Is Heathrow fit for purpose?

Old Jun 10, 11, 5:57 am
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Somerset/Dorset/Wiltshire borders, England [home].
Programs: BAEC Gold [>20k Lifetime TPs] | Hilton Honors Lifetime Diamond [as is Mrs PtF] | Various Others
Posts: 6,154
Is Heathrow fit for purpose?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/tr...r-purpose.html
Phil the Flyer is offline  
Old Jun 10, 11, 6:05 am
  #2  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Northumberland, UK and outback Australia.
Programs: BA silver
Posts: 3,858
I thought DXB wasn't all cut out to be, slightly overrated and doesn't compare with some of the Asian airports, but that is just me and my humble opinion.

LHR these days does not have the luxury of a blank canvas and have to work within a restricted framework.

However, as for the running of the airport, it could be much better managed... here's looking at you BAA.
Stez is offline  
Old Jun 10, 11, 6:11 am
  #3  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Programs: I am a lowly ant
Posts: 1,678
Dubai is a revolting place. I'll take crappy old LHR over an uncivilised place like Dubai any day.
meester69 is offline  
Old Jun 10, 11, 6:17 am
  #4  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London
Posts: 293
Originally Posted by meester69 View Post
Dubai is a revolting place.


Wont go near the place until they bring their laws and policies towards women, minorities etc up to western standards

Oh, and it appears to be the Chav's current favourite holiday destination...

Heathrow gets a lot of grief, but I have very few issues with it (APD being the main exception )
Professor Yaffle is offline  
Old Jun 10, 11, 6:30 am
  #5  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LCY/DUB
Posts: 2,883
Originally Posted by Professor Yaffle View Post


Wont go near the place until they bring their laws and policies towards women, minorities etc up to western standards
The fact its not actually in or anywhere near the "west" might play in part in that not being remotely likely....!
Kgmm77 is offline  
Old Jun 10, 11, 6:31 am
  #6  
Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Programs: BA Gold, Mucci
Posts: 8,504
Assuming the third runway is never built will Heathrow operate longer hours to accomodate.

It was suggested in the atricle but is it ever likely to happen?
PETER01 is offline  
Old Jun 10, 11, 6:33 am
  #7  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: London
Programs: Mucci (Scirocco Sash), BAEC Gold plus various other pleb level air and hotel programmes
Posts: 732
This article is demented! A quote from Paul Griffiths, head of Dubai Airports and ex-Gatwick:

"the West’s obsession with democracy does have a downside — it means there is no visionary, long-term strategy in a society that changes government every four to five years"

Yes, sily us and out "obsession" with democracy, what on earth are we playing at...

Not to mention the usual lazy journo approach of "Right, almost summer, better bash out a piece about how terrible Heathrow is".

/ rant off
daftboy is offline  
Old Jun 10, 11, 6:50 am
  #8  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: JER
Programs: BA Gold/OWE, several MUCCI, and assorted Pensions!
Posts: 28,815
"Is Heathrow fit for purpose?". It certainly was, back in the 60's. I doubt the original planners ever envisaged the traffic growth over the subsequent 50 years, and of course there is virtually no way LHR could 'expand'. DXB, like so many other 'lucky airports' has space to play with.

This is Dubai International Airport. Terminal 3, where I am standing, covers 370 acres and has 82 moving walkways, 97 escalators and 180 check-in counters. It is the world’s largest air terminal, twice the size of our much-vaunted Terminal 5.
And how does DXB T1 compare with LHR T3? Typical selected facts to support a pre-prepared argument. The totality of LHR compared with the totality of DXB is ... ?

And the totality of London Airport is LHR + LGW + LTN + STN. Not ideal, but short of bulldozing large swathes of extant buildings to the West of London [not a bad cause in itself] there's not a realistic option. "Estuary Airport" is, IMO, a flawed and doomed white elephant concept that would cost £billions and create a surface infrastructure problem that would overshadow anything we've seen at LHR. [That's assuming the Nimbys, tree-huggers and newt-protectors ever let it happen].
T8191 is offline  
Old Jun 10, 11, 6:56 am
  #9  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 10,679
Heathrow is fit for purpose.

The problems starts when many airlines use LHR as a hub so in reality many more people travel through heathrow that dont actually need to. Now that BA is owned by the Spainish maybe its better they built a new hub in Spain, pleanty of very cheap land and then not have the issues that we have at Heathrow. Spain wont get the extreme cold weather as London does so when it snows not as many people will get hurt and have difficulties.
origin is offline  
Old Jun 10, 11, 6:58 am
  #10  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West London & 8th Arrondissement
Programs: BA Silver, AF Ivory
Posts: 1,947
This sloppy piece makes me wonder if the Telegraph is fit for the purpose.
dnajockey is offline  
Old Jun 10, 11, 7:07 am
  #11  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 164
DO I think Heathrow is fit for purpose? Yes. Do others? Possibly. Does my opinion or another person in the airport matter a lot? Nope.

So on that note I thank you Mr Telegraph for providing me some unentertaining and unimportant news to make me feel so much better this Monday when I am transiting from GLA-LHR-SFO. That there makes heathrow fit for purpose in my honest opinion.

It is big but at least the terminals you can get around from end to the other quicker than in Dubai. That said do I think refinement in the management and processes at heathrow is necessary? Yes I do.

I am of the belief that other airports in the area should be dealing with more traffic and have it spread a bit finer. Domestic flights (in majority cases) should be using LCY, Luton and Stansted. LHR and LGW should be mainly for international journeys. LGW possibly intra europe and LHR long haul.

I from an airline point of view do not see the value in establishing at LHR now. Or perhaps BA, BD and other airlines should use the regionals more. If TC, EK etc can achieve it the British flag carrier should. That would relieve tension at LHR and make T5 n even more thrilling experience.
C-130 is offline  
Old Jun 10, 11, 8:06 am
  #12  
Ambassador: Emirates Airlines
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 13,967
Originally Posted by Professor Yaffle View Post


Wont go near the place until they bring their laws and policies towards women, minorities etc up to western standards

Oh, and it appears to be the Chav's current favourite holiday destination...
If you won't go there, how do you know it's full of Chavs?
DYKWIA is online now  
Old Jun 10, 11, 8:27 am
  #13  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Programs: Sir CT-UK - Streaker pour les autres.
Posts: 5,463
Originally Posted by DYKWIA View Post
If you won't go there, how do you know it's full of Chavs?
Because the Daily Mail has pictures of the Rooney clan there every second week

Like anywhere it can have chavs there and a lot more, I love the place now and you can easliy avoid any chavs with cash.
CT-UK is offline  
Old Jun 10, 11, 11:05 am
  #14  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,774
Am I missing something, did anyone expect the people dependant on the success of Dubai over LHR to say anything else? "oh yes, LHR is wonderful. T5 really beats us hands down...." would have been a bit of career limiter for either of them.
adrianjc32 is offline  
Old Jun 10, 11, 11:17 am
  #15  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 40,073
Originally Posted by Stez View Post
I thought DXB wasn't all cut out to be, slightly overrated and doesn't compare with some of the Asian airports, but that is just me and my humble opinion.

LHR these days does not have the luxury of a blank canvas and have to work within a restricted framework.

However, as for the running of the airport, it could be much better managed... here's looking at you BAA.

I find DXB one of the better airports for originating and for connecting at and miles ahead of LHR ( which I do my best to avoid ) plus the 1st/business annexe for check in at T3 is excellent. Singapore pretty much is the airport which I like most for connecting though rarely connect there these days

That LHR is constricted by position is irrelevent; Heathrow (ime) is better than connecting in the USA but still a poor airport
Dave Noble is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread