• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Gatwick second* runway

Status
Not open for further replies.

YorkRailFan

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2023
Messages
2,096
Location
York
Thought it made sense to start this thread after the Heathrow thread. Note that I add * as Gatwick does have two runways, but the distance between the two runways is too close, so they can't be used at the same time, meaning that a new runway would be Gatwick's third runway, but second one that can be used simultaneously with the main runway. The second runway is usually used as a taxiway but is used for departures and arrivals when the main one is closed for repairs.
London Gatwick Airport currently uses its shorter, northern runway primarily as a taxiway but is proposing to develop it into a fully operational departure runway.

Credit: London Gatwick Airport
For decades, London Gatwick Airport (LGW) has operated in the shadow of the capital’s aviation hub, London Heathrow (LHR).

Heathrow has traditionally been favored by business travelers, both for its proximity to the city center—it lies about 12 miles to the west—and for the plethora of connections available through it.

Still, Gatwick has for some time been the world’s busiest single-runway airport. Now it wants to change that reputation by opening a second runway to significantly increase the number of passengers it serves.

Located some 25 miles south of London, Gatwick had a reputation for many years as a “bucket-and-spade” airport, as it mainly catered to short-haul flights for holidaymakers heading to Mediterranean beach resorts. LCC easyJet is the largest operator at Gatwick and nine of its top 10 destinations are European.

However, that flight profile is changing. In August, the airport announced its 50th long-haul route (Ethiopian Airlines to Addis Ababa), although many of these are still leisure-related, notably to Dubai and the Caribbean.

Still regarded by many airlines as London’s second-choice airport—several have used it to get a foothold in London, then switched to Heathrow when rare slots became available—Gatwick handled 46.6 million passengers in 2019 before the pandemic struck.

In 2022, numbers were still significantly below that figure, at 32.2 million, but climbing. The airport told ATW it was unable to give a forecast for the number of passengers it would handle in 2023.

However, given the arrival of British Airways’ lower-cost short-haul subsidiary BA EuroFlyer and the growth of low-cost, long-haul specialist Norse Atlantic Airways, together with the steady increase in long-haul destinations, passenger numbers can be expected to be nearing 2019 levels by the end of this year.

Those numbers have made Gatwick look at ways to increase its throughput. A single runway poses difficulties in the event of any mishap. Like Heathrow, it “runs hot” and anything that puts the runway out of action can have knock-on effects for several hours.

To improve its resilience, Gatwick has filed plans with UK planning authorities for a second runway. The Northern Runway Project involves bringing a standby runway into use for departing flights alongside the existing main runway. The airport is currently limited to using the northern runway as a taxiway or when the main runway is out of use.

The airport declined to speak with ATW, but in a written statement a spokeswoman said that it intends to move the northern runway’s centerline 12 m (39 ft.) to the north to allow greater clearance from the main runway.

The project will also include a host of related works, including reconfiguration of taxiways, pier and stand amendments (including a proposed new pier) and extensions to the airport’s two terminals.

The new runway will have limitations. The existing main runway is 3,316 m long whereas the northern runway is only 2,565 m in length and will not be extended as part of the project.

Partly for this reason, it is planned to accommodate aircraft up to the size of an Airbus A320 or Boeing 737 and will handle departures only.

“If approved, our plans would allow dual operations of our main runway and northern runway, aligning with international safety standards,” the spokeswoman wrote. “All arriving flights would use the existing main runway, as this has an instrument landing system (ILS) whereas the northern runway is a non-instrument runway. Departing flights would be shared between the existing main runway and the northern runway, with the northern runway being used for smaller aircraft.

“There would be controlled dependency between the two runways to enable safe crossing of the northern runway by arrival flights.”

At present, the single runway can operate up to 55 movements per hour, and in 2019 it handled a total of 283,000 movements. The added capacity from the new runway would enable Gatwick to handle 382,000 commercial air traffic movements by 2038, with 75.6 million passengers able to pass through the airport—a major increase compared with current capacity.

While Gatwick would remain short-haul dominated, a second runway would allow more long-haul traffic.

“If you can increase your throughput, which is your bread and butter, that will allow you to accept more long-haul services on the main runway,” said UK-based director at JLS Consulting John Strickland. “It’s definitely complementary.”

He did not believe that developing the second runway at Gatwick is a substitute for greater capacity at Heathrow, as the latter is more focused on long-haul services. It also remains the favored airport for higher-margin business travelers as it has the network structure to offer more connections, whereas Gatwick is more orientated toward point-to-point services.

While environmental considerations surrounding the expansion of any airport have taken a much more significant role in recent years, “I’ve always felt that Gatwick would be much easier [than Heathrow] because it’s in a much more rural setting that reduces the effect of the noise footprint,” Strickland said. Departing Gatwick aircraft climb out over the countryside and the English Channel is a relatively short distance away.

“I think they have less of a challenge than Heathrow and they would have the argument that, with Gatwick’s emphasis on short-haul flights, they have more new-generation aircraft operating that are quieter and more fuel-efficient,” he said.

The proposed project also has the advantage of being largely contained within the airport’s existing boundaries, although there will be some highway adjustments just outside the perimeter.

This is in contrast to Heathrow’s proposed third runway, which would entail razing a village alongside the airport and diverting London’s main orbital motorway, which would have to be moved 150 meters to the west and buried in a tunnel under the new runway, at vast cost in terms of money and disruption.

“As part of our plans we are working with relevant highway authorities to redesign and improve local roads around the airport to mitigate the impact of airport traffic on local road users,” Gatwick said in its statement to ATW.

Gatwick’s proposals have now been submitted to the UK’s Planning Inspectorate. If all goes according to plan, construction could start in 2025 and the new runway being operational by the end of the decade.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
The timeline will also depend on the scale of the now-inevitable environmental challenges to any airport expansion in the UK.

“The planet cannot afford this expansion,” local protest group Communities Against Gatwick Noise and Emissions (CAGNE) told ATW. “We are horrified that a government Planning Inspectorate would agree to a second runway when it impacts the well-being and house value of so many residents, as well as the planet.”

Major environmental lobby groups such as Greenpeace are also unhappy with the planned expansion and the project will almost certainly end up in court.

Despite those concerns, some believe Gatwick makes a compelling case.

“I think from a commercial perspective, it should be a pretty strong business case,” Becrom Basu, a partner in the transport practice at consultants LEK, said. “Gatwick is full and there still seems to be a strong demand for leisure flying, which is mainly what Gatwick is serving. I would expect the numbers would work out well. And compared to the [Heathrow proposal] the CapEx is quite small. If you compare it with the third runway at Heathrow, this is much more practical, in several ways.”

Pre-pandemic, Gatwick’s main runway was running at 90%-plus in terms of utilization.

“Airports are quite innovative in terms of squeezing extra flights but, like Heathrow, it comes at the price of potential disruption,” Basu said regarding the knock-on effects of any problems on the main runway.

Basu said it is difficult to predict what level of opposition the runway plan might trigger.

“Personally, I feel restricting capacity at London airports is a bit of a false economy when it comes to saving the planet,” he said. “People will just fly to [Paris] Charles De Gaulle, Frankfurt or Amsterdam and hub through there. I think forcefully restricting capacity isn’t likely to work. If it goes ahead, there will probably need to be some concessions on some aspects, whether it’s cutting out night flights completely or making some commitment to modal share mix—for example, a minimum number of people coming in by train, or some aspect of travel management around the airport.”

Gatwick has a rail station with a frequent service from central London adjacent to its South Terminal, but most passengers still arrive by motor vehicle.

The airport has measures in place to manage the impact of nighttime noise. The UK government limits the number of flights between 11:30 p.m. and 6 a.m. that the airport is allowed to operate per year. The limits are set at 3,250 over the winter period and 11,200 over the summer, when holiday traffic is greater. Gatwick authorities add that both runways would not be used routinely between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m.

“We understand some people may have reservations about our plans,” the airport wrote. “We are working with local councils and other interested parties to provide as much information as possible about our plans, and provide evidence and reassurances where necessary.”

What impact might Gatwick’s new runway have on the case for Heathrow’s proposed third runway?

“That’s an interesting question. In the medium term, it might be compromised to a certain extent. I think, though, that the case for Heathrow is more about connectivity for the country,” Basu said. “I don’t think Gatwick’s second runway will lead to more connectivity; I don’t think it will be a game-changer. You may get a few extra routes, but business flyers prefer to fly out of Heathrow.

“Gatwick has a natural catchment area south of London, but it’s mainly for leisure flights. Heathrow has a much richer catchment area with the M4 motorway corridor”—along which many high-tech companies have settled—”and central London.”

As we saw when an Emirates A380 got stuck on Gatwick's main runway, the airport went into chaos with most aircraft diverting, another runway would help with issues like this, with aircraft still being able to land, and the airport generally having more capacity.
An Emirates Airbus A380 aircraft became stuck on the runway at London-Gatwick Airport (LGW), temporarily paralyzing traffic.

The incident took place on July 11, 2023, when an Emirates Airbus A380, registered A6-EUN, became stuck on the runway after the aircraft’s nosewheel steering failed upon landing. The double-decker aircraft landed at LGW at 7:51 PM local time (UTC +1). Before landing at one of London’s busiest airports, the aircraft circled for around 30 minutes. However, it did not squawk 7700, the code for a general emergency.

Crews at the airport were forced to tow the aircraft away from the runway, which is the only runway that is used by the airport. Video footage taken by the A380’s tail camera showed emergency crews attending to the stranded aircraft.Several flights were delayed, or pilots were forced to divert to other airports. For example, easyJet flight U28624 from Berlin Brandenburg Airport (BER) to LGW diverted to London Luton Airport (LTN), with the aircraft circling just south of the airport while the Emirates Airbus A380 was on the runway at its original destination.

British Airways flight BA2821 diverted to Amsterdam Schiphol Airport (AMS). The British Airways aircraft, an Airbus A320 registered as G-GATU, landed at LGW at 11:59 PM local time (UTC +1).

The Emirates Airbus A380 left LGW several hours after the incident, landing at Dubai International Airport (DXB) on flight EK10 on July 12, 2023, at 9:24 AM local time (UTC +4). It has remained there ever since.

LGW recently submitted an application to use an already existing runway, known as the Northern Runway, for commercial operations. Currently, the runway is used as a taxiway and is only available when the other runway is out of use.

No flight used the Northern Runway during the incident, resulting in significant delays for arriving and departing traffic.

“The Northern Runway plan will help secure the long-term future of the airport and economic prosperity for thousands of families, businesses, and future generations across the region,” said Stewart Wingate, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Gatwick Airport on July 6, 2023.

 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
26,839
Location
Nottingham
Thought it made sense to start this thread after the Heathrow thread. Note that I add * as Gatwick does have two runways, but the distance between the two runways is too close, so they can't be used at the same time, meaning that a new runway would be Gatwick's third runway, but second one that can be used simultaneously with the main runway. The second runway is usually used as a taxiway but is used for departures and arrivals when the main one is closed for repairs.


As we saw when an Emirates A380 got stuck on Gatwick's main runway, the airport went into chaos with most aircraft diverting, another runway would help with issues like this, with aircraft still being able to land, and the airport generally having more capacity.


If this incident took the main runway out of use as mentioned, why couldn't they then use the other one instead?
 

YorkRailFan

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2023
Messages
2,096
Location
York
If this incident took the main runway out of use as mentioned, why couldn't they then use the other one instead?
Not all aircraft can land on it as it is smaller and the runway was being used to store aircraft that were stranded on the ground.
 

Watershed

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
14,239
Location
UK
Not all aircraft can land on it as it is smaller and the runway was being used to store aircraft that were stranded on the ground.
It also doesn't have an instrument approach, so can only be used in VMC.
 

Ken X

Member
Joined
29 Nov 2021
Messages
247
Location
Horsham
Having lived in Horsham since 1999 and worked at Heathrow and Gatwick until 2020, I take an interest in the development at Gatwick.

To be honest we have no problem with aircraft noise. The noisiest aircraft we hear is the air ambulance which orbits us every now and then as it lands in the park.

I was born under the Heathrow flight path in the early sixties and the noise and vibration was enough to crack the plaster and lathe ceilings in our house. Even in the seventies when we lived around seven miles from Hurn airport in Dorset we could clearly hear the 1-11s ground running.

I was on the roof of the Airport Hotel at Povey Cross roundabout watching the A380 taking off Eastbound just before I retired and it's noise was completely drowned out by the traffic on the A23. It is easy to forget how noisy the older jets were and a darn sight more smokey too.

We hope the extra runway capacity will assist in reducing the stacking of arriving aircraft over Sussex which we regularly see when the airport is busy. One thing to note is that Heathrow closes from around 22:00 until around 05:00 or thereabouts. Gatwick accepts landing aircraft throughout the night so being able to approach and land without stacking which may be a benefit both for noise and pollution.

I am sure other people will have different opinions but for us it's a non-issue. Whether we should be flying so much is a different discussion. :)
 

AlastairFraser

Established Member
Joined
12 Aug 2018
Messages
3,473
Thought it made sense to start this thread after the Heathrow thread. Note that I add * as Gatwick does have two runways, but the distance between the two runways is too close, so they can't be used at the same time, meaning that a new runway would be Gatwick's third runway, but second one that can be used simultaneously with the main runway. The second runway is usually used as a taxiway but is used for departures and arrivals when the main one is closed for repairs.


As we saw when an Emirates A380 got stuck on Gatwick's main runway, the airport went into chaos with most aircraft diverting, another runway would help with issues like this, with aircraft still being able to land, and the airport generally having more capacity.


Why don't they shift the main runway south towards the southern airport boundary, allowing both runways to be used simultaneously?
 

YorkRailFan

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2023
Messages
2,096
Location
York
Why don't they shift the main runway south towards the southern airport boundary, allowing both runways to be used simultaneously?
Likely because it would cause a lot of disruption, the airport would have to be closed for a considerable amount of time.
 

Ken X

Member
Joined
29 Nov 2021
Messages
247
Location
Horsham
Why don't they shift the main runway south towards the southern airport boundary, allowing both runways to be used simultaneously?
The plan, when I last saw it, was to shift the auxiliary runway north to achieve the same result. Having retired in 2020 I am now out of the loop but understand this is still the plan.
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
8,313
Location
West Wiltshire
The plan, when I last saw it, was to shift the auxiliary runway north to achieve the same result. Having retired in 2020 I am now out of the loop but understand this is still the plan.

Plan is to move centreline of north runway about 12m northwards, so basically widen it. It will remain at 2565m long, (main runway is 3316m or 10,879 feet long). Runways currently 45m (148 feet) wide

A number of taxiways would also be altered. The new smaller runway will be used by narrow body planes taking off, thus freeing the existing runway for more landings. Big planes will continue to land and take off on current runway.

I think the centrelines are only 200m (657 feet) apart, but rules for parallel operation needs them spaced slightly further apart.
 

AlastairFraser

Established Member
Joined
12 Aug 2018
Messages
3,473
Plan is to move centreline of north runway about 12m northwards, so basically widen it. It will remain at 2565m long, (main runway is 3316m or 10,879 feet long). Runways currently 45m (148 feet) wide

A number of taxiways would also be altered. The new smaller runway will be used by narrow body planes taking off, thus freeing the existing runway for more landings. Big planes will continue to land and take off on current runway.

I think the centrelines are only 200m (657 feet) apart, but rules for parallel operation needs them spaced slightly further apart.
The plan, when I last saw it, was to shift the auxiliary runway north to achieve the same result. Having retired in 2020 I am now out of the loop but understand this is still the plan.
Ah, so you get the same result.
Makes sense.
Likely because it would cause a lot of disruption, the airport would have to be closed for a considerable amount of time.
Well, if they could use either runway while one is closed for short haul at least and divert long haul to Stanstead temporarily, it wouldn't be awful.
 

YorkRailFan

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2023
Messages
2,096
Location
York
Well, if they could use either runway while one is closed for short haul at least and divert long haul to Stanstead temporarily, it wouldn't be awful.
Gatwick is a more lucrative airport than Stansted, additionally could Stansted handle the amount of A380s Emirates sends to Gatwick?
 

AlastairFraser

Established Member
Joined
12 Aug 2018
Messages
3,473
Gatwick is a more lucrative airport than Stansted, additionally could Stansted handle the amount of A380s Emirates sends to Gatwick?
Well, I'm proposing Gatwick relocates long haul only temporarily.
And on your point about A380s - please explain why Stanstead would be unable to handle A380s?
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
26,839
Location
Nottingham
Well, I'm proposing Gatwick relocates long haul only temporarily.
And on your point about A380s - please explain why Stanstead would be unable to handle A380s?
Do Stansted (spelling!) have stands with multiple airbridges (I believe A380 can use a single )? And could the terminal cope with the numbers?

Heathrow doesn't need a third runway just to cope with maintenance - I assume they do any work during the overnight shutdown. If it avoids building a totally new runway, couldn't Gatwick do the same, only allowing aircraft overnight that could use the shorter runway?
 

YorkRailFan

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2023
Messages
2,096
Location
York
Well, I'm proposing Gatwick relocates long haul only temporarily.
And on your point about A380s - please explain why Stanstead would be unable to handle A380s?
I said so many A380s, Stansted only has 1 A380 gate. Emirates sends multiple A380s a day to Gatwick.
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
8,313
Location
West Wiltshire
Heathrow doesn't need a third runway just to cope with maintenance - I assume they do any work during the overnight shutdown. If it avoids building a totally new runway, couldn't Gatwick do the same, only allowing aircraft overnight that could use the shorter runway?

Part of the problem, at both airports is the British crazy method of overallocating runway usage levels so that in normal times aircraft have to waste fuel queuing to take off and flying around in circles waiting to land. Bit of an environmental folly.

Unfortunately the regulator and Government advisors have been rather weak at protecting the environment in face of commercial greed to put as many movements as possible on each runway.
 

Ted633

Member
Joined
15 Mar 2018
Messages
398
I said so many A380s, Stansted only has 1 A380 gate. Emirates sends multiple A380s a day to Gatwick.
Technically you're not wrong, but Emirates only send 2 A380s a day into Gatwick. (Emirates operates three times a day, the AM flight is a 777)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Gatwick only has the one 380 gate as well. I've only seen them parked up on one stand on pier 6.
 

YorkRailFan

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2023
Messages
2,096
Location
York
Technically you're not wrong, but Emirates only send 2 A380s a day into Gatwick. (Emirates operates three times a day, the AM flight is a 777)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Gatwick only has the one 380 gate as well. I've only seen them parked up on one stand on pier 6.
The North Terminal has 3 gates capable of handling the A380. Additionally, Emirates sends a 777 2x daily to Stansted.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
26,839
Location
Nottingham
Part of the problem, at both airports is the British crazy method of overallocating runway usage levels so that in normal times aircraft have to waste fuel queuing to take off and flying around in circles waiting to land. Bit of an environmental folly.

Unfortunately the regulator and Government advisors have been rather weak at protecting the environment in face of commercial greed to put as many movements as possible on each runway.
I've flown medium haul into Heathrow about eight times since lockdown and never had any circling.

Unless the regulator and government changed their attitude, wouldn't an extra runway just lead to more flights? And if they did change, would the airport be so keen on getting an extra runway?
 

Watershed

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
14,239
Location
UK
I've flown medium haul into Heathrow about eight times since lockdown and never had any circling.
I've flown into LHR 19 times this year and had holds about 40% of the time. Only on a couple of occasions has it been more than 5 or 10 minutes; the worst was actually on a flight from MAN, where it extended the flight time by nearly half!
 

cactustwirly

Established Member
Joined
10 Apr 2013
Messages
7,884
Location
UK
Well, I'm proposing Gatwick relocates long haul only temporarily.
And on your point about A380s - please explain why Stanstead would be unable to handle A380s?
Does Stansted have capacity for it?
Would the airlines agree? I can't see BA agreeing to send planes to Stansted, there is no first class lounge and limited lounge space.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Gatwick is a more lucrative airport than Stansted, additionally could Stansted handle the amount of A380s Emirates sends to Gatwick?
There's more than just A380s, BA have a large presence for their Caribbean and Florida routes, plus Norse too
 

YorkRailFan

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2023
Messages
2,096
Location
York
There's more than just A380s, BA have a large presence for their Caribbean and Florida routes, plus Norse
Gatwick us quickly becoming a great option for carriers that can't operate from Heathrow due to slot constraints.
 

cactustwirly

Established Member
Joined
10 Apr 2013
Messages
7,884
Location
UK
Gatwick us quickly becoming a great option for carriers that can't operate from Heathrow due to slot constraints.

Just wish they'd make the terminals presentable. They feel old and run down, otherwise it's a great airport, really efficient and apart from Heathrow, it's far better than any of the other London airports.
 

Shaw S Hunter

Established Member
Joined
21 Apr 2016
Messages
3,292
Location
Over The Hill
Part of the problem, at both airports is the British crazy method of overallocating runway usage levels so that in normal times aircraft have to waste fuel queuing to take off and flying around in circles waiting to land. Bit of an environmental folly.

Unfortunately the regulator and Government advisors have been rather weak at protecting the environment in face of commercial greed to put as many movements as possible on each runway.
You have obviously not been to the US. At peak times the busiest airports can have 20+ aircraft queuing for take-off with similar airborne congestion for landings leading to much use of holding patterns. As for regulation you are talking about quantity regulation, not an idea that sits well with free-marketeer capitalists. It's definitely not just a British thing!

Gatwick us quickly becoming a great option for carriers that can't operate from Heathrow due to slot constraints.
Good grief, that has long been a factor at Gatwick. Before trans-Atlantic flights were "Open-Skied" only American and United of the US based carriers were allowed in to Heathrow so Gatwick played host to the others ie Continental, Delta, Northwest, TWA, US Airways (and other more historical carriers) and any charters. In terms of slots nothing has really changed but the growth of the global alliances has led some airlines to funnel more traffic through alternative European hubs thereby opening up some slots. And the low-cost carriers have killed off or weakened quite a few flag carriers from Europe's smaller nations freeing up more slots. Heathrow has been operating at current levels for a long time but the carrier mix has changed and the aircraft have grown larger which is why terminal capacity has been expanded without additional runways.
 

dosxuk

Established Member
Joined
2 Jan 2011
Messages
2,108
Part of the problem, at both airports is the British crazy method of overallocating runway usage levels so that in normal times aircraft have to waste fuel queuing to take off and flying around in circles waiting to land. Bit of an environmental folly.

Unfortunately the regulator and Government advisors have been rather weak at protecting the environment in face of commercial greed to put as many movements as possible on each runway.
Most flights into Heathrow that end up having to hold are long-haul. Short-haul from across the UK/EU are co-ordinated so that they don't depart until the correct time for their landing slot, removing the need to hold from the vast majority of flights (barring unexpected disruption that occurs after they have taken off).

Doesn't work for long haul as there is too much variability in flight times / routes / weather to make it realistic to arrive at exactly the right time. The most un-environmentally friendly holding is that done on the early morning long hauls which arrive in the vicinity of Heathrow before the night time landing ban ends. The runways are clear, there's not a queue to land, it's just we want to keep them up in the air until the clock ticks to the right time.
 

AlastairFraser

Established Member
Joined
12 Aug 2018
Messages
3,473
I said so many A380s, Stansted only has 1 A380 gate. Emirates sends multiple A380s a day to Gatwick.
That'll do fine, Emirates flights
don't arrive all at the same time.
Do Stansted (spelling!) have stands with multiple airbridges (I believe A380 can use a single )? And could the terminal cope with the numbers?

Heathrow doesn't need a third runway just to cope with maintenance - I assume they do any work during the overnight shutdown. If it avoids building a totally new runway, couldn't Gatwick do the same, only allowing aircraft overnight that could use the shorter runway?
Potentially, although you'd have to budget more for unsocial hours allowances.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Does Stansted have capacity for it?
Would the airlines agree? I can't see BA agreeing to send planes to Stansted, there is no first class lounge and limited lounge space.
It depends, you could add lounge and terminal spaces if the airlines wanted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top