LCY DEVELOPMENT

[BOEINGBOY1]

has anybody any news regarding a runway extension at lcy! there were some rumours a few weeks back about the dockland area to one side and one end being filled in and a "substancial" extension of the runway to be undertaken next year! apparantly the apron is to also be doubled in size with a view to attracting more biz jets. apparently klm uk are evaluating lcy for their f100's. i pressume this will be for after the redevelopments - biggest ive heard of going into lcy was an empty f70 on an unsuccessful proving flt!

[JuicyLucy]

The runway is staying as it is, but there are plans to extend the apron out over the dock giving 4 more stands.
In addition an extension to the west apron will allow more flexibility in GA parking.

Air France used F70s operated by Air Littoral for about a year

[This message has been edited by JuicyLucy (edited 05 January 2001).]

[Raw Data]

There is also a "turning circle" planned for the 28 threshold that will accomodate up to three aircraft- this might be what BoeingBoy means by an "extension".

Runway length is limited by local ordnance, as is the lack of a separate full-length taxiway- no way you will see either that or a runway extension.

[Knold]

There are other things in the way of extending the runway (had the rumour been correct). LCY is a “city-airport” and I believe that city-airports can’t have longer runways than 1200M. (LCY is 1199M if I’m not misstaken).
So I’ve heard at least.

[richardpw]

Belfast City has a runway of 1829m length

[Sharjah Night Shift]

If the runway were to be made longer than 1200M it would need to be made wider. Under present regulations there would not be enough space on either side before the water to be legal.

[BOEINGBOY1]

and if they reclaim land from where the dock on the terminal side, they will have the land to widen the runway, and build the additional stands! poss even an intersection link further along the runway ??????

[Croqueteer]

I was told at LCY that although the water can be built over, ie on stilts, it cannot be filled in, as it forms part of London's flood plan.

[Random Electron]

And don't forget that the DLR is being extended into the terminal building, great news for those troops living in London for when another UK operator declares LCY as a base!

[karmakomet]

I heard they're putting bouncy castles at each end. :)

[Raw Data]

Croqueteer is correct about the docks being part of the flood plan. The current apron is built over an old drydock, which is also flooded. If you look at the wall adjacent to stand 1, you can see the four blue vent pipes that vent this space. It is the steel structure holding the ramp up over the hole that makes your compass system develop large errors whilst parked there.

The runway length, and the prohibition on a full-length taxiway were part of the original agreement with the local council- apparently it can never be extended. It would be difficult to do in any case, just look at what lies at each end of the runway. I don't think there is any such thing as a "city" airport, the name comes from the location I think.

The new ramp area will go "around the corner" from stand 1, and will include a stub taxiway that will at least make the backtrack a little shorter on 28.

Still the best fun in the UK, with the possible exception of Barra, or Sumburgh on a bad day... ;)

[criscokid]

The plans include the building of a floating parking area for aircraft adjacent to stand 1.

I would suggest you open the streetmap http://www.streetmap.co.uk/streetmap.dll?grid2map?X=542250&Y=180750&zoom=1 in a seperate browser to understand the following better.

The runway is going to be lengthened (I'm not sure by how much) towards the West in the direction of Connaught Bridge.

The primary school which is over the road from the terminal buildings is going to be relocated and this will become the new DLR station. An elevated walkway will also be built to connect to the terminal building.

The current approach road for vehicles to the terminal building is going to be closed with a new entrance being created from Connaught Albert Road.

[criscokid]

Information source: http://194.223.79.93/news/PRArcCurrent.asp?id=94


LCY has submitted a planning application to the London Borough of Newham today - 15th November 2000. The application seeks to increase the number of aircraft parking stands and runway capacity at the airport.

Richard Gooding, Managing Director, London City Airport, said, ”When we achieved planning approval to increase aircraft movements from 36,500 to 73,000 back in 1998, we knew that to make full use of this we might, in due course, need to increase some of our physical capacity.”

He added, “Business has grown substantially over the last three years, so we now need to bring forward this application.“

The 1998 approval forecast a growth in jobs at the airport, and so far, some 1,300 jobs have been created. This new application, if granted, will enable the airport to grow to a throughput of between 3.5 – 4 million passengers by 2010, providing around 2,800 full-time on-site jobs – most of which will continue to be filled by local people.

It is hoped to achieve planning approval next year and to bring this new capacity on stream in 2003/4, at about the time that the Docklands Light Railway extension to the airport opens.

[Raw Data]

criscokid - be very interested to know where you get your info, because my contacts in LCY airport management have always said that the airport is prohibited from lenghtening its' runways under the terms of the lease granted on the land the airport is built on (or should that be water...)

You might be thinking of the ramp extension which is currently being tested for, or the runway turning loop which will ease congestion. I seriously doubt any runway extension will happen (and certainly not in the direction you indicate).

[BOEINGBOY1]

since when has water stopped airport development.? hong kong built on reclaimed land, funchal runway built on stilts, and theres that place in japan about 2miles of the coast that they built a whole island for.

[Evening Star]

RD

Lease terms (which can cover water as well as land, so no problem here) are not that much of a constraint to development. Most commercial leases have a lot of potential for flexibility - at a price. So if the LCY management think the development is worth the cost then expect a variation to the lease.

[ELondonPax]

The planning application (as submitted) does not include any change to the runway. As others have stated, it is for extra stands and a holding point at the east end of the single runway.

Yes - in theory the airport owners could submit a new planning application to build over the water and extend the runway. I don’t see that happening for the following reasons.

The water channel at the east end of the runway is part of the interconnection between the docks and the Thames. There are still shipping navigation rights through this. The new Excel exhibition centre (about 1km west of the runway) will be hosting the boat show - the larger yachts will sail up the Thames and through that navigation channel to Excel. So getting permission to fill that in doesn’t seem likely.

The dock to the north of the runway is now an Olympic size rowing course, and likely to be part of any future London bid to host the Olympics. So getting permission to fill that in doesn’t seem likely.

At the west end of the runway is the recently constructed Connaught Bridge. Yes, in theory you could knock it down and build a new one further west but that would be mighty expensive, especially as it has to be a swing bridge to preserve the shipping navigation rights. There is a further complication that there is a railway tunnel underneath this side of the airport land (it’s shown on the map link in criscokid’s post) which may restrict what weight could be supported over it. (Though the weight restriction is a guess on my part - I have no facts on that one).

[JuicyLucy]

criscokid - look again - the development at the west end is for enlarging the parking area. Gives us somewhere to park all the tech. a/c!!

[Raw Data]

Also, the planning provisions that restrict runway length were primarily for environmental reasons, and would be very difficult to remove.

The other diffculty with extending the runway is that you run into performance problems by reducing the distance to significant obstacles, thus necessitating a steeper climb gradient in the net takeoff flight path.

Besides, what would be the point? The only viable jet at the moment for LCY is the 146/RJ/RJX, and we can get by on most days... ;)