The scattered layout of the airport with multiple terminals and longish distances between them. Multiple terminals mean multiple sorting, each one of which adds to the time taken from A to B, and the complex mechanics and double and triple handling involved in covering the distances.
b) The fact that until T5 all the terminals were built before the need for total reconciliation of bags with passengers was introduced days after T4 opened in April 1986. As result separate transfer systems and a lot of new IT technology had to be tacked onto the existing arriving and departing ones.
c) The airport congestion caused by very high runway utilisation meaning frequent and sometimes lengthy holding which= delayed arrivals eating into minimum connecting times. BA as the largest home based carrier suffers most from this as its aircraft may transit LHR up to 3 times a day whereas foreign carriers will usually only do one LHR trip a day. BMis baggage performance is said to to similar to BAs. Virgins is probably better as they have no shorthaul network so their aircraft will not depart more than once a day and will have longer base turnarounds.

So.. let's get away from the BA and T5 knocking as a ritual sport and look objectively at the realities. With a large portion of LHR transfers now under one roof in T5 , everyones transfer baggage performance should get substantially better between now and BA's final T5 moves in October.

[BHDflyer]

Went through terminal 5 last month and must say on the whole I was impressed. Before I go any further i'll say I didn't fly to or from the terminal. I had landed into terminal 1 and because I hadn't seen it yet, and the fact that my hotel was the travelodge heathrow terminal 5, I got the heathrow express free to terminal 5. Finding the hoppa bus to the hotel took a few minutes but got there in the end. I did however have to go past every stop and read what buses went from it (no big signs!).

Apart from all that, the bus station was very clean with plenty of fresh air in and around it. I was pleased I hadn't decided to use the dark, dirty hole that is the bus station at terminal 1, while breathing in dangerous carbon monoxide levels. When your inside the terminal and see those high glass lifts and the water fountain outside, you do forget your in an airport terminal which is a good thing. From what I've seen it's a much nicer terminal to fly through than any of the others.

[BerksFlyer]

So if you've got a good tailwind across the Atlantic and turn up half an hour early, does that not count as on time? That's what their wording suggests.

It's not BA who set the standards for on-time statistics. Within 15 minutes is the internationally recognised standard.

[Seat62K]

The point being made is that the wording in the advertisement is poor. I agree. To use the phrase "arriving within 15 minutes of the scheduled time", if taken literally, only counts flights arriving within a 30 minute slot as being "on time" (i.e., those which arrive during the period between 15 minutes early and 15 minutes late). Hence, ironically a flight arriving 30 minutes early does not count as being "on time"! A better phrase for BA to have used would have been something like "arriving no later than 15 minutes after the scheduled time". Don't airlines pay expensive agencies to get things like this right?

[Ametyst1]

In the last year, I have travelled with groups of 10 people at a time transitting through Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, London Heathrow Terminal 4 & 5, Manchester, Paris Charles de Gaulle and Rome Fiumicino.

On each occasion at least two of the bags did not make it on to the flights. The baggage eventually turned up at least two or three days later except the transit through Terminal 5 when the two suitcases arrived on the next flight the same day and where delivered to the hotel the same evening.

The reason for the bags not making the original flight from Terminal 5? The loaders at Manchester Airport had not loaded them on to the shuttle to Heathrow!

[Falcon666]

Lets just face it ,Heathrow isnt a world class Airport anymore .Especially when compared to Airports like Singapore or Hong Kong.
The BAA and BAs reputations are on the line right now for different reasons(BAA possible break up of monopoly and BA dwindling popularity after p---ing off so many punters in the last year.
Compare for example SIN to LHR as a transit passenger.
SIN --
Tranquil atmosphere for relaxing.
500 free internet terminals
Movie Theatre
Swimming pool on roof deck
Ease of access between terminals
Transit hotel within terminal for rooms if needed
Free massages
Toilets manned 24hrs immaculately clean with areas to put bags
City trip-free for stays of over 5hrs
Water features-the list goes on

LHR--
Please feel free to comment but maybe a trip to Hounslow town centre doesnt have the same appeal.

In short , irrespective of the number of passengers using the airport there is no need not to be able to provide comfortable surroundings.
I dropped off friends to Luton recently-at least they dont pretend to be anything other than a low cost airport.
Simple ,clean with good amenities.What is expected of such an airport.
Of Heathrow i expect more, the UKs Gateway

[HZ123]

Now I have to take issue with the 'water features' you can find them in most terminals at LHR particularly during heavy rainfall. After 37 years at LHR I do not disagree with the last thread I have always advocated that LHR is a s------e. The addition of a further runway has the potential for causing longer delays and greater chaos.

I will defend the BAA / BA in regard that the UK lacks any sort of government policy and seems incapable of any decisions in transport. Lack of direction has much to do with the shambles LHR is in, likewise LGW which is also a dump, STN I cannoyt comment on. It is a pointless exercise trying to compare the UK airports to others in many quarters of the World. The Uk is a spent force with the finances and ideas gradually being stripped out and ownership passed to overseas companies who will observe us sink futher into the morass.

Our main appeal is to scroungers from the four couners of the World whom we provide with cash and accomodation, ex terrorists and criminals particularly welcome. This group are not bothered about the state of LHR.

[macnan]

Have had the benefit of T5 twice now - once on April 1st when I landed back from HKG to find a building site still in progress. I'll admit nowhere looks good at 5.30am after a 12hr flight, but it was appalling for a brand new building to have builders saw-dust/open roof tiles/exposing air ducts/wires and unfinished railings etc on the way from the B gates to the main terminal, I was not impressed.

Second visit through last month (benefit of departure and arrivals through T5) was one of the most calm and painless journeys through an airport building. Nowhere was packed (this was 8am on departure and 4.30pm on arrival) the bags arrived as we did to the luggage belt, and everywhere was clean/finished/and the building had an air of calmness about it. If London East (the new T1 & T2 replacement) is anywhere near as good, LHR will at least regain a lot of lost ground on some of it's European neighbours. (and I don't include CDG in that - it is and always will be awful!)

[PAXboy]

macnan
Nowhere was packedThe terminal is working at less than 50% capacity. Due to the almighty foul-up, not all the flights have yet moved to T5.


L337
For heavens sake your sister needs to get a life.
[snip]
You and your sister seem to want to complain for complaining sakes.Well, thank you for your polite message ...

The thread was about progress in T5 and I gave feedback from an average middle-aged woman (who enjoys airports and air travel) and found that it was not a particularly pleasant experience.

The thread invites discussion and I put forward some points - yet you make petty, personal remarks. You may find that the protocol in these forums is to discuss the subject and not the individual.

Now, as it happens, I express very few criticisms - either here or in life. I have learnt that giving criticism almost always changes nothing, particularly in business, so I just change my purchasing away from the product.

From my visit to T5, delivering my sister to departures, I have several more direct criticisms of the signage (inside and out) and thought that, once working at full volume, it will be no better than T4. There are also observations following interactions with the staff but, in deference to your delicate nature, I shall not inform anyone of them.

[aeroDellboy]

I travelled through T1 yesterday and was not impressed.

Security is stricter than at MME, you have to stand in a specific point to get your photo taken, (happens as you hand over your boarding pass at MME), you have to take shoes off at LHR, not MME, there is no space to put shoes back on so blocking access for others coming through.

Edit - note, I have no problem with security, but would like some consistency...

When you finally get through, you then have a long walk and another boarding pass check to get through to the domestic departures.

BMI wouldn't let me in the lounge, MME did, yes it was a cheap ticket so guess it was a bonus at MME.

LHR is scruffy, dirty and generally unpleasant.

I have flights booked each month until Christmas, but will be travelling home by train in future, it is easier in the long run.

Oh, and just for a change, the flight was delayed....

[SLF3b]

Passed through T5 on a quiet Saturday afternoon. In front of me was a frail lady in a wheel chair, eighty if she was a day, with a nurse in attendance. She had a leather case with her, probably as old as she was. The bag was much narrower and shorter than the baggage frame, but one inch longer. They would not let it through. She was understandly upset, could not understand what was wrong. There was no-one else around. I asked the BAA lady if she had any discretion, and suggested that if she just let it go no-one would ever know. 'We have to treat everyone the same, sir.' I walked off in disgust, leaving the nurse asking for clemency.

On the other side, loads of Americans with huge carry-ons that had obviously gone through flight connections.

We English live in a mean, nasty, brutish country of which, I am sad to say, I am ashamed.

And T5? Cheap, nasty, in-human, over-staffed, built down to a price, will age dreadfully. Bit like the rest of the country, really.

[IcePack]

Um!

I've often wondered about the position of T5 at LHR.

The recent tragedy in Madrid, would seem on face value, to compound my concerns. A loss of control on rotate, would IMHO put T5 in a position to collect the aeroplane.

Was this senario looked at, I wonder, when the planners made their recomendations.

:rolleyes:

[rmac]

Thats what I thought when I saw it being built. The "new" Hong Kong Airport is in a similar place.

[TFlyguy]

Gatwick south the same

[Spitoon]

Tell you what, why not build pax terminals 5 miles away from the runway - but, no, that won't do either, what if an aircraft drops out of the sky while on the downwind leg? That's it then, they'll have to go underground....but, blow me if the security risk assessment says that's not a good idea either. OK, I give up. Where do you suggest, IcePack?

More seriously, ICAO Annex 14 sets out the areas that should be clear of obstructions etc. for when an aircraft departs the runway in an unintended manner. Now if you want a discussion on the suitability of Runway Strips, Cleared and Graded Areas, Obstacle Clearance Surfaces etc., by all means lets have it - but for heaven's sake let's be sensible about things!

PS - I was on a railway platform the other day and I tell you, if the train had derailed as it came into the station it would have been pretty dangerous for all of us there!

[ukdean]

Totally agree what a stupid and utter nonsense thread....

[IcePack]

Lets hope that in the future the stupid thread does not prove to be not stupid.

Seriously, IMHO when an engine failure at rotate is mishandled by the flying pilot the A/C tends to go about 30 degrees off the RWY heading.

Mind you I gave a comand candidate a V1 cut on No1 Engine on a VC8 (4 eng A/C) once and he rotated instead of waiting to Vr. Streuth the heading change was more like 60 deg, with me spooling up the simulate failed engine , that taught me lesson.(VMCG inc Nose Wheel stearing. Before modern thinking)

Some of you of a certain age might remember a viking (I think) that went rather off course at LHR years ago.

Keep terminals in the centre of airfields I say. Yes you can not cover every eventuality but I think (not Knowing the exact track) Madrid is QED.

[Two-Tone-Blue]

Concur with Spitoon ...

In a world filled with consipiracy theories, I suppose it is unsurprising that some would consider that ICAO Annex 14 had failed to take account of the reality of aircraft operations, and what could happen, and at what probability. Hundreds of aircraft operators and ATC professionals over many decades undoubtedly just doodled something from time to time on a beer-mat, and then persuaded the entire aviation industry to accept the safety criteria they came up with.


[Retired ATCO]

[Yellow Sun]

Just to add a little more in the same vein to IcePack at Post#903. The Report on Canberra Accident at RAF Wyton in March 1991 (http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/B046B993-85DC-402C-B1F9-66FE6FA002BD/0/maas91_01_canberra_tmk4_wj877_18mar91.pdf) is worth reading. Although heavily redacted, it nonetheless it clearly illustrates that things can go disastrously wrong when an engine fails (is failed) at this stage of flight and is not correctly handled. The report notes that the crew had "considerable experience". I would expand on that to say that the handling pilot; for whom I had the greatest respect; was a very experienced Canberra pilot.

We're all human.

YS

[Hermano Lobo]

Please click the link:-

http://www.geocities.com/spitfiremk9/RAeS.html




http://www.raes.org.uk/images/header/header_logo_l.gif

[OliWW]

I know its not just from Heathrow, but there are a load of long haul flights from here, but does anyone know when flights in about Nov-Dec 09 are on sale with airlines like BA, Virgin and other airlines for long haul routes??? they go upto Aug 09 at the moment, but even low cost airlines have upto Oct 09 at the moment...

[jet2impress]

Fares are generally released 11 months in advance. So for November 2009, they should be out in December 2008. This is the general rule, but it does not always work this way.

[Globaliser]

... does anyone know when flights in about Nov-Dec 09 are on sale with airlines like BA, Virgin and other airlines for long haul routes??? they go upto Aug 09 at the moment, but even low cost airlines have upto Oct 09 at the moment...BA website allows bookings up to "355 days" in advance (last booking date as of today appears to be 31 August 2009), and Virgin allows up to "336 days" in advance (last date 13 August 2009). I'm never quite sure how they count the days, but that looks about right.

I'm surprised to see that any low-fare airlines are booking up to October 2009. Which ones? It's more common to see low-fare airlines booking to a much shorter time horizon.

[OliWW]

Yes thats why I expected like BA or Virgin to have there Oct 09 flights on sale by now
bmibaby, jet2 goes upto Oct 09, Ryanairs say that it goes upto Aug 09, but you cant book a flight after April 09

[Globaliser]

Yes thats why I expected like BA or Virgin to have there Oct 09 flights on sale by nowI think the reservations systems of the major airlines (and the global distribution systems on which they rely) won't do more than a year ahead, hence the limitation. So these limits are absolutely typical of major airlines.

[Seljuk22]

AF: cancellation LHR-LAX 26th Oct but new daily route LHR-JFK from 29th March

[WHBM]

Will the "AF" LHR-JFK not just be a codeshare on Delta ?

[04DDF]

Landed from Geneva at 21:27 but T5 evacuated. Stranded on a bus going nowhere for an hour before Heathrow Express up and running. Anybody have any info?

[Skipness One Echo]

No it is an AF operated flight.

[baopsman]

Unattended bag left landside.

[Farrell]

Unattended bag left landside.

So there's how to cause chaos for the knee-jerk Brits.

Bags left all over the place in Muscat - and what happens? Nothing!

Last time the place was bombed by an unattended bag? Never!

Last time a UK airport was blown up by an unattended bag? Never?... Yep.

[wazzer1976]

Fair enough Farrell, maybe not a british airport but through the many years of conflict with the IRA, unattended bags left in pubs, shopping streets, bins etc have blown up! Not unheard of.

[pwalhx]

Because it has never happened are we to assume it never will. Personally I would rather be safe than sorry.

In potential risk terms I am not sure you would compare Muscat with Heathrow either.

[Skipness One Echo]

No it's an over reaction. The modern threat is a suicide bomber willing to die, the IRA threat is pretty much over and has been for a long time. To allow life to completely grind to a halt gain because some eejit left their bag for five minutes lets the terrorists win. It's like being scared to have bins in railway stations but having them in airports......I mean get real.

[udachi moya]

I do think sometimes it is a complete over-reaction, but there again the threat could be real - if they didnt react and baddaboom - they are damned for not doing anything - and if false alarm, they are damned for reacting.......
There is technology and devices that can be used within minutes to ascertain whether the bag is a risk or not....!!

[cogrady84]

If people caught wind that Heathrow weren't doing anything about unattended bags being left lying around, then would it not become a successful way to "terrorise" ??

Why should any lives be risked by attempting to ascertain the contents of the unattended bag?

There is more than enough information thrown at passengers about NOT leaving their bags unattended, so it is normal to assume an unattended bag is suspicious!

Whats the problem? They averted a major incident by taking the necessary precautions... regardless of risk, let it be.

[ara01jbb]

A bag without its owner at T5? Surely not... :E

[tangoecho]

I was in paris CDG in June and The terminal was evacuated as a bag was left unattended outside the front on a trolly. The police/army folk blew the bag up in front of us pax. A womans bra and panties strewn all over the place.;)
So not only a British over-reaction.
As said above you're damned if you do anything and you're damned if you don't.

Get a life guys..:ugh:

[BAladdy]

I was wondering how long it would take for some to have what they think is a smart comment about what is T5's baggage past.

[uklad007]

Well for some nice news, dont all jump on me at once for saying this, am a fairly regular traveller through LHR but yesterday was my first time through T5 and i have to say i was mightly impressed.
Ok so i wasnt travelling at the most peak of times but everything ran like clockwork, we left slightly ahead of schedule and were on the tarmac in Munich 20 mins ahead of schedule....and yes my large heavy suitcase came off the conveyor belt within 5 minutes of arrival on stand (a little thumbs up to Munich there).

I know that is to be expected everytime you fly but i know (understandable in the past) there has been some T5/BA bashing.

Well done BAA and BA for an enjoyable journey :ok: and a very smart terminal!

[4567]

Air France are to cancel there LHR-Los Angeles service and start LHR-JFK!

There taking on a route with even more competition. Between them and delta its up to 3 daily flights. Even at that though taking on BA and Virgin who would usualy have between 5-8 flights a day between them!

Maybe its a retaliation aginst BA for FlyOpenSkies at CDG!

[airhumberside]

AF starting JFK is about providing a Skyteam first class product on the route, something Delta don't offer. I would see DL/AF as a joint operation rather than competitors on LHR-JFK

[Globaliser]

The modern threat is a suicide bomber willing to die ...Just like at Madrid?

[eagle21]

Flights to Bilbao resume from the 29th of October from T2, operated by Clickair. It is interesting how Bilbao has been going back and forward from LHR to LGW.

It is also interesting how BA could not make money on this route in when they dropped it in 2004 and Air France did not even fly to Bilbao.

Now Air France has 5 daily flights from BIO to CDG offering hundreds of connections to their longhaul market.

[airhumberside]

LHR-Valencia is axed however. Moving Bilbao back to LHR retains the slot

[kala87]

Can someone pls tell me, with the recent transfer to T5 of most of the remaining BA long haul flights from T4, are all the 744 and 777 stands served by airbridges, or are pax bussed to some of them? Just wondered.

[BAAdboy]

A number of T5 stands that will ultimately become 'pier served' when the second satellite building opens are currently being used as remote stands with passengers being coached to them. There are 7 dedicated coaching gates in the main T5A building (5 for international, 2 for domestic) to support coaching operations.

[SR71]

Gordon Brown will give green light to expand Heathrow within weeks - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/3332048/Gordon-Brown-will-give-green-light-to-expand-Heathrow-within-weeks.html)

That must be the first thing Brown has done right in ages....

:ok:

[MAN777]

By the time it gets through public enquiry and planning, the conservatives will be in power anyway and if they stick to their manifesto it will be cancelled.

:rolleyes:

[VAFFPAX]

I would prefer the train service TBH, but with the amount of NIMBYs to pacify for a 200 mph service on a dedicated line between Rugby, Birmingham, Leeds and Manchester, I guess the amount of NIMBYs at the runway (well, to be fair, the people who've lived for decades where LHR r/way 3 is to go) is less...

S.

[Max Angle]

and if they stick to their manifesto it will be cancelled.

They won't and it will go ahead.

[738FO]

Just out of curiosity , where will they put the third one?

But i think its a good thing if they will do so.:ok:

[MAVERICK 1]

By the time we cut through the governments stupid red tape and the idiotic tree huggers finally fall out of a tree and have a shower AMS will have built 18 even further right which will be closer to London than LHR! I would love to know what the hell in the world we in Britain are good at anymore apart from Obesity, drunken louts and teenage pregnancy!?:D

[General_Kirby]

The idea that a super fast train line will be a good alternative to a 3rd runway is laughable. I mean seriously who have the Conservatives actually asked to look into this and they thought it was a good idea. When did you last hear of flights from Heathrow to Birmingham or Leeds, and even if all the Manchester/Scotland flights were taken out (and this would still mean changing trains at Manchester) the free slots would be replaced with other flights in the blink of an eye. Freeing up a few slots is not what is needed, actually spare capacity for growth and room to expand and attract more customers/cargo/revenue.
The train idea is very good for train users but not to replace a runway! Anyway if the government can ever make a train network that is reliable and safe, not overcrowded and full of drunks then people might be more keen to use it.

[Guest 112233]

Britan has bee only good at obesity , pregnancy & getting truly pissed for years. What planet have you been on - Did you remember to close the door on your flying Saucer - If its unlocked the thing will get TWOC'd Etc. (Sorry cannot Stop -Have Car - but the owner's want It back - Blues & two's behind - must go ! - Byeeee.)

We will converse with ailen life forms before the 3rd Runway is built at LHR (Largely Humungus Rathole)

Cat III

[Skipness One Echo]

Oh dear why do people dive in with their mouths first......?
The recent legislation to fast track large projects of public interest is designed to ram this through as it is deemed ( and I agree ) to be of national importance. Cameron won't be in power until 2010 IF he wins and once he's in the door and the real decisions are his to take, it would be a bloody brave man that would backtrack on Runway 3 as he would be slaughtered by business. The issue of West London marginals will be parked for a few years by this point. It WILL happen, and not before time.

[BOBBLEHAT]

Runway 3 will be north of the existing runways and shorter.

[HZ123]

As none of the major projects seem to make any money how will this be funded, considering that the recession will run for about a 5 year cycle. We do need it, to bring the rest of the worlds dross in to feed, clothe and house? It will be a shame that the rail links are not the first priority as they are long overdue.

[Guest 112233]

In all the proposals that I have seen, (Not very detailed I have to admit ) a shorter runway aligned with, and to the north of the two exsistng long runways, to cater for I assume, is to be short/ medium routes ,is going to have long taxi and waiting time issues regarding taxing times, both for Take offs and landings - Say from T4 at the southern part of the complex - I know its been talked about on PPRUNE but has anyone done a work/computer simulation study to properly quantify the consequences, of say operations on a Rwy 28C (prev 28R ) and "new" Rwy 28R or 28S for short. Think of Parallel Ops or when LVP are in operation Arrival & Departure seperation. Taxi way layouts etc, or are we still at the kite flying stage in all of this. ?

[LHR27C]

short/ medium routes is going to have long waiting issues regarding taxing times both for Take offs and landings - Say from T4 at the southern part of the complex - I know its been talked about on PPRUNE but has anyone done a work/computer simulation study to properly quantify the consequences of say operations on a Rwy 28C (prev 28R ) and new Rwy 28R or 28S for short

NATS have already modelled all this in great detail. The conclusion is the best arrangement would be for 27L and the renamed 27C to operate segregated, while the new 27R would be mixed mode. Also, it's likely that any new runway would be accompanied by a terminal north of the existing complex.

[Skipness One Echo]

Are we sure it will be another 09 / 27 and not a 10 / 28 or a 08 / 26, just to keep things a little simpler.

[Michael SWS]

A third runway - or any expansion of existing airports - would be criminally irresponsible. We need to be controlling capacity and safeguarding the environment by pricing the masses out of the sky, not by covering even more fields and villages with tarmac and shopping malls.

I'll vote for any party that promises us that the third runway will not happen.

[davidjohnson6]

Michael SWS - I think that many of the people reading this forum are completely sold on the idea of a third runway and a 6th terminal at Heathrow. They'd probably also support additional runways at both Luton and Stansted and also Gatwick as soon as the planning agreements permit it in 2019 as well !

[Skipness One Echo]

No most people on this forum know the importance of international connectivity through a world class hub versus more Ryanair 737s at 50p a flight from Runway 2 at Essex International.

If anyone has a number for Doctor Who, perhaps he could drop Michael SWS back in the glory days of 1974. No masses cluttering up "our" airports back then. I agree that unrestricted growth is nuts but well managed growth in the right place is years overdue. The current infrastructure is incredibly bad !

[Walnut]

The Daily Telegraph article which started this thread mentioned 38 Labour MPs had signed an early day motion opposing a 3rd r/w at LHR. Since the government only has a majority in the low 60"s then the numbers needed to vote this through are not there. I am convinced the recent resignation of Ruth Kelly as former transport secretary is significant.

[Michael SWS]

I agree that unrestricted growth is nuts but well managed growth in the right place is years overdue. The current infrastructure is incredibly bad !Both infrastructure and interconnectivity can, and should, be improved by means other than airport expansion.

People are flying too much. In a world of diminishing resources and threatened environment it is time to price most of those people out of the skies. Fares have hardly changed in absolute terms since 1974, and in real terms they are probably a tenth of what they were back then. If airlines such as Ryanair wish to continue to fly people unnecessarily across the continent for pennies then let's tax them until the fares reach a level that discourages people from nipping to Dublin for lunch or taking half a dozen weekend breaks per year. And put the resulting income - and the money that would have been spent on airport expansion - into dragging our rail network out of the 19th century and into the 21st.

Why not just let CDG, Frankfurt and Schiphol grow and become the major European hubs? What's so bad about trying to make Heathrow the best airport in the world rather than the biggest?

[Skipness One Echo]

Why not just let CDG, Frankfurt and Schiphol grow and become the major European hubs? What's so bad about trying to make Heathrow the best airport in the world rather than the biggest?

Have you considered a career in comedy? Railway connectivity is a classic red herring. You could ban all flights from ABZ / EDI / GLA / NCL / MME / LBA / JER and still barely dent Heathrow's movement figures so the "lets build a high speed rail link" whilst being an excellent idea in itself, is not directly related to expansion of LHR. Travellers in these airports would simply connect abroad and our own long haul airlines would suffer as their market was reduced. It's way easier to connect through AMS or CDG than get a train to London then a walk to the plane to check in etc. There would be more job losses at BA and Virgin as a result.

Quite how this makes Heathrow the best airline in the world is anyone's guess.

it is time to price most of those people out of the skies
Pompous and arrogant elitism that I'm afraid, sorry but I'm here to stay. Deal with it or get back to the railways where you'll be happy surrounded by er......common people.

[SR71]

I'll vote for any party that promises us that the third runway will not happen.

I'll vote for any party that promises a fourth runway will happen!

:ok:

[NWSRG]

Time for some joined up thinking...

The 3rd runway is essential...how much fuel is burnt in the hold en-route to LHR, or during taxi when trying to depart? The airport is creaking capacity wise, and any single incident can cause days of chaos...an additional runway will allow the airport to breathe again.

Saying all that...there is no doubt that diversity will also help provide a stronger transport infrastructure. High speed rail should be the primary method of national transportation for a nation the size of ours. With the right technology, rail would be virtually as fast as flight, and would free up (some) much needed capacity.

And as for Cameron, he will live with a 3rd runway...he'll really have no option.

[beamender99]

Runway 3 will be north of the existing runways and shorter.


Boundary Map | Heathrow | Homepage - Hillingdon Times (http://www.hillingdontimes.co.uk/no_to_heathrow/boundary_map/)

Heathrow Third Runway Plans

http://www.hillingdontimes.co.uk/resources/images/529790/

Heathrow Future

http://www.hillingdontimes.co.uk/resources/images/529792/

[Michael SWS]

Railway connectivity is a classic red herring. You could ban all flights from ABZ / EDI / GLA / NCL / MME / LBA / JER and still barely dent Heathrow's movement figures so the "lets build a high speed rail link" whilst being an excellent idea in itself, is not directly related to expansion of LHR. Travellers in these airports would simply connect abroad and our own long haul airlines would suffer as their market was reduced. It's way easier to connect through AMS or CDG than get a train to London then a walk to the plane to check in etc. There would be more job losses at BA and Virgin as a result.

Quite how this makes Heathrow the best airline in the world is anyone's guess.It wouldn't. And nowhere in my post do I suggest that it would.

[befree]

A bigger LHR will take more routes that go via Manchester & Birmingham. You just have to look at the loss of routes over the last year to see airlines are desperate to keep slots at Heathrow. The sensable system is to auction slots at Heathrow so that airlines use them as if it cost money. We may then get a move to more direct flights from the likes of Mancester.

I cannot see the third runway getting the green light. MPs from London are not keen and it does nothing for MPs from the North. The way to make LHR work better is to run a few less flights added with more direct flights from regional airports.

[Skipness One Echo]

Flights from the regions to where? Ryanair do that really well, the foreign legacy carriers already fly to their hubs. Emirates, Continental etc are already here. Exactly who are you angling for? QANTAS and Cathay use Heathrow as a OneWorld hub, STAR are building a hub at Terminal 1 with LH and BMI coming together and Air New Zealand, United and US Airways already under the one roof.
Who is going to fly all these flights to the regions that doesn't already do it?

[jongeman]

Skipness One Echo

Will you please stop this aggressive stance you're taking. We all know your opinions, and you're putting me off reading this damn site. It's getting boring.

[HZ123]

Skipness for one of only 27 years of age you seem to know lots about everything. Do you actually work in aviation?

[CabinCrewe]

Yes very tiresome and predictable indeed. I suspect theres no formal link with the aviation industry at all, not that that is a prerequesit to post.

[Ametyst1]

I don't think Skipness is being aggressive he is merely stating a few home truths. Heathrow is not in competition with Manchester or Birmingham it is in competition with Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Paris CdG, Madrid and maybe Brussels when Lufthansa starts dictating terms at Brussels Airlines.

People forget that London is not just the capital city of the United Kingdom, it is a truly global city along with New York, Paris and Tokyo. London has a special status in the business and financial world. Despite the ecomomic downturn there is always a strong demand for services to Heathrow.

I would much prefer a third runway at Heathrow with an allocation of slots serving the regions so destinations such as Liverpool, Inverness, Plymouth, Newquay, Isle of Man and Guernsey can be once again lim=nked to an international network. In addition, Leeds & Bradford, Durham Tees Valley, Newcastle and Jersy could keep their Heathrow slots.

This time last year Manchester had 23 Long-haul scheduled flights a day, this year it is down to 15 a day a decrease of about 35%. The future for UK plc is Heathrow.

[Skipness One Echo]

I am a business analyst, a number cruncher of trends, models customer spends and other metrics. Sorry if people don't like me, and take personally what I say but I have been in aviation most of my life in one form or another and as a consultant I have no need to be a supporter of any airline. I tell it as I see it and the yields and numbers model it. I won't comment without a good allegory or example from the past to back it up.

I'll say it one more time as it bears repeating in big shiny letters.
1) No one is prevented from flying from the regions because of Heathrow.
2) The mass market for UK legacy carriers is London and London alone
3) Foreign legacy carriers may serve their offshore hubs quite successfully from the regions, however Alliance pressures on certain carriers mean an extra London rotation is more likely
4) Outside of London, the future of UK commercial carriers is Loco ( including flybe ) or Eastern type high cost high frequency carriers.

In answer to HZ123, I don't work in aviation, I work FOR aviation in a consultancy role as it pays way better and the pressure on wages and Ts and Cs within aviation is terminally downward. Think of that the next time someone is rifling through your possessions on a daily basis as you got to work on the flight deck.

This gives me insight into underlying data denied to customer facing staff. As this is an open forum I am free to air relevant views, give historical parallels where I think they are valid and if you disagree, either block me or try coming up with a cogent argument backed up by numbers and stats because at the end of the day, in business, that's the bottom line.

cabincrewe it's spelled "prerequisite"

[WHBM]

I'm with S1E in all of this.

Heathrow is the desired point for :

10% of UK-originating European IT passengers
30% of UK leisure passengers
40% approx of the UK population overall
50% of UK business passengers
70% of UK-originating premium pax
80% of inbound pax
90% of inbound premium pax

That's how it is. No hype, no favoritism, just reality.

[Michael SWS]

I have found that cabin crew have no business acumen whatsoever. If they did, they would be earning way more and getting on in life rather than serving tea and coffee.You may know a lot, mate, but you're not very nice.

[eggc]

Heathrow is the desired point for :

10% of UK-originating European IT passengers
30% of UK leisure passengers
40% approx of the UK population overall
50% of UK business passengers
70% of UK-originating premium pax
80% of inbound pax
90% of inbound premium pax

Rubbish !!! Heathrow and desired do not belong in the same sentance.

People fly from there because there is no regional alternatives. Qantas filled a daily 744 from MAN for years and years till BA got involved, now we HAVE to go via LHR, and certainly do not desire to do so.

Given a choice the flying public outside the South East do not want to have to go to London for long haul - we are forced too.

[daz211]

Well said how many passengers traveling by road to LHR or LGW
have to pass STN or LTN.

I hate the M25 but to take the M25 and then have to fight my way through LHR is just not funny:ugh:.

Many people would love the chance to fly longhaul from STN.

Well the chance to fly longhaul from STN is a few steps closer with AirasiaX starting flights to OZ via KL and Dubai starting next month with
Air Sylhet.

Not to mention the news on the Ryanair thread re LONGHAUL!

[Skipness One Echo]

Qantas filled a daily 744 from MAN for years

For the record what was the routing on this flight? I seem to remember it was an extension from Heathrow and was never filled at Manchester as it picked up passengers at Heathrow and Singapore / Bangkok. Hence the reason QANTAS still got the passengers without needing to send a mostly empty B747-400 on a UK domestic errand when the BA codeshare kicked in.
The same happens at the other end for BA, passengers from Melbourne and Perth being fed into Sydney by QANTAS, all going to help the bottom line in a VERY tough market.
Given a choice the flying public outside the South East do not want to have to go to London for long haul - we are forced too.
Manchester has Emirates, Singapore, Continental, Delta, US Airways, PIA, Qatar, Etihad and all. Foreign carriers seem to manage serving their hubs from MAN quite well. Birmingham has Continental and Emirates, even Newcastle has Emirates, allowing Australia to be a one stop trip.

The issue is London being a proper world city with a world class hub. I think it is great that the regions have a good choice of links.

[Musket90]

Skipness - I agree with the need for LHR runway 3 and the reasons you give, however I am disappointed about your comments regarding those with no business acumen serving tea and coffee. If it wasn't for cabin crew passenger carrying aircraft would not be permitted to fly. Your aviation business knowledge, number crunching etc. experience seems to lack people skills, but hey - your well paid so what does it matter.

Everyone has a different role to play in working life and many, like you, have worked very hard to achieve what they have, so don't not knock it.

[eggc]

Ohhh, thats fine then...lets have 30 flights a day to JFK, 15 a day to Australia, all from LHR, which requires a 3rd runway to be sustainable, and make the entire UK population travel to LHR for a long haul flight.

What percentage of LHR pax live north of Birmingham ?

There is no reason MAN, BHX, GLA could not handle these pax, maybe even enough of them that LHR would not need a 3rd runway.

All it takes is a big sign at LHR saying "AIRSPACE FULL" and a carrier to commit to the nation rather than just its capital.

Bring on the yield & "London is the center of the universe" argument again....

[apaddyinuk]

Also, I have found that cabin crew have no business acumen whatsoever. If they did, they would be earning way more and getting on in life rather than serving tea and coffee. I worked pretty hard to get where I am, and I think I understand the dynamics and pressures of modern business more than many on here.

Thats a tad harsh! My degree is in Marketing with my masters in aviation management (what was I thinking??? :ugh:) and I have a very good business acumen thank you very much! I "chose" to fly cos Im still relatively young, have no ties and want to enjoy my life a little before I get dug into the stressful ladder climb of a marketing career!!! I had intended to be out of it this winter but think Im going to hang on for a while longer until the economy picks up!
Now I may be just one "exception" in the near 15000 crew who work in my airline but I know Im not! There are a hell of a lot of crew out there who are bloody bright and intelligent people and deserve to be given some credit, but yeah, there are also the percentage who are just doing the job to pay the bills or have got themselves stuck in a rut...and sadly a lower standard of crew who actually still think the job is "glamorous and classy" but perhaps dont have two braincells to rub together, this job attracts and appeals to allsorts!

So in a nutshell.... Dont put us down Skipness! Generalising does nothing for ones argument and although I agree with almost everything you say in various topics on here please just leave the specific job bashing out of it!

[Skipness One Echo]

Apologies, I have deleted the remark. I should know better than to generalise. I had someone have a go at me a few posts back and it brought back traumatic memories of the one and only cabin crew I ever dated. A Concorde CC who talked only about themselves for what felt like an entire ice age........gave whole new meaning to shallow. ( digging a bigger hole ? )

I reiterate that by and large most cabin crew I have flown with have been great (1) and I apologise for an ill thought out and untrue angry remark.

*dons flame proof jacket and runs like Hell*

(1) with the exception of a certain "Irish" airline based out of Stansted-grad. You're bad. So bad. Bad doesn't begin to cover it. Scary. As in frightening. I mean giving whole new meaning to scary. When the passenegers laugh at the cabin announcement I don't feel confident. But cheap, so I have only myself to blame.

[LHR27C]

Despite all the angst, S1E is right on virtually every count here.

Rubbish !!! Heathrow and desired do not belong in the same sentance.

Heathrow today is arguably the most important airport on the planet. You cannot underestimate the huge demand, especially for premium travel, that it generates. It is the main gateway to probably one of the two most important cities in the world and its economic significance cannot be understated.

If you meant not desired in terms of quality of airport experience, take a stroll through Terminal 5, easily the best airport experience in the UK and one of the nicest outside Asia.

Given a choice the flying public outside the South East do not want to have to go to London for long haul - we are forced too.

What can people on here not understand about a free market? Airlines are companies out to make a profit. They will fly routes where there is demand and routes that do not generate sufficient revenue will be axed. No one is stopping any airline from flying longhaul services from the regions, but the fact that there are few services suggests the regions are maybe not the pot of gold some on here think.

Notice for instance that since BA axed MAN-JFK, no one has stepped up to fill the gap. MAN has lost a lot of longhaul services over the years, not through some bizarre desire by airlines to make people travel via London for the sake of it, but because demand has dropped.

There is no reason MAN, BHX, GLA could not handle these pax, maybe even enough of them that LHR would not need a 3rd runway.

If there was no reason that MAN, BHX, GLA etc could not handle these pax, they would be doing so today. But oh look, they're not, and the reason is entirely economical. The only longhaul services out of any UK regional airports are by carriers linking the regions to their hubs and relying on onward connecting traffic.

People may be tired of hearing the "importance of London" argument but like it or loath it, it is true. Airlines are businesses out to make money and if London will do that where the regions won't, they'll set their routes accordingly. If airports such as MAN are really such a goldmine, why has it been overtaken by STN recently so that London's three airports are the top three for pax in the UK, and why has its longhaul services shrunk so much? The simple notion of demand and supply.

[VAFFPAX]

LHR is, as much as you argue about MAN, GLA, STN, still the most important airport in the UK. It sucks, but it has been traditionally the ideal airport for legacy carriers to go into. But you will still find people on the M40/M4/M3 corridors driving to STN or LTN for a better airport experience (although it goes beyond me why STN would be better... LTN yes, but STN? No.) - bypassing LHR or even LGW altogether.

The biggest problem I see with Rwy 27/09C is that it brings the infrastructure to LHR to creaking point (and it already is there). HEX is not bad, but LU is shyte, and the CBS is also utter crap (by virtue of being stuck in the middle of the "roundabout" that circles past T1/2/3 and not being able to expand). The requirement for people from everywhere else to have to deal with the M25/M4 without a proper system that makes travel there easy makes LHR the pits for travellers outside the traditional 10-20 mile radius for LHR. LGW and STN have the same problem as LHR - lack of expansion capability and lack of options for high-speed transport (motorways included). LGW is nobbled by the BAA agreement with WSCC, STN is getting stick from the commuters living around there.

I admit, I love trains, and I actually like sitting down on a train for a nice point-to-point trip. But the problem for LHR is that you cannot catch a fast train to LHR, but instead you have to go into Paddington or switch at Reading for Paddington, catch the HEX and spend 15 minutes going the other way, or catch an 'intermediate' service to connect with the every-30-minutes 'Heathrow Connect' service out of Slough.

If 09/27C happens, I would expect BAA or whoever to start a very high-frequency bus/train service from West Drayton/Hayes&Harlington into LHR, and FGW/SouthWest/TL/London OG actually stopping there on their fast services, or else people will continue to hate the place.

As far as T'North goes, NCL and MAN could do some really good business, especially when other legacy carriers use them as bases or connector points for their flights. A colleague who lives near NCL has used that airport almost exclusively, connecting into AMS thanks to KL's good connections from NCL. MAN and LPL are similar for some of my other colleagues who fly out of LPL to the continent and Ireland, granted, it's mostly LCC's out of there, but again it could provide alternatives to the airports on the continent because no-one wants to spend time flying from LPL to LHR to somewhere else... precisely because LHR is so crap as far as the pax experience is concerned. If NWI were to expand in a similar fashion for KL and the roads to NWI were better (the A14 between Mildenhall and Thetford is murder, as is the A47), NWI would be an alternative to STN for the people in the Fens and Suffolk (or even as far as Grantham/Lincoln). But going west (i.e. USA), nothing north of the Watford Gap has the cachet that LHR has.

Anyway... the third runway will only make sense if there is significant investment in the other transport options into LHR (NOT just road) and a raison d'être for people to travel to LHR instead of connecting into AMS, FRA or CDG, but since that's not happening (or even planned to happen), I'd vote it down because of the additional strain.

S.

[davidjohnson6]

Does anyone have details of recent studies which look at the possibility of integrating Heathrow more into the UK rail network - adding connectivity chords where necessary, similiar to that done with CDG or AMS ?

I'm thinking about building an extra stretch of main line from Hanwell to Slough that goes via Heathrow so long distance trains from Paddington could stop at Heathrow on their way to Bristol / Oxford / Exeter, as well as cross-country trains from Birmingham and the north stopping on their way to Sussex.

A good chunk of such a piece of main line would have to be in a tunnel, but is 10 miles of well-engineered tunnel not involving a major river, the sea or a city centre really that expensive ? Trains would just divert from current routes, so could maybe even avoid buying new trainsets.

There's probably something I haven't thought of which makes this all completely unfeasible, but for the moment, I can't think of what that factor is.

[malq]

Large segments of the erstwhile British empire, from the North Americas to Australasia and all points therein, still need to head into London to sort out a variety of their issues. This one factor alone continues to make Heathrow/London something like a "compulsory waypoint" on really odd routes like:-

India - Pakistan - Bangladesh
USA - Ireland
Cyprus - Cyprus
South Africa - Zimbabwe
Chagos - Mauritius
Papua NG - Australia/New Zealand
Timor vs Timor
Singapore vs Malaysia (and till a few years ago, Singapore vs Singapore)
Sri Lanka vs North Sri Lanka
Saudia Arabia by itself
UAE by themselves
Egypt - Israel - Syria
Kurdistan - Turkey
Large parts of Africa
Eyl to Luxembourg

And so on and so forth.

In addition, the crowds at T3/T4 and T5 are really thin nowadays, even the evening peak hour security rush has more people at Krispy Kreme than at the Security Line at T3, for example, so maybe a 3rd runway won't really ever be required.

[ETOPS]

There is a plan to bulid a rail link directly in to T5.

Here is the website The AirTrack Forum - What is AirTrack (http://www.airtrack.org/airtrack.htm)

Unfortunately we will have to wait (why :confused: ) until 2013/4 to see this in operation.............

[Hotel Mode]

Does anyone have details of recent studies which look at the possibility of integrating Heathrow more into the UK rail network - adding connectivity chords where necessary, similiar to that done with CDG or AMS ?


Think this is what you meant Arup research High Speed alignments north of London (http://www.nce.co.uk/news/transport/2008/10/arup_research_high_speed_alignments_north_of_london.html)

Some of the press and the Conservatives seem to see this as an alternative to the new runway, I think its vital the 2 are built together.

[VAFFPAX]

I like Arup's research into this... the M4/Wales corridor for services out of Paddington are currently aligned in parallel 1 mile north of the M4 near LHR; the longest bit for HEX to travel (of its 15 minute journey) is the trip from PAD to HAY, west of which it branches off to tunnel through underneath the M4, the M4 spur etc into T1/2/3 (CBS) and then T4/5.

AirTrack suggests a 6 trains an hour connection, allows for 2 trains an hour from Reading, Guildford, and Woking. It's a start, but is that enough? Considering that there are some services into Victoria (to connect to GEX) run every 15 minutes, I don't know if it would be.

But at least the thought is already there... it's just the time frame that stinks (unless that's the same timeframe for 09/27C).

S.

[ETOPS]

mech assassin


'cause they've got to build it first?

Building 4km of track along an already existing rail-bed shouldn't take 5 years!!

The Airtrack platform/station at T5 was preplanned and was built along with the HEX connection so that's ready now......

[Hotel Mode]

AirTrack suggests a 6 trains an hour connection, allows for 2 trains an hour from Reading, Guildford, and Woking. It's a start, but is that enough? Considering that there are some services into Victoria (to connect to GEX) run every 15 minutes, I don't know if it would be.


Isnt it 6 per hour, 2 to Guildford, 2 to Reading and 2 to Waterloo? The Waterloo trains would connect at Clapham for Gatwick (quicker than Victoria and back). Although I hope it ends up being 4 to Waterloo in the end 2 seems a little stingy.

[VAFFPAX]

You're correct, sorry. The Guildford services run via Woking. 3 or 4 services per hour for each of the Guildford/Waterloo routes would definitely make a difference, especially when Guildford/Clapham is upgraded to make it easier for people with luggage. GEX does not stop at Clapham at the moment, but would that make it easier to connect if it did? I'd think so.

S.

[LGWAlan]

But the GEX is overpriced - and currently undergoing revisions anyway to extend it to Brighton! Southern Trains have plenty of options from Clapham Junct to LGW

[VAFFPAX]

LGWAlan, so is HEX, but both GEX and HEX are well-equipped for luggage-wielding travellers. Currently East-West and North-South connections are not luggage-friendly, so more luggage-friendly transport would make things a LOT more attractive for people (at a price).

Airtrack would probably be just as well-equipped as HEX and GEX are because it again is designed for travellers. I won't talk about the Stansted Express - its interior is, compared to the other two, a disgrace. Luton doesn't even have its own express service, you end up on a grubby semi-fast Capital Connect if you're lucky.

When CrossRail finally takes off, STN would be connected to CrossRail at Liverpool Street, requiring a change at Farringdon for LGW (40 minutes) and LTN (50 minutes). Heathrow would be a straight run of 35 - 40 minutes on CrossRail from Liverpool Street.

S.

[PAXboy]

£230m boost for cross-London rail project

By Peter Woodman, PA
Tuesday, 4 November 2008

A £16 billion cross-city rail scheme got a welcome boost today when airport operator BAA agreed to inject £230 million into the project. This will enable the cross-London Crossrail route to link with Heathrow airport in west London.

There will be four fast-train services for the majority of the day with passengers being able to travel from Heathrow to central London, the City, Canary Wharf in Docklands, Shenfield in Essex and Abbey Wood in south London.

/// Article continues ...
£230m boost for cross-London rail project - Home News, UK - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pound230m-boost-for-crosslondon-rail-project-990652.html)
At this rate, we will need a separate thread for Crossrail.

[Baltasound]

If crossrail gets built I will dance naked around Unst in the middle of winter. There are two hopes at present; one of them is Bob.

Airtrack will come first as the application for TWA order will be going in next year. There will be a connection from both the Reading and Waterloo ends with the International platforms at Waterloo (currently vacant and rusting) being used. There is also built in a plan to link via a northern spur to the GWML (also wired) which will be more feasible in the long run, as the route via Wokingham to Reading (and then change) will be long, slow and tedious.

[Skipness One Echo]

Leaving aside the choo choos and naked dancing lunatics for a moment, NWA is reported to be ending SEA-LHR in January. This follows Uniteds termination of DEN-LHR and Air France ending LAX-LHR.
Well done BMI for not getting involved at this point, I think a better decision day by day.

[118.70]

Get involved - 2M Group - Wandsworth Council (http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/Home/MyWandsworth/Newsextra/2mgroup.htm#rail)

[118.70]

http://www.heathrowairport.com/assets/Internet/Heathrow/Heathrow%20downloads/Static%20files/HeathrowAirtrack_Consultation2.pdf

[WHBM]

Regarding train connections to the airports.

Quite often I see the trains from Brighton which run up from Clapham Junction to Willesden and Watford (they used to go on to Milton Keynes). They normally have no more passengers on board by the time they get to Watford than would fit in a taxi.

You can also see the Heathrow Connect, which is useful from Heathrow in as far as Ealing but then just duplicates other services on the last lap to Paddington.

A connection between these two, for which the groundworks are pretty much there anyway, would seem to offer a whole range of new opportunities, as well as eliminating some unnecessary train operation. From Brighton and Gatwick through Croydon, Clapham, Kensington, Shepherds Bush, Ealing, and on to Heathrow. This opens up all sorts of useful links like Ealing to Gatwick or Croydon to Heathrow. It is an efficient use of the train, because as those from Gatwick are getting off, those for Heathrow are getting on.

I guess however it is the sort of scheme which will not see the light of day because it does not involve big investment in civil engineering or new trains, so the major contractors and manufacturers who push such schemes along would not be interested.

[PAXboy]

I only use the Watford/Clapham Junction/Gatwick/Brighton service about twice a year but you would be surprised by how busy it is. The northern end between Watford and west London is sometimes standing room only, as the service is just once an hour. It is a fabulous route and the best way for me to get to Gatwick. I am due to go to Brighton in the next ten days and will try to remember to check pax levels.

[airhumberside]

The Watford-Brighton service is to be cut back to Watford-Clapham Junction soon. Some services may get as far as Croydon but not any further south

[Hotel Mode]

You can also see the Heathrow Connect, which is useful from Heathrow in as far as Ealing but then just duplicates other services on the last lap to Paddington.

Thats not entirely correct. Heathrow Connect is really just an extension of the previous Paddington - Hayes stopping service. Without it Hanwell would have no service to London, and Southall and West Ealing only 2 per hour.

[Hotel Mode]

The Watford-Brighton service is to be cut back to Watford-Clapham Junction soon.

But extended in the other direction from Watford to Milton Keynes which gives better northbound connections.

[speedbird10]

Are Qantas still moving their operations from Terminal 4 across to Terminal 3 in January. I understand this was to be around 16 January with the start of their A380 operations 3 days a week on the QF31/32. If not does terminal 4 have gates that have been upgraded for A380 ops yet??

[beamender99]

I tried a QF booking for 26 Jan and it still shows T4

[747-436]

I think the Qantas move to T3 will coincide with the BA move, which is so far unknown.

[Skipness One Echo]

Am I correct in thinking Lufthansa and the other star alliance carriers will move from T2 to T1 on 25th Nov

What's your source for this? There's not enough room for all of the STAR Alliance carriers until the apron works are complete,

[LHR27C]

If not does terminal 4 have gates that have been upgraded for A380 ops yet??

405/406/407 are currently closed and being transformed into two A380 compatible gates.

[Skipness One Echo]

Photos: Airbus A319-131 Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net (http://www.airliners.net/photo/Singapore-Airlines/Airbus-A380-841/1425002/L/)

I thought that the Europier was to be torn down to make way for Heathrow East? Looking at this, it appears that the South side of Pier 3 is PWFU and the Europier is to be extended. Looks out of place in this :

http://www.baa.com/assets/B2CPortal/Static%20Files/LHReast_birdseye.jpg

[NWSRG]

Seems the construction is the satellite pier for Heathrow East. While the main terminal development has been delayed somewhat, a £300M project to build the northern section of the new satellite has begun.

[PAXboy]

The Independent
Heathrow expansion decision delayed By Peter Woodman, PA
Thursday, 4 December 2008
Heathrow expansion decision delayed - UK Politics, UK - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/heathrow-expansion-decision-delayed-1051377.html)
A Government decision on expanding the UK's biggest airport has been been postponed, it was announced today.The Government had committed itself to making an announcement on Heathrow, including a third runway at the west London airport, before the end of this year. But Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon said today that he would not make an announcement until January 2009.

No surprise and I would not expect the decision to be announced in 2009. They might save it for the election run up in 2010, depending who they want to nice/nasty to.

[Seljuk22]

Kingfisher Airlines from 5th Janary BOM-LHR daily A330

BOM-LHR
13.50-17.50(7)/17.55(x67)/18.05(6)
LHR-BOM
20.30-11.00(next day)

[racedo]

Anybody got details of who operates the slots out of LHR as like to know who is operating them.

thanks

[Swedish Steve]

Heathrow slot organisation
Airport Coordination Limited - Heathrow Airport (http://www.acl-uk.org/default.aspx?id=54)

[Skipness One Echo]

If rumour control is true the seasonal Cleveland - London service is operating from Heathrow in 2009 after having been apparently planned from Gatwick as in previous years. It seems that having payed a premium for their initial slots, Continental have gained some more?

Given that these are only seasonal for a low-ish yield route, does anyone know where they got the slots from?

[rutankrd]

Slots currently deployed on COA110 and COA111 Newark rotations!

These get new later schedules COA110 ARRIVES @ 1025 and COA111 moves to a 1205 departure.

Looking at ACL both of these new slots for the Newark rotation may have come from the pool rather than via leasing!

[HeathrowAirport]

Hello All,

Just read on the Times Online that Heathrow Mixed mode will possibly be introduced as early as next year. Aircraft will take different routes from the holding stacks to the new turning points. The points at which aircraft turn to enter their final approach, either from the east or west, will be moved eight miles farther from the airport. The point were aircraft will establish are Woolich to the East on Westerlies and Reading on Easterlies. Longer landing paths are needed to accommodate mixed mode procedures.

This in turn also means Major Airspace Changes are needed within the London TMA and for SIDs out of Gatwick.

New flight paths for Heathrow will bring jets&rsquo; roar to millions - Times Online (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/transport/article5447273.ece)

Regards,

R...

[LHR27C]

According to the FT, LHR will get 3rd runway approval next week: FT.com | Westminster Blog | Heathrow decision next week (http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/2009/01/heathrow-decision-next-week/)

About time too.

[Skipness One Echo]

Only if the Cabinet's serrious reservation are dealt with. I give up.....

[WHBM]

Should the approval come through, which reading the "leak" in The Times looks likely, it will be most important for BAA to get contractors in ASAP and start digging the ground (much of which they own already). And I mean start in days. Get the plant in and start excavating. Doesn't have to be letting the whole contract but just some quite extensive-looking preliminary works.

Once the work starts then a lot of impetus behind the opposition will dissipate. But if they mess about with start-of-work dates or set them in 2011 there continues to be scope for the project to be cancelled, for example if there is a sudden election.

It's not as if it hasn't been designed and re-designed in detail a dozen times by now.

[Seat62K]

Will BAA have the money for it?

[Musket90]

The sale price of Gatwick, Stansted and Edinburgh may help fund it.