LHR 3rd runway argument won't go away

Status
Not open for further replies.

SwindonPkwy

Member
Joined
2 Aug 2011
Messages
273
Location
Swindon.
With 70 business leaders writing to the Daily Telegraph urging the government to rethink its position, the 3rd runway argument just isn't going to go away.

Personally, I think the government's dichotomy of policies is increasingly untenable. On the one hand they are, quite rightly, investing billions in Crossrail and favour the linking of HS2 with LHR. On the other hand, they have ruled out the 3rd runway and instead are backing Boris' vanity project in the Thames.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Schnellzug

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2011
Messages
2,926
Location
Evercreech Junction
I really think that strategy ought to be directed towards decentralisation; developing regional airports (Birmingham, Newcastle, Glasgow etc, not just Manchester) rather then endlessly pouring everything into London Heathrow, or indeed any other Prestige project for some completely new Airport in or in the vicinity of London.
 

starrymarkb

Established Member
Joined
4 Aug 2009
Messages
5,986
Location
Exeter
I think the reason for supporting Boris's Airport is more to do with Conservative Party politics then transport policy. The PM desperately wants Boris to remain mayor of London, because if he loses to Ken then there is a good chance that he'll turn his attention towards No 10 and a leadership contest. Hence supporting Boris's campaign. Of course if Boris wins the election then don't expect the airport to be built - central government will find an excuse and the PM is safe for a few more years.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
24,493
Location
UK
With the new air taxes, I am fairly certain we'll begin to see a stabilisation, or even drop, in flights in the coming years.
 

Clip

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,616
it would be a good idea if residents of Harmondsworth and Sipson would sue these idiots for blighting their properties
Most of Sipson is owned by BAA nowadays isnt it? Cant see them suing themselves.


The MP for the Heathrow area was on Radio 4 yesterday and he made a good point of actually doing more to join up the other London regional airports with decent rail links(HS) so that more flights could be had at these locations and make the whole outer ring of airports an interconnecting hub in their own right.In other words the internal/close european flights going to Luton/Stnastead and then a quick connection to Heathrow for the international flight your taking.

Would probably be cheaper then an airport island and the upgrade of a 3rd runway too.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
24,493
Location
UK
Using other airports more efficiently is fine, and very logical.

However, airports are in competition with each other (especially given they're not all BAA owned now) and are fighting each other to secure profitable routes. This means there's a desire to maximise usage of Heathrow, possibly beyond what it was designed for or can cope with.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
11,761
Without a return to public ownership of the airpots surrounding London they will not have any sane attempts at capacity increases elsewhere, everything will have to be at Heathrow.

If the new airport was to be built further out at the originally proposed Shivering Sand and if they were willing to pay for it to be done properly it would be a very good thing for London, as it is the proposal is half baked on the Isle of Grain with all the attendent difficulties.
 

kylemore

Member
Joined
28 Aug 2010
Messages
913
I think the reason for supporting Boris's Airport is more to do with Conservative Party politics then transport policy. The PM desperately wants Boris to remain mayor of London, because if he loses to Ken then there is a good chance that he'll turn his attention towards No 10 and a leadership contest. Hence supporting Boris's campaign. Of course if Boris wins the election then don't expect the airport to be built - central government will find an excuse and the PM is safe for a few more years.
Too many skeletons in old Boris's cupboard for that I'm afraid! I think they just want to do whatever it takes to keep out Red(aye right!!) Ken.:lol:
 

Clip

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,616
Its quite an odd one Heathrow anyway - it doesnt go to as many destinations as Gatwick does... always wondered why that was..
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
8,397
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Not to mention over all of these, that LHR Runway 3 would be privately finded entirely by BAA... But they won't keep the money there for ever if the goverment ***s them around...
 

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
8,767
Its quite an odd one Heathrow anyway - it doesnt go to as many destinations as Gatwick does... always wondered why that was..
(A possible anecdote which can be used in a pub in Manchester).
Even Manchester has more destinations than Heathrow.

Of course, Manchester and Gatwick have more destinations because they serve a lot of minor places infrequently, whereas Heathrow serves major destinations very frequently so has more passengers per destination, and more passengers overall.

The main airports 'competing' with Heathrow, e.g. AMS, CDG, FRA, are all in the EU anyway so I wouldn't really call them competition, well any more than LHR and MAN compete with each other. It is considered OK for MAN to take passengers away from LHR, after all.
 
Last edited:

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,436
Location
Glasgow
Number of destinations isn’t particularly relevant to an airport’s overall importance; it’s more about the volumes and value of throughput (i.e. passengers and cargo). Heathrow is a “high value” airport, whereas Luton and Stansted are not. Note how Heathrow only has one real ‘low cost airline’ – a relatively small Spanish airline rather than the giants of easyJet and Ryanair. The ‘London airports’ combined probably already have enough runway/terminal capacity to accommodate the demand for air traffic and relieve Heathrow, but the major world airlines congregate at Heathrow and it would take major players like BA and Virgin to switch flights to other airports to change this trend. Theoretically, you could make Heathrow a quieter airport by making it for Oneworld alliance members only (BA and partners) and then moving one airline alliance (e.g Skyteam) to Gatwick, another one (e.g. Star Alliance) to Stansted, Virgin could go to Manston (!), other non-aligned carriers to Luton, smaller players at an expanded Southend or Oxford. All linked by high-speed rail.

It’s never going to happen though as Heathrow is very much a connecting hub as well an airport for London. Connecting passengers passing through Heathrow from and to other countries are not affected by UK passenger air taxes. BA and partners want to expand at Heathrow and make the airport as efficient as possible to compete with state-of-the-art transfer hubs in Europe and the Middle East such as Amsterdam, Munich, Zurich, Frankfurt and Dubai - (Paris CDG is also major competition, but I’d struggle to call it efficient). Passengers from the rest of the UK travelling on medium and long-haul routes (particularly from the regions) are increasingly ditching the “Heathrow transfer” and going via mainland Europe or the Middle East – this harms BA and UK plc as the revenue goes to a foreign airline and a foreign hub airport. Short-haul passengers from the regions are just flying direct to their destination from their local airport with Ryanair/easyJet/Flybe e.t.c, rather than flying via a London airport.
 

starrymarkb

Established Member
Joined
4 Aug 2009
Messages
5,986
Location
Exeter
Its quite an odd one Heathrow anyway - it doesnt go to as many destinations as Gatwick does... always wondered why that was..
Frequency - I believe its about 26 departures per day to New York alone, Most routes from Heathrow run at least daily. But with airports like Gatwick there are more weekly charter flights to holiday destinations.
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,436
Location
Glasgow
Its quite an odd one Heathrow anyway - it doesnt go to as many destinations as Gatwick does... always wondered why that was..
Charter flights with one or two flights a week to "beach resorts" increase the numbers of destinations significantly, hence why Manchester and Gatwick have an equal or greater amount of destinations than Heathrow.
 

starrymarkb

Established Member
Joined
4 Aug 2009
Messages
5,986
Location
Exeter
Passengers from the rest of the UK travelling on medium and long-haul (particularly from the regions) are increasingly ditching the “Heathrow transfer” and going via mainland Europe or the Middle East – this harms BA and UK plc as the revenue goes to a foreign airline and a foreign hub airport.
As shown by the number of UK airports linked to Amsterdam by KLM Mainline and Cityhopper) - Bristol for example has 3 Fokker 70s per day (and Cardiff just up the road is also served)

Air France now have codeshares on all Flybe flights to Paris (and Flybe have been moved into the main Air France terminal to help feed AF/Skyteam long haul) - ironically Flybe is 15% owned by IAG (BA/IB)
 

Clip

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,616
, Virgin could go to Manston (!),.

Im sure I read somewhere that he liuked the idea but again the NIMBYs in Thanet dont want a working airport let alone a cross-atlantic service there..

Id be suprised if Manston survived much longer as anything as even FlyBe have pulled out.
 

Deerfold

Established Member
Joined
26 Nov 2009
Messages
10,548
Location
Yorkshire
Charter flights with one or two flights a week to "beach resorts" increase the numbers of destinations significantly, hence why Manchester and Gatwick have an equal or greater amount of destinations than Heathrow.
Do they count the 2 flights a year Jet2 do to New York from Manchester?
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,436
Location
Glasgow
Possibly, although I suspect they will count the more frequent American Airlines and Delta Airlines services to JFK and the Continental Airlines services to Newark ;) (Together comes to about 20fpw)
United Airlines now. :) Virtually the same thing though.
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,436
Location
Glasgow
Whatever... Don't work there any more so not as clued up. But yeah, MAN has plenty of services to New York.
It has decreased quite a bit though, it's just AA to JFK and United to Newark, Delta isn't operating to JFK anymore.

Aer Lingus are too tempting with their cheap deals via Dublin/Shannon.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
8,397
Location
Somewhere, not in London
It has decreased quite a bit though, it's just AA to JFK and United to Newark, Delta isn't operating to JFK anymore.

Aer Lingus are too tempting with their cheap deals via Dublin/Shannon.
The direct not changing route thing is very tempting for the likes of me that actually want to get there with some level of comfort though. Although come September I'd just fly from Heathrow or Gatwick anyway.
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,436
Location
Glasgow
The direct not changing route thing is very tempting for the likes of me that actually want to get there with some level of comfort though. Although come September I'd just fly from Heathrow or Gatwick anyway.
Yeah, but the thought of crossing the Atlantic on a knackered AA 757 isn't too appealing to some regular travellers. Not exactly the highest quality airline product out there.

You'll find that's it's often significantly cheaper (we're talking hundreds here) to go via somewhere even from Heathrow/Gatwick and Ireland is excellent for the US as it's in the right direction and the airports offer US immigration pre-clearance, which can save literally hours of queuing time on arrival.
 

Heinz57

Member
Joined
4 Aug 2009
Messages
646
Location
Ilkeston
There's just one departure to JFK from MAN now, by American. And one to Newark by United (Continental)

Frequency - I believe its about 26 departures per day to New York alone
Yep 26. 17 of them are to JFK, the remaining 9 are to Newark.

Served by BA, American, Virgin, Delta and United (Continental).

Just going back to the 3rd runway, if I may, personaly I'm for the 3rd runway and 6th terminal expansion plans. I think that'll be the better option.
I don't get Mr Johnson's idea 'To save the planet I'm proposing to spend billions of pounds we don't have to build a wopping big 4 runway airport on recalimed land in the themes estury. Which will have more flights than Heathrow. An airport for London, which'll be nowhere near London'

Basicaly making it all somebody elses problem.
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,436
Location
Glasgow
The environment in one way actually suffers by not building a third runway, as aircraft have to circle in a holding pattern waiting to land at the existing choked runways, burning fuel, which is unnecessary air/noise pollution and extremely costly in terms of what fuel now costs.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
11,761
Is it possible to find a breakdown of London Airport flights (from each airport) to each UK and International Destination?
 

SwindonPkwy

Member
Joined
2 Aug 2011
Messages
273
Location
Swindon.
WestCoast said:
The environment in one way actually suffers by not building a third runway, as aircraft have to circle in a holding pattern waiting to land at the existing choked runways, burning fuel, which is unnecessary air/noise pollution and extremely costly in terms of what fuel now costs.
Also, queueing on the ground for a takeoff slot.

I really don't think that linking London's airports by high speed rail will work. There simply isn't enough synergy between LHR, LGW and STN, especially given that BAA nolonger owns LGW and is being forced to sell STN.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top