Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5789392/

Topic: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: cosyr
Posted 2013-06-14 07:07:11 and read 14307 times.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/todayi...ll-be-the-queens-terminal/2422557/

Does this mean that the replacement for terminal 1 will be this new Terminal 2? If so is there a future Terminal 1 in the master plan of LHR? Either way, a nice tribute.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: GCT64
Posted 2013-06-14 07:20:01 and read 14250 times.

Quoting cosyr (Thread starter):
Does this mean that the replacement for terminal 1 will be this new Terminal 2?

Yes - as far we can tell, the future LHR will have Terminals 2 (The Queen's Terminal),3,4 & 5 - no Terminal 1 as that is being absorbed into the new T2.

The 2013 BAA T2 brochure says: "Terminal 2 will be home to 23 Star Alliance member airlines as well as Aer Lingus, Virgin Atlantic Little Red and Germanwings."

Pretty much everything you could want to know about the new T2 is at:
http://www.heathrowairport.com/about...athrow/heathrow%27s-new-terminal-2

[sorted out link]

[Edited 2013-06-14 07:37:12]

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: slinky09
Posted 2013-06-14 07:24:41 and read 14200 times.

IIRC the Heathrow masterplan envisages T1 coming down and T2 having additional piers, similar to T5 - at one time it was called Heathrow East rather than T2 / T1 etc. If anyone has a link to the latest masterplan do share?

As for calling T2 the Queen's Terminal, I think that's fab.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: ImperialAero
Posted 2013-06-14 07:42:32 and read 14037 times.

I think that calling it the Queen's Terminal is pretty bloody depressing, a massive missed opportunity, and a totally damning statement about all that is wrong and backward about current day Britain to be honest.

Instead of honoring someone who has made a real contribution to Aviation / London / GB (Frank Whittle / Churchill / Brunel / Darwin / Newton / Nelson anyone?) they go and do this, honoring someone who appears in public every now and then, waves a bit, who ensures that the governance of one of the most important democracies in the world is rooted in the dark ages, and who generally lives off the taxpayers pounds, and more importantly who isn't even dead yet!

At least it wasn't called Thatcher's Terminal which is possibly the only thing I can imagine that would be worse.

Rant over.

Edit: On reflection, my preferred name would be the Oliver Cromwell Terminal...oh for the good old days  

[Edited 2013-06-14 07:59:26]

[Edited 2013-06-14 08:00:17]

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: sierra3tango
Posted 2013-06-14 07:47:49 and read 13974 times.

Quoting ImperialAero (Reply 3):
I think that calling it the Queen's Terminal is pretty bloody depressing, a massive missed opportunity, and a totally damning statement about all that is wrong and backward about current day Britain to be honest.

Well she's your Queen as well (assuming your flag is representative, mine isn't)

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: Revelation
Posted 2013-06-14 07:50:04 and read 13920 times.

Quoting ImperialAero (Reply 3):
At least it wasn't called Thatcher's Terminal which is possibly the only thing I can imagine that would be worse.

How about "Tesco Terminal"?   

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: ImperialAero
Posted 2013-06-14 07:58:18 and read 13849 times.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 5):
How about "Tesco Terminal"?   

Yup, still better!!

Quoting sierra3tango (Reply 4):
Well she's your Queen as well (assuming your flag is representative, mine isn't)

Temporarily geographically accurate, proudly British, but an evangelical Republican.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: shamrock350
Posted 2013-06-14 08:01:04 and read 13813 times.

I think naming terminals after people is a silly idea usually but I support this choice, it's a nice nod to the history of LHR and T2 in particular as I'm sure many people have fond memories of The Queens Building which unfortunately had to go in order to develop the new T2 and surrounding area.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: sierra3tango
Posted 2013-06-14 08:01:38 and read 13813 times.

Quoting ImperialAero (Reply 6):
Temporarily geographically accurate, proudly British, but an evangelical Republican.

??? then why have the word 'imperial' in your tag, I'm a proud (though not republican) Brit too

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: N62NA
Posted 2013-06-14 08:02:18 and read 13800 times.

Looks like it will be quite a nice terminal.

I haven't been following this project so if anyone knows the answer it would be appreciated: Did the airlines that were using the old Terminal 2 have to cut back on the number of flights into LHR while they were (presumably) relocated to the other terminals at LHR?

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: ImperialAero
Posted 2013-06-14 08:05:42 and read 13787 times.

Quoting sierra3tango (Reply 8):
??? then why have the word 'imperial' in your tag, I'm a proud (though not republican) Brit too

...also proudly an alumni of Imperial College London, producing the world's finest Engineers and Scientists since 1907

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: GCT64
Posted 2013-06-14 08:09:38 and read 13760 times.

Quoting N62NA (Reply 9):
Did the airlines that were using the old Terminal 2 have to cut back on the number of flights into LHR while they were (presumably) relocated to the other terminals at LHR?

No, because the moves were all tied into the introduction of extra terminal capacity elsewhere in LHR (primarily in T5). LH, KL, AF etc. all kept all their LHR slots (in fact LH have substantially increased theirs since the move from T2).

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: sierra3tango
Posted 2013-06-14 08:11:59 and read 13740 times.

Quoting N62NA (Reply 9):
haven't been following this project so if anyone knows the answer it would be appreciated: Did the airlines that were using the old Terminal 2 have to cut back on the number of flights into LHR while they were (presumably) relocated to the other terminals at LHR?

In very simple terms

Think it is correct to state that T5 opened so BA left of T1 & T4 and airlines using T2 were shuffled about into T1 / T3 / T4 to clear out T2.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: AirbusA6
Posted 2013-06-14 08:21:26 and read 13632 times.

Quoting GCT64 (Reply 1):
The 2013 BAA T2 brochure says: "Terminal 2 will be home to 23 Star Alliance member airlines as well as Aer Lingus, Virgin Atlantic Little Red and Germanwings."

These airlines swapping alliances must a nightmare for airport planners,

I presume all the US flights will move to the AA terminal T3.

And does it make sense for Virgin Atlantic Little Red to be in T2, Virgin Atlantic in T3 and Delta in T4, the Skyteam terminal?

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: sierra3tango
Posted 2013-06-14 08:40:06 and read 13512 times.

Thinking about it wasn't there always a building at LHR called the 'Queens Building'; seem to remember standing on top of it to watch Concorde's inauguration flight to BAH on a cold January day in 1976

Was that the building that disappeared down a large hole caused by ?Austrian? mining methodology when the Paddington link was being built?

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: ThomasCook
Posted 2013-06-14 08:41:48 and read 13502 times.

Totally stupid concept to name a terminal, especially when the other terminals aren't named. They have now created a situation where by passengers are going to be confused and looking for both T2 and 'The Queen's Terminal'.

I also concur that if they are naming it after anybody, it should not be who they've gone for.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: yyz717
Posted 2013-06-14 09:15:11 and read 13341 times.

Quoting ThomasCook (Reply 15):
They have now created a situation where by passengers are going to be confused and looking for both T2 and 'The Queen's Terminal'.

Good point. The naming should be consistent. All numbers, or letters, or names. Not a mixture.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: slinky09
Posted 2013-06-14 09:36:19 and read 13269 times.

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 13):
I presume all the US flights will move to the AA terminal T3.

Flights to the US will depart from all terminals as before, Skyteam from T4 (unless DL moves to T3), UA from T2 (Star Alliance), BA from T5, AA from T3 ... so no. But you're right, US is the next odd one out, when it merges with AA one would assume it'll join AA in T3 whereas as a *A airline it's slated to move to T2.

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 13):
And does it make sense for Virgin Atlantic Little Red to be in T2, Virgin Atlantic in T3 and Delta in T4, the Skyteam terminal?

Not really but it's more complex than that - T3 doesn't have domestic arrivals so Little Red is at T2 where domestic arrivals was planned because BMI were to be located there. As for T3, VS has put huge investment into T3 so won't be going anywhere - also it is unaligned from an alliance perspective so there's no reason for it to move.

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 13):
These airlines swapping alliances must a nightmare for airport planners,

You're right there!

Quoting ThomasCook (Reply 15):
They have now created a situation where by passengers are going to be confused and looking for both T2 and 'The Queen's Terminal'.

Or maybe they'll be looking for 'T2 The Queen's Terminal' so life might be easier.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 16):
Good point. The naming should be consistent. All numbers, or letters, or names. Not a mixture.

Just like LAX then ... T1, T2, T3, Tom Bradley International Terminal, etc.   

[Edited 2013-06-14 09:37:57]

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: brilondon
Posted 2013-06-14 10:03:17 and read 13124 times.

Quoting ThomasCook (Reply 15):
Totally stupid concept to name a terminal, especially when the other terminals aren't named. They have now created a situation where by passengers are going to be confused and looking for both T2 and 'The Queen's Terminal'.

Why would you be confused, if they call it "T2, the Queen's Terminal", that would not be confusing to me.

On a broader scale, why is it every time something new and different comes up there is so much negativity towards progress in these discussions. They don't just pull these things out of their butts you know. Now it is going to be called the Queen's Terminal not the Queen Elizabeth II Terminal, so I would assume but not completely sure that it would not be a tribute to the rock group Queen or Elizabeth I, or Victoria or Anne or any other Queen they have had in history.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: etihadairways
Posted 2013-06-14 13:28:50 and read 12386 times.

That's such an Amazing Name .. The Queen Rocks Loves Her !   

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: eljas
Posted 2013-06-14 14:45:47 and read 11434 times.

Quoting GCT64 (Reply 1):
The 2013 BAA T2 brochure says: "Terminal 2 will be home to 23 Star Alliance member airlines as well as Aer Lingus, Virgin Atlantic Little Red and Germanwings."
Quoting slinky09 (Reply 17):
Not really but it's more complex than that - T3 doesn't have domestic arrivals so Little Red is at T2 where domestic arrivals was planned because BMI were to be located there. As for T3, VS has put huge investment into T3 so won't be going anywhere - also it is unaligned from an alliance perspective so there's no reason for it to move.

Surely VS would be keen to have the domestic in T3, seeing as the whole point of little red is to boost the long haul flights by providing connecting passengers (and poach BA traffic, which all connects straight into T5). How much would it cost BAA / VS to set up domestic facilities in T3?

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 13):
These airlines swapping alliances must a nightmare for airport planners,

They must have to rethink several times a year... A massive headache for them is BA acquiring BD, making T5 much too small for IAG. Having 1 airline spread over 3 terminals is a pain for everybody. Time for T5 piers D and E perhaps?

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: eicvd
Posted 2013-06-14 15:17:01 and read 11057 times.

I'm almost certain I read somewhere that VS will be making Terminal 2 their new home.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: vhtje
Posted 2013-06-14 16:09:26 and read 10579 times.

Quoting slinky09 (Reply 17):
Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 13):
I presume all the US flights will move to the AA terminal T3.

Flights to the US will depart from all terminals as before,

I think he meant US Air flights will move to T3 once US and AA merge.

I don't think for a moment he was suggesting that all US carriers would be housed in Terminal 3.  

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: pegasus1
Posted 2013-06-14 16:51:44 and read 10217 times.

Quoting ImperialAero (Reply 10):
...also proudly an alumni of Imperial College London

An alumnus. Alumni is the plural form  

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: BRITANNIA25
Posted 2013-06-15 03:01:50 and read 7174 times.

Imperial Aero. Here here! I salute you and totally agree with you in every way!

The "Queens" terminal - what a joke! Terminal 2 is just fine.

 

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: teme82
Posted 2013-06-15 03:42:00 and read 7148 times.

How about Freddie Mercury's terminal?? He worked at LHR before The Queen.  

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: v jet
Posted 2013-06-15 04:06:18 and read 6955 times.

God Save Our Gracious Queen! Very appropriate name for the terminal.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: airbazar
Posted 2013-06-15 04:43:17 and read 6958 times.

But which Queen? See my point? They didn't name it after A queen. I kinda like it.
I have no problem with naming terminals. After all every single airplane also has a name and it's not like it confuses passengers. Some are even named after cities and I've never hear of anyone ending up in the wrong city because of the name of the plane  A lot of airports name their terminals but the maps usually only show the numbering and lettering rather than the name. One of the most famous? The Trans World Flight Center at JFK, commonly known as Terminal 5. Some of you guys are way too serious  

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: MANfan
Posted 2013-06-15 04:46:06 and read 6929 times.

For consistency then, can we rename BA's Terminal 5 hub at LHR, 'King's Terminal'.

Those who know about BA's history will understand why, as it would also be a fitting tribute !

MANfan

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: babybus
Posted 2013-06-15 05:33:19 and read 6606 times.

Quoting ImperialAero (Reply 3):
I think that calling it the Queen's Terminal is pretty bloody depressing, a massive missed opportunity, and a totally damning statement about all that is wrong and backward about current day Britain to be honest.

I agree with you. I'm a fan of the Queen but naming this the Queen Terminal is wrong. That's the kind of thing that happens in other countries not UK.

We need to make the terminal naming system as simple as possible because not everyone using it has English as their first language and don't use our letters or numbers. Think of the Chinese or Arabs.

A simple Terminal 1 and Terminal 2 (old T5) should be enough.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: brilondon
Posted 2013-06-15 05:55:16 and read 6436 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 27):
But which Queen? See my point? They didn't name it after A queen. I kinda like it.
I have no problem with naming terminals. After all every single airplane also has a name and it's not like it confuses passengers. Some are even named after cities and I've never hear of anyone ending up in the wrong city because of the name of the plane  A lot of airports name their terminals but the maps usually only show the numbering and lettering rather than the name. One of the most famous? The Trans World Flight Center at JFK, commonly known as Terminal 5. Some of you guys are way too serious  

I completely agree with what you have said, including the fact that they did not mention which queen they meant if they meant a particulate queen. Mary I, Elizabeth I, Anne, Queen Victoria even more of a bizarre twist, a foreign queen, ie. Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands. Really don't know if they even meant the future queen, the Duchess of Cambridge, so as you can see, the Queen's terminal could really be named after any of the above mentioned queens and that doesn't include the spouses of the Kings such as the late Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother. I still think it was after the rock band myself, but that is just my musical side coming out.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: seansasLCY
Posted 2013-06-15 06:04:50 and read 6365 times.

I think people are looking too much into this. The old terminal 2 was called the Queen's building and people seemed to manage just fine.

This just generates some PR for Heathrow and everyone sees they have invested X amount in a new terminal.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: peterinlisbon
Posted 2013-06-15 06:08:37 and read 6325 times.

It's nice that she get's her own terminal, but it's a shame she'll never use it even if they do put in a Corgi check-in point and a hatstand. She flies on her own fleet of business jets paid for by everyone else in the country from Northolt airport. Maybe, just to really get into the royal spirit of things, we should also install the "Camilla Parker Bowles" standby desk, a "princess Diana" valet parking service and a "Prince Charles" left luggage desk. They could also install some voluntary charity boxes for swan food.

[Edited 2013-06-15 06:10:04]

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: skipness1E
Posted 2013-06-15 06:54:10 and read 5996 times.

Quoting ImperialAero (Reply 3):
Edit: On reflection, my preferred name would be the Oliver Cromwell Terminal...oh for the good old days

I have to assume that you are being provocative as anyone who has any familiarity with how the religous Puritan Mr Cromwell behaved in Ireland cannot see him in anything other than a dreadful light. Mind you this is country that had a statue of "Butcher" Cumberland in Inverness... Can we keep the personal politics off these boards please?

The reason there's no glass on the North side of T2 is that the current building is only half the intended size. Once it's open and T1 is closed, T2A will be extended North to match T5 in width. It's still goingt to Be Terminal 2, perhaps we should all just calm down a minute. It may well be named in honour of the current monarch but I suspect most people will have the brains to count from 2 to 5 and muddle their way around....

Quoting N62NA (Reply 9):
Did the airlines that were using the old Terminal 2 have to cut back on the number of flights into LHR while they were (presumably) relocated to the other terminals at LHR?

No there was a mid term move of many terminals allowing most in T2 to move to T4 if non aligned and T1 if in STAR. T4 was revamped and those in T1 are moving again into the new T2 which will be for STAR and a couple of others.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 18):
On a broader scale, why is it every time something new and different comes up there is so much negativity towards progress in these discussions. They don't just pull these things out of their butts you know. Now it is going to be called the Queen's Terminal not the Queen Elizabeth II Terminal, so I would assume but not completely sure that it would not be a tribute to the rock group Queen or Elizabeth I, or Victoria or Anne or any other Queen they have had in history.

People don't like change and it's easier to moan about a new thing and try and stop it than work on geting used to it which requires effort. I include myself btw  
Quoting eicvd (Reply 21):
I'm almost certain I read somewhere that VS will be making Terminal 2 their new home.

There was talk of being the "anchor" tennant but they're staying in T3 which has a drive in access to the Clubhouse etc. They want DL into T3 as well though whether that happens remains to be seen.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: VV701
Posted 2013-06-15 07:58:02 and read 5807 times.

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 13):
And does it make sense for Virgin Atlantic Little Red to be in T2, Virgin Atlantic in T3 and Delta in T4, the Skyteam terminal?

This is illustrative of the problems of changing alliances, of changing airline relationships and of changing routes flown. For example only two of LHR's terminals, T2 and T5, have been built with the facilities to handle passengers arriving from the Common Travel Area (CTA) - the British Isles including the Irish Republic. This was to meet the needs of BA, BD and EI and their CTA passengers.

So having decided that Skyteam - including DL - should be in T4 - DL goes and buys a significant interest in VS who had already been allocated to T3. Then along comes Little Red, a "CTA-only" airline, whose services cannot operate from T3 or T4 but have to fly in and out of either T2 or T5, both of which have been designed to handle not just "international" but also CTA passengers.

So Little Red could not operate from T4 or T3 without significant and costly internal changes to those terminals that would allow arriving CTA passengers to avoid having to pass through customs and immigration. And if those costly internal changes were made they would reduce the number of "international" rotations that those terminals could handle throwing the whole original plan out of the window. Of course these flights could be handled by T2 simply by spending a lot more money changing the CTA arrival facilities to the "international" specification.

If these changes to LHR terminals were planned and made then there would be more inter-airline or route changes throwing everything back into the melting pot.

Does this sound horribly complex? It should do because it is! There are no easy, instant solutions. Terminals can only be built to a set plan that limits or restricts flexibility because of their structural integrity.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: Revelation
Posted 2013-06-15 10:41:45 and read 5530 times.

Quoting teme82 (Reply 25):
How about Freddie Mercury's terminal?? He worked at LHR before The Queen.

Seems The Queen (QE2/ER/whatever) was doing her ceremonial work even earlier...

Quote:
1953 saw Queen Elizabeth II ceremonially place the first concrete slab of Heathrow's first modern runway, and she returned again two years later to open the Europa Building. Shortly afterwards the Europa Building was joined by the Oceanic Terminal, and these were renamed Terminal 2 and Terminal 3 respectively when Terminal 1 joined them in 1968.

Ref: http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/place-lancashire/plain/A4455038

Quoting babybus (Reply 29):
We need to make the terminal naming system as simple as possible because not everyone using it has English as their first language and don't use our letters or numbers. Think of the Chinese or Arabs.

A simple Terminal 1 and Terminal 2 (old T5) should be enough.

Don't overthink this. As in reply 1:

Quoting GCT64 (Reply 1):
Yes - as far we can tell, the future LHR will have Terminals 2 (The Queen's Terminal),3,4 & 5 - no Terminal 1 as that is being absorbed into the new T2.

The 2013 BAA T2 brochure says: "Terminal 2 will be home to 23 Star Alliance member airlines as well as Aer Lingus, Virgin Atlantic Little Red and Germanwings."

everyone will call it T2 in day to day use...

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: VV701
Posted 2013-06-15 12:29:45 and read 5382 times.

It is worth remembering that Queen Elizabeth set foot in the UK for the first time as Queen at LHR when she disembarked from a BOAC Argonaut C4 on returning from Kenya following the death of her father in February 1952.

It is also worth remembering that three years later Queen Elizabeth opened the Europa Terminal (later renamed T2) and the Queen's Building (with the memorable Queen's Building Roof Gardens that also extended onto the roof of the Europa Terminal) which were on the same site as the new "Terminal 2 - The Queen's Terminal".

It is to be hoped that Queen Elizabeth will formerly open the new terminal in June 2014 just one year short of six decades after she opened its predecessor.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: brilondon
Posted 2013-06-15 12:49:22 and read 5315 times.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 36):
It is to be hoped that Queen Elizabeth will formerly open the new terminal in June 2014 just one year short of six decades after she opened its predecessor.



I hope that Prince Philip will be there with her.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-06-15 13:23:29 and read 5267 times.

Quoting v jet (Reply 26):
God Save Our Gracious Queen! Very appropriate name for the terminal.

It's also appropriate considering that a major part of the old T2 and one of the original LHR structures, the "Queens Building," was demolished 4 years ago as part of the new T2 project.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/8280021.stm



Pause this video at the 11 to 13 second mark for a good aerial view of the Queens Building which had a big observation deck on the roof.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6t899VCErCk

I believe it was "Queens Building" not "Queen's", meant to refer to all Queens, not just the current one, who coincidentally officially opened the original T2 in 1955.
http://www.britishpathe.com/video/qu...ens-new/query/Queen+London+Airport

[Edited 2013-06-15 13:28:39]

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: TC957
Posted 2013-06-16 01:37:34 and read 4847 times.

Could T3 develop a few domestic gates for VS Little Red ops ? Once the *A airlines move out to T2 then there should be plenty of free gates to accommodate VS's UK flights and make matters simpler for them and their connecting pax.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: VV701
Posted 2013-06-16 02:41:09 and read 4713 times.

Quoting TC957 (Reply 39):
Could T3 develop a few domestic gates for VS Little Red ops ?

Anything is possible. But recognise that a stand used for CTA flights cannot be used for "international" flights and vive-versa unless bussing rather than an air bridge is used. Recognise here that there are three constraints in a slot bound airport like LHR. In addition to runway space there is the availability of a suitably sized stand and the capacity to handle the number of arriving passengers. So, for example, according to the Airport Coordination Ltd web site T5 can handle a maximum of 950 domestic and 3,750 international passengers in any 60 minute period while T! can currently handle up to 1,500 domestic, 950 CTA and 1,600 international passengers in 60 minutes.

So T£ could handle domestic flights if appropriately adapted. But spreading such passengers over a larger number of terminals would almost certainly result in LHR being able to handle few flights and passengers unless the T3 domestic flights were spread evenly across the day and not concentrated in peak times.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: shamrock604
Posted 2013-06-16 03:48:17 and read 4622 times.

Quoting ImperialAero (Reply 3):
Edit: On reflection, my preferred name would be the Oliver Cromwell Terminal...oh for the good old days

[Edited 2013-06-14 07:59:26]

Hmmmm.. Good luck getting Aer Lingus to move into that one......  

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: skipness1E
Posted 2013-06-16 04:46:39 and read 4502 times.

Quoting TC957 (Reply 39):
Could T3 develop a few domestic gates for VS Little Red ops ? Once the *A airlines move out to T2 then there should be plenty of free gates to accommodate VS's UK flights and make matters simpler for them and their connecting pax

That's the intention, however bearing in mind VS are taking on the old BMI routes and they were planned to be in T2, that's why T2 has a domestic facility and T3 does not. Little Red came rather late in the project timeline given it's nearly built. It will also need to be costed if VS want to tinker with T3 which is next on the list for revamping beyond recognition.

Oh silly me I forgot they're going to close LHR and build a floating island in the estuary. Silly old me.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: flyingthe757
Posted 2013-06-16 05:15:17 and read 4454 times.

Quoting peterinlisbon (Reply 32):
It's nice that she get's her own terminal, but it's a shame she'll never use it even if they do put in a Corgi check-in point and a hatstand. She flies on her own fleet of business jets paid for by everyone else in the country from Northolt airport

When out of LHR, she is normally on a chartered BA longhaul jet that departs from the Royal Suite opposite T4.

Regarding the 'fleet' of her own jets, that is incorrect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No._32_Squadron_RAF#VIP_transport.

For your president/PM

'The Portuguese Air Force operates two Dassault Falcon 50 built in 1990 for use by the President of the Republic and the Prime Minister, as well as cabinet members and other dignitaries when appropriate.
Usually, for long range flights, Airbus A340 and Airbus A330 from TAP Portugal are used.'

[Edited 2013-06-16 05:49:50]

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: EK773
Posted 2013-06-16 05:23:38 and read 4423 times.

Just be lucky the naming rights weren't up for grabs and it was called "The Emirates Terminal"  

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: skipness1E
Posted 2013-06-16 05:24:07 and read 4426 times.

Quoting peterinlisbon (Reply 32):
She flies on her own fleet of business jets paid for by everyone else in the country from Northolt airport. Maybe, just to really get into the royal spirit of things, we should also install the "Camilla Parker Bowles" standby desk, a "princess Diana" valet parking service and a "Prince Charles" left luggage desk.

I was going to reply with a dig at your own President until I realised that I hadn't heard of him / her for some reason  

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: RyanairGuru
Posted 2013-06-16 05:56:56 and read 4356 times.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 45):
I was going to reply with a dig at your own President until I realised that I hadn't heard of him / her for some reason

  

Although going with Peter's theme, the "Duchess of Cambridge Business Lounge" might be popular with businessmen wanting to...................unwind   

Quoting v jet (Reply 26):
God Save Our Gracious Queen!

Hear hear, she's welcome here anytime she likes IMHO  

[Edited 2013-06-16 05:57:35]

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: Revelation
Posted 2013-06-16 06:56:25 and read 4244 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 38):
I believe it was "Queens Building" not "Queen's", meant to refer to all Queens, not just the current one, who coincidentally officially opened the original T2 in 1955.

All Queens, including members of a certain rock band, as well as some gay men who refer to themselves as such?

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: BestWestern
Posted 2013-06-16 08:22:09 and read 4122 times.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 42):
That's the intention, however bearing in mind VS are taking on the old BMI routes and they were planned to be in T2, that's why T2 has a domestic facility and T3 does not. Little Red came rather late in the project timeline given it's nearly built. It will also need to be costed if VS want to tinker with T3 which is next on the list for revamping beyond recognition.

For operational reasons, VX Red and EI flights are also co-located.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 42):
Oh silly me I forgot they're going to close LHR and build a floating island in the estuary.

Old age creeping up on you??? That is now replaced by a nuclear powered blimp over staines....

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: 1400mph
Posted 2013-06-19 02:19:48 and read 3437 times.

The UK has a monarchy that dates back thousands of years that is universally more popular than it is not. No where more so than in the UK itself. We are currently enjoying the reign of the longest serving most popular monarch in our history who herself has a history (as others as stated) intertwined with LHR.

Therefore I think the naming is very apt. The royal family generate more money than they cost and their work especially when it comes to that which benefits charity is tireless. They are as much an integral part of the UK as the President is to the United States of America.

Trooping the colour. (a few weeks ago)





Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: brilondon
Posted 2013-06-19 03:13:18 and read 3320 times.

Quoting TC957 (Reply 39):

Could T3 develop a few domestic gates for VS Little Red ops ? Once the *A airlines move out to T2 then there should be plenty of free gates to accommodate VS's UK flights and make matters simpler for them and their connecting pax.

What has that got to do with the name of the terminal, talk about going off topic with a 90 degree turn.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: VV701
Posted 2013-06-19 04:44:38 and read 3142 times.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 50):
What has that got to do with the name of the terminal, talk about going off topic with a 90 degree turn.

The name of the terminal is "Queens Terminal ". And look at this thread's title.

If you cannot see the most obvious and very direct connection between "Queens Terminal" and the Queen and her popularity . . .

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: ThomasCook
Posted 2013-06-19 04:53:42 and read 3088 times.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 18):
Why would you be confused, if they call it "T2, the Queen's Terminal", that would not be confusing to me.

From experience, I understand that travellers become confused by a myriad of things in such high stress environments. Often, passengers don't even know what terminal they are flying from until they get to the airport and non-English speaking travellers are further susceptible to confusion given the zero foreign language signage at Heathrow. Giving one place two names will cause confusion.

Besides which, the monarchy is a controversial subject to many in the UK.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 49):
We are currently enjoying the reign of the longest serving most popular monarch in our history who herself has a history (as others as stated) intertwined with LHR.

That is very subjective. I wouldn't read to much into surveys by the UKs 'balanced media'.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: 1400mph
Posted 2013-06-19 05:08:11 and read 3043 times.

Quoting ThomasCook (Reply 52):
That is very subjective. I wouldn't read to much into surveys by the UKs 'balanced media'.

Really ?

You must have been out of the country during the Diamond Jubilee last year ?







Even the Scottish National Party want to keep the monarchy if they achieve independence for Scotland.

As I was saying.....is a great name for the Terminal and i'm sure the vast majority approve.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: MillwallSean
Posted 2013-06-19 05:29:31 and read 2981 times.

Me I'm far from a royalist, to the contrary, Im still bitter over Thatcher not privatizing the royals.
But QE2 is popular, immensely popular among most people. And thats not a media thing.

Honouring her with a Queens terminal isn't a bad idea. Whether people call it Queens terminal or terminal 2 etc doesn't matter. We can use both names.
Might as well do it when she is alive as well.

Ive never really liked the American way of naming airports after politicians. I still avoid George Bush international airport even though it was named after his father for example. Changi, Heathrow, you name it, its something I prefer.
Naming airports after people just feels tacky.

But the queen is something special shes been around since before I was born. She is the symbol, the last symbol, of what once was Great Britain the biggest empire this would had ever seen.
When she is gone we will miss her, we will be nostalgic about her, even if we like me are against paying a cent to the monarchy.

And confusing with Queens terminal?
Ah people tend to arrive at the right terminals, its after that the confusing parts with flying starts. Designing that well or creating a flow seems to be something the authorities and airports dont want...

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: ThomasCook
Posted 2013-06-19 05:32:54 and read 2968 times.

Hmmm, how many of those were tourists? Of course though, packed London streets are fully representative of the entire UK population. You'd probably get the same turn out if One Direction or Adele threw a party in the city. Enlighten me, what events did the 'royals' throw north of London? Didn't see anything in the north west that's for sure.

Coming back to the topic at hand, I still believe naming a terminal is a rather stupid, unnecessary move despite the previous Queen's Building. Regardless of the shock revelation by some that it may not refer to royalty or the current queen, we all get the idea behind it.

ThomasCook

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: 1400mph
Posted 2013-06-19 05:35:24 and read 2968 times.

Quoting ThomasCook (Reply 52):
Besides which, the monarchy is a controversial subject to many in the UK.

'many' relative to how many support the monarchy ? I don't think so.

You really don't see it do you. Where do you think the following pictures were taken....?






Not the UK.....New Jersey. Prince Harry was visiting ravaged New Jersey after hurricane Sandy. The visit put the area back in the minds of Americans and helped the local communities there no end.

The kind of publicity they garner and generate is 'absolutely priceless' both abroad and at home.

They are as even they themselves call them 'a firm'

With respect....one has to doubt the intelligence or reasoning behind those that don't approve considering said publicity and ££££ they generate for UK plc.

The terminal is as aptly named as any other in world that is named after a person.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: 1400mph
Posted 2013-06-19 05:44:25 and read 2908 times.

Quoting ThomasCook (Reply 55):
Hmmm, how many of those were tourists? Of course though, packed London streets are fully representative of the entire UK population.

Well maybe you should switch on your TV. HRH is about to arrive at Royal Ascot to no doubt thunderous applause and thousands upon thousands of race goers singing a hearty national anthem.

Very British, nothing like it in the world. Terminal 2 is honoured.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: ThomasCook
Posted 2013-06-19 05:55:30 and read 2880 times.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 56):
With respect....one has to doubt the intelligence or reasoning behind those that don't approve considering said publicity and ££££ they generate for UK plc.

I understand the royals are a driver for London's tourism (albeit I'm sure it would garner enough interest without them as well), perhaps for some parts of Scotland too, but where is else in the UK benefits? How did Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, Newcastle etc benefit from the jubilee. What do royals do for these parts of the country?

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 57):
Well maybe you should switch on your TV. HRH is about to arrive at Royal Ascot to no doubt thunderous applause and thousands upon thousands of race goers singing a hearty national anthem.

Hmm, a few miles outside of London...and with respect, if you think people go to Ascot just to see the royals, one has to doubt the intelligence behind that line of thinking. Likewise, how many people in this country can recite the words to the national anthem? Maybe one that's about the people and not centred on saving the queen as a priority would be a better fit.

Returning to the main point, as crew operating out of Heathrow, seeing the issues passengers encounter daily, I still firmly believe giving a terminal two names lacks rationale, especially when it isn't a concept uniformly applied too all terminals.

ThomasCook

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: 1400mph
Posted 2013-06-19 07:04:59 and read 2747 times.

Quoting ThomasCook (Reply 58):
I understand the royals are a driver for London's tourism (albeit I'm sure it would garner enough interest without them as well), perhaps for some parts of Scotland too, but where is else in the UK benefits?

Oh dear.

The Queen represents the entire United Kingdom not just London and in that capacity during her 60 year reign has undertaken 261 official overseas visits, including 96 State Visits, to 116 different countries.

Quoting ThomasCook (Reply 58):
Maybe one that's about the people and not centred on saving the queen as a priority would be a better fit.

Oh dear again. The national anthem is not about 'saving the Queen' as one physical human entity. The Queen in the song represents the country and the people she reigns over. As in the 'royal we'

Quoting ThomasCook (Reply 58):
Returning to the main point, as crew operating out of Heathrow, seeing the issues passengers encounter daily, I still firmly believe giving a terminal two names lacks rationale, especially when it isn't a concept uniformly applied too all terminals.

Judging from your posts on this topic I do understand that you see things on a very simplistic level but I feel confident that people will just about cope with it !

[Edited 2013-06-19 07:15:14]

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: b2319
Posted 2013-06-19 07:25:21 and read 2697 times.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 49):
The UK has a monarchy that dates back thousands of years that is universally more popular than it is not.

The UK has a history that dates back to 1922; cessation of parts of Ireland/Independence of the Republic of Ireland.

Great Britain has a history that dates back to 1707; the Act of Union.

All European countries who have monarchies can trace such monarchies back 'thousands of years'.

You misinform your readership making such statements, independent of the merits (if any) of your later sentences and posts.

My only comment on this thread.

Regards

B-2319

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: 1400mph
Posted 2013-06-19 07:33:32 and read 2677 times.

Quoting b2319 (Reply 60):
My only comment on this thread.

Is that a promise ?

Don't worry I have seen from your other posts with what respect you hold the United Kingdom.

Getting back to the point - it is a very apt name for Terminal 2.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: brilondon
Posted 2013-06-19 09:11:16 and read 2567 times.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 51):
The name of the terminal is "Queens Terminal ". And look at this thread's title.

If you cannot see the most obvious and very direct connection between "Queens Terminal" and the Queen and her popularity . . .

It is not a connection with the present queen but with all queens in the past and the future.

Quoting MillwallSean (Reply 54):
Honouring her with a Queens terminal isn't a bad idea. Whether people call it Queens terminal or terminal 2 etc doesn't matter. We can use both names.
Might as well do it when she is alive as well.

See my above posts

Quoting ThomasCook (Reply 55):
Hmmm, how many of those were tourists? Of course though, packed London streets are fully representative of the entire UK population. You'd probably get the same turn out if One Direction or Adele threw a party in the city. Enlighten me, what events did the 'royals' throw north of London? Didn't see anything in the north west that's for sure.

Coming back to the topic at hand, I still believe naming a terminal is a rather stupid, unnecessary move despite the previous Queen's Building. Regardless of the shock revelation by some that it may not refer to royalty or the current queen, we all get the idea behind it.

Do you? I don't think you do. Why do you not think naming a terminal is a good idea? Most airports are named after people, and at LHR has a terminal named after an entity.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: Lofty
Posted 2013-06-19 09:13:52 and read 2565 times.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 40):
Anything is possible. But recognise that a stand used for CTA flights cannot be used for "international" flights and vive-versa unless bussing rather than an air bridge is used. Recognise here that there are three constraints in a slot bound airport like LHR. In addition to runway space there is the availability of a suitably sized stand and the capacity to handle the number of arriving passengers. So, for example, according to the Airport Coordination Ltd web site T5 can handle a maximum of 950 domestic and 3,750 international passengers in any 60 minute period while T! can currently handle up to 1,500 domestic, 950 CTA and 1,600 international passengers in 60 minutes.


Actually stands used for International flights can be used for Domestic Departures as long as they have Biometrics at the gate (T5 have them). The main issue is Domestic Arrivals as you would have to have a dedicated domestic reclaim area and domestic exit.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: 1400mph
Posted 2013-06-19 09:51:41 and read 2497 times.

Quoting ThomasCook (Reply 55):
Enlighten me, what events did the 'royals' throw north of London? Didn't see anything in the north west that's for sure.

Well, let's see......16th to 17th May might interest you

The dates and locations for The Queen’s Diamond Jubilee Royal Tour have been announced by the Press Secretary to The Queen.

Dates and Locations

8 March 2012 – Leicester

23 March 2012 – Manchester and Salford

29 March 2012 – North London (Redbridge, Walthamstow and Harrow)

26 – 27 April 2012 – Wales (Cardiff, Margam, Merthyr Tydfil, Aberfan, Ebbw Vale and Glanusk Park)

1 – 2 May 2012 – South West England (Sherborne, Salisbury, Crewkerne, Yeovil and Exeter)

15 May 2012 – South London (Bromley, Merton and Richmond)

16 – 17 May 2012 – North West England (Burnley, Accrington, Warrington, Chester and Liverpool)

2 – 5 June 2012 – CENTRAL WEEKEND

13 – 14 June 2012 – East Midlands (Nottingham, Burghley, Corby, Stevenage and Hatfield)

25 June 2012 – South East England (Henley-on-Thames)

2 – 6 July 2012 – Scotland ‘Holyrood Week’ (Edinburgh, Glasgow, Dunbartonshire, Renfrewshire and Perth)

11 – 12 July 2012 – West Midlands (Hereford, Worcester, Birmingham and Shropshire)

18 – 19 July 2012 – North East England (Sunderland, South Tyneside, North Tyneside, Gateshead, Durham City , Stockton-on- Tees and Leeds)

25 July 2012 – South East England (Cowes, Isle of Wight, New Forest and Hampshire)

[Edited 2013-06-19 09:52:51]

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: ThomasCook
Posted 2013-06-19 10:03:25 and read 2473 times.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 59):
Oh dear.

Let's not result to being childishly condescending. It earns you no credibility for the views you believe in.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 59):
The Queen represents the entire United Kingdom not just London and in that capacity during her 60 year reign has undertaken 261 official overseas visits, including 96 State Visits, to 116 different countries.

That's fabulous however maybe the family could have arranged events in other UK cities on the day of her jubilee rather then concentrating them all in London. After all, as you say, she represents the entire UK. Regardless of whether she appeared at any such events, she could have at least funded events outside of London.

There are also a lot of public interest issues that continually appear with this family.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 59):
Oh dear again. The national anthem is not about 'saving the Queen' as one physical human entity. The Queen in the song represents the country and the people she reigns over. As in the 'royal we'

That is open to interpretation. It can be especially controversial with the Welsh and Scots.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 59):
Judging from your posts on this topic I do understand that you see things on a very simplistic level but I feel confident that people will just about cope with it !

I will trust your experience of working with the travelling public on that one.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 62):
Do you? I don't think you do. Why do you not think naming a terminal is a good idea? Most airports are named after people, and at LHR has a terminal named after an entity.

There is a difference between giving an airport a name and giving a terminal a name. Especially when none of the other 3 terminals are named. In particular so when the name refers to a someone who is controversial and not universally admired. Warsaw's Frederyk Chopin Airport is the kind of name which is quite fitting and inspiring - non political, non military, national icon.

ThomasCook

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: FlyCaledonian
Posted 2013-06-19 10:04:30 and read 2470 times.

Quoting ThomasCook (Reply 55):
Hmmm, how many of those were tourists? Of course though, packed London streets are fully representative of the entire UK population. You'd probably get the same turn out if One Direction or Adele threw a party in the city. Enlighten me, what events did the 'royals' throw north of London? Didn't see anything in the north west that's for sure.

London is the capital, and as such major national events will be held there. That's no different from any other country.

As for what happened outside London last year for the Jubilee, well the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh visited many parts of the UK (as did other members of the Royal Family). Probably more visits than in a normal year, but they do have many engagements across the UK every year. But as I said, the big set piece events take place in London as the capital.

Every year the Queen has a week at Holyrood (Edinburgh) where there is a Garden Party and an Investiture, so they no longer take place just in London. Also, the Maundy Service takes place at a different Cathedral around England each year rather than, as it used to be, just at Westminster Abbey.

The day-to-day business of the Royal Family is generally pretty low key, and maybe that's one of their weaknesses in that everything isn't used as a photo opportunity. If William and Catherine become full-time Royals in the AUtumn maybe a bit more light will be shone on all the visits that are done, simply because of the fact she's currently a hot ticket item in the press. Yet if you looked at the Court Circular and saw how many visits the Royals do across the UK (and abroad) you'd realise just how few make the national press and tend to get attention at a local level only (News and Nwspapers), which helps with the distortion that apart from a few high profil events and trips they don't do anything.

I'm originally from Cumbria and I don't hold any resentment for the fact that my home county figures so littel in holding national events. Hell, I now live in Hampshire and half the people I work with have no idea where my home county is located! Fine, you're not a Royalist, but the claptrap that the majority aren't either is a bit rich. If the media is so bias why the heck does the BBC feel the need to let the pressure group Republic put a spokesman up anytime there is a Royal news story?

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: 1400mph
Posted 2013-06-19 10:15:36 and read 2447 times.

Quoting ThomasCook (Reply 65):
Let's not result to being childishly condescending. It earns you no credibility for the views you believe in.

Oh no - really ? Damn.

Quoting ThomasCook (Reply 65):
That's fabulous however maybe the family could have arranged events in other UK cities on the day of her jubilee rather then concentrating them all in London. After all, as you say, she represents the entire UK. Regardless of whether she appeared at any such events, she could have at least funded events outside of London.

Well, let's see......16th to 17th May might interest you

The dates and locations for The Queen’s Diamond Jubilee Royal Tour have been announced by the Press Secretary to The Queen.

Dates and Locations

8 March 2012 – Leicester

23 March 2012 – Manchester and Salford

29 March 2012 – North London (Redbridge, Walthamstow and Harrow)

26 – 27 April 2012 – Wales (Cardiff, Margam, Merthyr Tydfil, Aberfan, Ebbw Vale and Glanusk Park)

1 – 2 May 2012 – South West England (Sherborne, Salisbury, Crewkerne, Yeovil and Exeter)

15 May 2012 – South London (Bromley, Merton and Richmond)

16 – 17 May 2012 – North West England (Burnley, Accrington, Warrington, Chester and Liverpool)

2 – 5 June 2012 – CENTRAL WEEKEND

13 – 14 June 2012 – East Midlands (Nottingham, Burghley, Corby, Stevenage and Hatfield)

25 June 2012 – South East England (Henley-on-Thames)

2 – 6 July 2012 – Scotland ‘Holyrood Week’ (Edinburgh, Glasgow, Dunbartonshire, Renfrewshire and Perth)

11 – 12 July 2012 – West Midlands (Hereford, Worcester, Birmingham and Shropshire)

18 – 19 July 2012 – North East England (Sunderland, South Tyneside, North Tyneside, Gateshead, Durham City , Stockton-on- Tees and Leeds)

25 July 2012 – South East England (Cowes, Isle of Wight, New Forest and Hampshire)

Quoting ThomasCook (Reply 65):
That is open to interpretation. It can be especially controversial with the Welsh and Scots.

Everything is open to interpretation.

Quoting ThomasCook (Reply 65):
I will trust your experience of working with the travelling public on that one.

Worked long-haul for an airline based at LHR for 15 years.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: ThomasCook
Posted 2013-06-19 10:35:09 and read 2401 times.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 67):
The dates and locations for The Queen%u2019s Diamond Jubilee Royal Tour have been announced by the Press Secretary to The Queen

Thanks for double posting that however if you read my post properly you would see that I am referring to the day/weekend of the jubilee, not a few months either side.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 67):
Worked long-haul for an airline based at LHR for 15 years.

Awesome, good for you! You should well know then how people, especially non-English speakers find travelling through LHR. In particular, infrequent fliers.

ThomasCook

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: VV701
Posted 2013-06-19 17:10:24 and read 2142 times.

Quoting ThomasCook (Reply 55):
Hmmm, how many of those were tourists?

It would be great if they were all tourists. A study b y New York City based Deloitte reported:


"Tourism contributes £96.7bn to the economy in England (8.6% of GDP), £11.1bn in Scotland (10.4%), £6.2bn in Wales (13.3%) and £1.5bn in Northern Ireland (4.9%)."


More at:

http://www.visitbritain.org/insightsandstatistics/visitoreconomyfacts/

If you are right and only a significant minority of those in the photos were tourists then the Royal Family are without doubt one of the biggest net contributors to the prosperity of all residents in the UK. £115.5 billion, the total value of all tourism to the UK, is an awful lot of money. So naming a major gateway for tourists visiting the UK "Terminal 2 Queens Terminal" seems really appropriate. And you can see from the Deloitte figures why the SNP is so anxious to keep the monarchy.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-06-19 17:42:11 and read 2085 times.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 69):
So naming a major gateway for tourists visiting the UK "Terminal 2 Queens Terminal" seems really appropriate. And you can see from the Deloitte figures why the SNP is so anxious to keep the monarchy.

In today's world where sexist language is discouraged, wouldn't something like "Monarch Terminal" be more appropriate? Why exclude Kings, which I believe have been more numerous than Queens?

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: 1400mph
Posted 2013-06-19 23:26:12 and read 1930 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 70):
In today's world where sexist language is discouraged, wouldn't something like "Monarch Terminal" be more appropriate? Why exclude Kings, which I believe have been more numerous than Queens?

Maybe I'm wrong but I doubt the heir apparent son, grandson or future grandson ad infinitum will mind too much ?

There are countless tributes to both Kings and Queens throughout the United Kingdom after all.

Topic: RE: New LHR Terminal 2 "Queen's Terminal"
Username: VV701
Posted 2013-06-20 02:52:31 and read 1788 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 70):
In today's world where sexist language is discouraged, wouldn't something like "Monarch Terminal" be more appropriate?

Checks and balances, particularly balances.

A major London railway terminal is King's Cross Station. It was opened as such in 1852 (during the reign of Queen Victoria). So naming T2 "Queens Terminal" will achieve the sexual balance you are seeking and has been missing for the last 161 years.

Of course I recognise that we also have Victoria Station. We can guess what that was named after. It is after all located at one end of Victoria Street!


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/