Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > British Airways | Executive Club
Reload this Page >

Heathrow Third Runway Approved by Parliament

Heathrow Third Runway Approved by Parliament

Old Jun 6, 2018, 3:45 am
  #46  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London, United Kingdom
Programs: British Airways Gold
Posts: 2,635
Originally Posted by Worcester
Grayling seemed to suggest public funds would be used to compensate locals. Since when should public funds be used to buy a private company
His wording was vague because formally the obligation to pay blight compensation sits with Government, but Heathrow has agreed to take on the compensation obligation, despite not being formally awarded the scheme yet
ajeleonard is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2018, 3:49 am
  #47  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Mostly UK
Programs: Mucci Extraordinaire, Hilton Diamond, BA Gold (ex BD)
Posts: 11,203
Originally Posted by clarkeysntfc
Completely, 100% agree with this. The runway should come with a ban flights on certain routes (MAN, LBA in particular), coming in to effect once HS rail is open.
As long as there's through ticketing I'd agree with this. Co-operation with airlines should be part of any long distance franchise that serves London or passes a major airport (e.g. Birmingham International station has a direct link to the airport). Obviously a rail operator can't force airlines to co-operate but something in their franchise that means they have to provide this facility to airlines if they want it would make sense. A lot of franchises are coming up for renewal in the next few years and this could be made a requirement.

It's been a long time since I've done this but I flew KLM to AMS and onwards on a train to Antwerp. The train was part of my flight ticket and was allocated a KL code so I even got miles on it. The most important thing though was I was protected should either my flight or train was delayed.

I know BA and certain other airlines have something similar with GWR but I don't think the train segments are Avios qualifying as they don't carry the BA code but you are protected in the event of a delay.
dylanks and squawk like this.
layz is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2018, 3:57 am
  #48  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,797
Originally Posted by clarkeysntfc
Completely, 100% agree with this. The runway should come with a ban flights on certain routes (MAN, LBA in particular), coming in to effect once HS rail is open.
Only if they do build a Heathrow section, otherwise you will completely remove the benefit of the Heathrow expansion from the rest of the UK. Noone is going to catch the train to Euston/Kings Cross to then sit on the tube for an hour to get to Heathrow.
tigertanaka, dylanks and squawk like this.
1010101 is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2018, 4:20 am
  #49  
Ambassador: Emirates Airlines
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 18,554
Originally Posted by squawk
IIRC, Eurostar takes 75% of the London-Paris air/rail market. Paris-Brussels on Thalys is 1h25 or so. With HS2 Manchester (Airport/Piccadilly) will only be about 1h10 from London - and even NCL will be 2h20, without further high speed rail construction, which is just about competitive. This also opens up the chance for 'flights' to places like Liverpool, York, etc.
I'd estimate that > 90% of the Manchester to London passengers currently take the train. It's just over 2 hours city to city. Why go to Heathrow if you're not connecting anywhere?

Originally Posted by clarkeysntfc
Completely, 100% agree with this. The runway should come with a ban flights on certain routes (MAN, LBA in particular), coming in to effect once HS rail is open.
That would be good, if it were not for that fact the HS2 will not be going to Heathrow. I don't think it's been officially confirmed it will serve MAN yet.

MAN is pretty well served by other carriers. You'd have to be a bit special to use BA when going east, when you can use EK/EY/TK/QR/SQ/CX/WY etc.

And VS are expanding out to the west. Add these to the US airlines, SQ and Thomas Cook flights, this makes it even less likely people will want to use BA and change at LHR. .
DYKWIA is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2018, 4:22 am
  #50  
Ambassador: Emirates Airlines
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 18,554
Originally Posted by layz
It's been a long time since I've done this but I flew KLM to AMS and onwards on a train to Antwerp. The train was part of my flight ticket and was allocated a KL code so I even got miles on it. The most important thing though was I was protected should either my flight or train was delayed.
KLM also do a bus service. So, I could (if I really wanted to) book a MAN-EIN ticket, and this would be a KLM bus service from AMS-EIN.
squawk likes this.
DYKWIA is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2018, 4:49 am
  #51  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: LON
Programs: BA Gold; LH FTL; IHG Diamond; Marriott Gold; ALL Gold
Posts: 1,758
Originally Posted by Grace B
more sensibly, a new airport on the green belt. How about some new thinking?
Umm, I think that idea was widely discussed with the Thames estuary airport ("Boris Island"), which got killed off precisely because it was in the greenbelt! The local estuary bird life was apparently not keen on it...

Also, re-locating all the existing infrastructure around Heathrow (transport connections, cargo handling, maintenance, hotels etc) to a new airport would be massively more expensive than just building a new strip of tarmac next to the M4.
Deltus is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2018, 4:58 am
  #52  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: All over the place often South Wales and Lake District
Programs: BA Gold for Life
Posts: 4,547
Originally Posted by Grace B
Shouldn't be building any new runways at LHR, what about the impact on local residents?

Perhaps a couple more at LGW, or, more sensibly, a new airport on the green belt. How about some new thinking?
So look after those that bought houses at a lower rate than they would have had the housing not been next to a major airport - I mean who would have thought that there might be a possibility of development at an airpiort?! I'd rather the wetland was protected. Plus how do you get all that traffic across to the east of London? The M25 is a car park as it is. That's before you look at the environmental concerns of the wetlands.
itsmeitisss is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2018, 5:02 am
  #53  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: The North
Posts: 1,835
I may not have been clear enough in my earlier post: it was more a lament on what could have been with a little more joined up thinking. Certainly not encouraging any train users to switch to flying for Manchester to London.

Rather, my logic is: we are now going to be building another runway, for capacity reasons. We could have mitigated at least some of those capacity constraints through high speed rail for many domestic flights, if there was a HSR station at LHR and the political will to insist upon integrated, code-shared/through-ticketed connections as a condition of slots/rail franchises. I dont think we could have avoided a 3rd runway in the medium term, but we could be making much better use of the assets by focusing the limited slots at LHR on international/LH connections and using high speed rail for most domestic connections. Britain has an ideal geography for it, but I fear we lack the kind of joined-up land use and transport planning plus political will that you see in places with world-class transport systems (eg Switzerland).
squawk is online now  
Old Jun 6, 2018, 5:03 am
  #54  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Manchester but from Yorkshire better known as Gods country
Programs: BA Gold, , Sandals plat
Posts: 839
[QUOTE=Grace B;29834629]Shouldn't be building any new runways at LHR, what about the impact on local residents?

Perhaps a couple more at LGW, or, more sensibly, a new airport on the green belt. How about some new thinking?[/QUOTE

I've no sympathy for anybody thats purchased a house in the last 30 years near Heathrow and complains about it. Its the airport thats contributed to the wealth of that area and if the government pulled the plug on Heathrow and started with a clean sheet fit for purpose airport that our nation desperately needs watch the locals bleat as the local economy would tank.
Stez likes this.
PJSMITH0 is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2018, 5:26 am
  #55  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: LH SEN; BA Gold
Posts: 8,400
Originally Posted by Jagboi
Give that it took nearly 30 years for T5 to wind it's way through planning permission and construction, I wonder if a third runway will be in service before 2050?
2050 will be a great year! Third runway in London and BER. ^
WorldLux is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2018, 6:16 am
  #56  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,246
How does a Bostonian who travels BOS-LHR-DEL return without stopping over at LHR contribute to the London and UK economy?
FlyerTalker39574 is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2018, 6:38 am
  #57  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Brexile in ADB
Programs: BA, TK, HHonours, Le Club, Best Western Rewards
Posts: 7,067
Originally Posted by richardwft
How does a Bostonian who travels BOS-LHR-DEL return without stopping over at LHR contribute to the London and UK economy?
My making the LHR - DEL route financially viable
FlyerTalker39574 likes this.
Worcester is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2018, 7:06 am
  #58  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,246
Originally Posted by Worcester
My making the LHR - DEL route financially viable
So the airline gets more revenue, makes more profit, pays more dividends to shareholders and pays more corporation tax?
What about VAT and jet fuel taxes?
Does HAL get more passenger charge revenue and that benefit goes to Spain?
FlyerTalker39574 is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2018, 7:09 am
  #59  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: UK
Programs: BAEC (blue), VS Flying Club (red), Hotels.com (silver!), IHG, Amex, TopCashback, Tesco...
Posts: 83
Originally Posted by richardwft
How does a Bostonian who travels BOS-LHR-DEL return without stopping over at LHR contribute to the London and UK economy?
Not an economist or aviation business type but...

Answer: Stuff like er...well you pay a fare...some of your $ will end up as s... and some of it eventually oils the wheels of the London Stock Exchange etc... Some of it goes straight into payroll and a lot of that will get spent in the vicinity of LHR (ie the UK)... Some of it is buying/leasing the aircraft in the fleet - some of it was/will be made in the UK... Some of it buys the LHR slots ... Some of it buys stuff and services for you to consume on the flight like fuel, food, booze, aircraft parts/maintenance, waste and baggage handling etc which may be bought and/or designed/manufactured in the UK... Some of it ends up with the taxman and (s)he spends some of it in the UK on various services and stuff for the natives...some of that is wages that then gets spent etc etc...

Seriously though, all that is reliant on the airline running the flight because they deem it to be a profitable endeavour over the months/years they see fit to plan ahead. There might well be not enough LHR-DEL-LHR passenger traffic to make it worth the risk so without you and other transfer pax joining the flight... (win win for them if you arrive at LHR on the same airline - you exert the same influence on two routes.) That is the crux of a lot of the argument around LHR expansion versus any other decision as far as I understand it!
FlyerTalker39574 likes this.
hedgehopper is offline  
Old Jun 6, 2018, 8:23 am
  #60  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Brexile in ADB
Programs: BA, TK, HHonours, Le Club, Best Western Rewards
Posts: 7,067
Originally Posted by richardwft


So the airline gets more revenue, makes more profit, pays more dividends to shareholders and pays more corporation tax?
What about VAT and jet fuel taxes?
Does HAL get more passenger charge revenue and that benefit goes to Spain?
Those are certainly good points but research shows that cities with direct flights do more business, and certainly more flights lower the cost of air freight.
Worcester is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.