FRASYD From Germany, joined Mar 2004, 176 posts, RR: 0 Posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2570 times:
The expansion of Germany's biggest airport in Frankfurt will be delayed. The new runway (number 4) which was originally supposed to be ready by 2007 will not come into use until 2009 or 2010.
The minister of economics of the state of Hessens has announced a press conference for the afternoon.
It seems like the chemical factory Ticona brings new problems for the runway. The factory is only 100m's away from where it is supposed to be built.
Pretty sad that politics and neighbours here don't get the importance of this huge project...
Racko From Germany, joined Nov 2001, 4838 posts, RR: 21 Reply 1, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2478 times:
They can't just level the Ticona plant there.
I don't think you should blame it on the neighbours, you should blame it on the Koch government which was going for the northwest-solution even though they knew how big the obstacles are. And they fail to admit their mistake and stop the planning for the NW-runway - this is all lost time to find another solution.
FraT From Germany, joined Sep 2003, 1101 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2415 times:
So what would have been your solution, Racko??
Besides Ticona, that is the best solution IMO and Koch said before that in the end, Ticona must move the plant.
I think that the opponents of a fourth runway would find a reason for every location to not build a runway. Keep in mind that even people who live south of the airport and who would not be affected at all from a northwest runway keep on protesting.
Andreas From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 6104 posts, RR: 34 Reply 3, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2380 times:
Yes protesting and sueing is one of the favorite pastimes of Germans nowadays...unfortunately!!
I was at Schiphol last Saturday...why can't we create a solution like Polderbaan???? Quite simply because it needs some creativity and political will, both things that our politicians are missing.
FRASYD From Germany, joined Mar 2004, 176 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2309 times:
Certainly right, Andreas!
Pretty funny that Riehl excused the delay in the press conference with the saving of rare animals and plants... seems like he means powerplants!
Whatever, the plans of Fraport where a little optimistic from the beginning anyways... maybe we should be content with an in-time-realisation of the A380 maintenance hangar for LH. Fraport should really concentrate on this project right now...
LJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4142 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2273 times:
I was at Schiphol last Saturday...why can't we create a solution like Polderbaan????
Andreas, I hope you mean by a solution a la Polderbaan the fact that the approach doesn't go over populated areas. The Polderbaan itself isn't much liked by passengers and airlines due to its long taxi to the terminals and even the people living near AMS can't stop complaining (just last week the Dutch transport minister had to find an excuse for the rise in aircraft noise related complaints). Furthermore, I don't think it's wise to have the Polderbaan as an example for "creativity and political will" because that's something which wasn't applicable to the Polderbaan
DBOBA From Germany, joined Aug 2001, 21 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (8 years 12 months 20 hours ago) and read 2118 times:
The discussion about the Frankfurt Airport is a kind of strange and it is typical for the German's NIMBY attitude. They all in and around Frankfurt need the airport for their own special reasons (i.e. taxes,jobs,living...). Without the expansion program airlines will choose the mobile exit option an look for other hubs, i.e. Munich (they will also have their problems for the 3rd runway and it will take them at least 10 years for all the formalities) or Brussels...
What quite a lot of people doing in Frankfurt and its vicinities - they are lamenting on a very high level. What would they do if Fraport had to cut jobs, because all the airlines went away - probably lamenting again. I was involved in those discussion down there in Frankfurt and it is so frustrating - indeed.
TriStar500 From Germany, joined Nov 1999, 4685 posts, RR: 47 Reply 8, posted (8 years 12 months 20 hours ago) and read 2092 times:
For those involved with the F R A expansion process, this development comes to no surprise.
I especially loved the comment of the Fraport spokesman: "A delay of the new runway to 2009/10 will be no problem for F R A, because we have enough spare capacity until then."
He just destroyed Fraport's main line of argumentation for the expansion program in this very second.
And BTW - maybe we have a different flight movement database than he had, but F R A's runway capacity is congested up to the Koordinationseckwert (maximum number of flights technically possible per hour) from 7 until 21 on virtually every day of the week.
Homer: Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!
FraT From Germany, joined Sep 2003, 1101 posts, RR: 1 Reply 9, posted (8 years 12 months 18 hours ago) and read 2046 times:
OK, so in the local press comes up again the other possibility of a third parallel runway in the south with the transformation of "Startbahn West" into a taxiway.
Would that help FRa in the long term? I mean, they still would have only 3 runways, the only difference would be that all of them could be used for landings as well.
DBOBA From Germany, joined Aug 2001, 21 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (8 years 12 months 18 hours ago) and read 2020 times:
... but F R A's runway capacity is congested up to the Koordinationseckwert (maximum number of flights technically possible per hour) from 7 until 21 on virtually every day of the week.....
That is so true, with high efforts Fraport tries to squeeze the last slots out of the runway system - i.e. the second threshold on the southern runway (HALST-DTOP). This was also an outcome of the local mediation process - to use all latent existing possibilities to increase the system-capacity before building new infrastructure, i.e. runway, taxiway etc.
But without the new runway - there is no real chance to increse the system capacity significantly
FRASYD From Germany, joined Mar 2004, 176 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (8 years 12 months 15 hours ago) and read 1945 times:
FraT:
The runway in the South of the airport would help a little as it could be operated independently to the norhtern runways. Frankfurts main problem nowadays is the too short distance between their northern runways...
Andreas From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 6104 posts, RR: 34 Reply 12, posted (8 years 12 months 14 hours ago) and read 1882 times:
LJ: I don't know if you are familiar with AB) (FRA / FRF / EDDF), Germany">FRA and its surroundings: It's much worse than AMS, since the whole airport is enclosed by either:
-something that must be protected at any cost!
-someone who just moved there in order to sue, no matter what!
-some Autobahn like the A5, which is indeed very important
-some idiots that travel to AB) (FRA / FRF / EDDF), Germany">FRA not to spot but to demonstrate against airports in general.
I'm sure AMS does have a few of those probs, too, but probably not all of them.
Yes I think it would be better to have a 4th runway somewhere in the backwoods, like Polderbaan, if you think of longhaul flights, a 15 minute ride out there is not that relevant (besides the fact that the long taxiway in AMS does provide a few very lovely spotter's points!).
And if I think of all those long drives out to Startbahn 18 West from T2, well it couldn't be much longer anyway!
FRASYD From Germany, joined Mar 2004, 176 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (8 years 12 months 10 hours ago) and read 1842 times:
Theoretically a good idea, Christian, but where would you put that "4th runway somewhere in the backwoods"??
If you consider the taxi-way-run from T2 to RWY 18, you're right, it can't get much worse. Althoguh you have to consider that most intercont flights have a much shorter way to travel and nearly only small a/c's from stands V92 to V102 or the eastern T2 / T2-apron gates are sent all the way round via B-east and S...
I think it would be reasonable to consider all three runway-opitions with some more publicity again and present arguements against south and northeast to the people. The choice for the north-west option has been made a little quick and especially without informing the public...
Andreas From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 6104 posts, RR: 34 Reply 14, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1768 times:
Hmmm Christian? Actually my name is Andreas, it really is, I didn't see the point in changing it
Ok, where would I put it? There were several alternatives under discussion if I remember correctly, there was an idea to put it on the other side of the A5..I like that one : Thousands of traffic jams on the Autobahn with all those aviation freaks breaking hard to watch a 744 or a 380 pass overhead
Ok seriously, I think there are several locations around the airport, but it's a disaster that no one seriously considered those during the planning period...the government said "Kelsterbach" and that's it...very professional, I have to say! So now we can open up the whole process again, but fortunately Fraport told us they don't really need the 4th runway...makes me wonder how stupid one can be and still be able to operate an airport!!
TriStar500 From Germany, joined Nov 1999, 4685 posts, RR: 47 Reply 15, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1719 times:
Unfortunately this is only the tip of the iceberg. A friend of mine - a fellow planning engineer - was involved in the Raumordnungsverfahren on Fraport's side, and the company I am employed at is working on projects for Fraport and case studies for the Regionales Dialogforum, but unfortunately due to certain non disclosure agreements, I must refrain from going into details about this whole f*cked up process here.
Homer: Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!
FRASYD From Germany, joined Mar 2004, 176 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1680 times:
Sorry, but was is the reason of your post then?
Come on Andreas, Christian is a cool name. Think about it!
But as I said, those options were considered during the planning process. (I do have a lot of pro's and con's in some Fraport-papers). The problem is that it never reached the public...
DBOBA From Germany, joined Aug 2001, 21 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1682 times:
Ok seriously, I think there are several locations around the airport, but it's a disaster that no one seriously considered those during the planning period...
They did it really properly as well as very detailed in a double stage evaluation process during/for the zone changing procedure (Raumordnugsverfahren - ROV) and even the FAA was involved - as a more or less neutral institution - to evaluate finally over 20 out of quite more different runway altenatives that even included the Wiesbaden Air Force installation. Finally the three remaining known alternatives NW, NO and South were brought into the ROV for final evaluation. And the winner was NW for several reasons.
Actuaally - for people who might be concerned about this - I do not disclose anything that hasn't been published before yet - just for the minutes.
TriStar500 From Germany, joined Nov 1999, 4685 posts, RR: 47 Reply 19, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1622 times:
Don't know if this was already mentioned, but at one point there was a viability study to use WIE as a satellite airport (for traffic with high O&D values), and although the passenger and freight stream management would have been possible, this alternative was killed due to mainly political reasons.
Oh, by the way, the point of the my previous post was to indicate that the whole procedure was managed much worse that what is currently available to the public. But I have to agree with you that my comment was rather nebulous and probably not of much help.
[Edited 2004-05-28 14:03:28]
Homer: Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!
DBOBA From Germany, joined Aug 2001, 21 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1593 times:
Wiesbaden Air Base has the status of a final NATO installation (this information was published) - so there is nearly no chance in the medium term run to use it for civil aviation business; then think of the minimum connex time of 45 minutes (quality indicator) and of course try to get a fast raillink or what so ever from Wiesbaden to Frankfurt airport - that formal procedure will also take some years as they may found maybe another beetle or spider they have to study and move smoothly.
The worst aspect to the whole expansion program seems to be the fairly strong influence of the policy - not necessarily only today but also in former periods e.g. when RWY 18 was up to decide on.
TriStar500 From Germany, joined Nov 1999, 4685 posts, RR: 47 Reply 21, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1584 times:
One of the studies during the Mediationsverfahren concerned the W I E - F R A link I mentioned above, so I suppose, there are plans of the US Air Force to withdraw from the airfield somewhen in the future.
You are certainly right, there is really no point for a transfer connection between F R A and W I E, so the study focussed - from what I remember - chiefly on O&D traffic, e.g. non-homebase carrier charter traffic and also non-homebase carrier cargo traffic with a low commercial uplift quota.
edited to stop the stupid F R A bug
[Edited 2004-05-28 14:34:38]
Homer: Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!
DBOBA From Germany, joined Aug 2001, 21 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1577 times:
You are right. But the Mediationsverfahren (it was a nice try) is over now and there is what they call Regionales Dialogforum (as one result from the Mediation) and there are prob. several studies concerning the future of WIE in the civil aviation business, but the expansion program in Frankfurt is to increase the capacity of the HUB-AB) (FRA / FRF / EDDF), Germany">FRA - to remain competitive with e.g. CDG, AMS, BRU, ZRH, MUC etc.) and my statement was in connection to this. I tell you - if it comes to the vow - even the smallest obviously O&D airline will state that they need the HUB AB) (FRA / FRF / EDDF), Germany">FRA and that they will not move to WIE - compare Hahn and how many passenger airlines are there beside Ryanair.
TriStar500 From Germany, joined Nov 1999, 4685 posts, RR: 47 Reply 23, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1568 times:
Correct, that is why no airline is willing to give up its operations at F R A in the center of the Rhein-Main-Region in order to go to H H N, which will always be in the middle of nowhere. Who is dumb enough to give up his excellent market position if his competitors stay in F R A?
[Edited 2004-05-28 14:40:57]
Homer: Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!
Mrniji From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (8 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1556 times:
There was once the discussion about upgrading Startbahn West to a Landebahn, too. Is this still considered (this would be a lot less fuss)? How are the 'technics' behind, i.e. is it possible to do this at all from the technical perspective?
Pretty sad that politics and neighbours here don't get the importance of this huge project...
This is a very unelaborated statement. We know that there is a need for another Landebahn. But people (Neu-Isenburg...)habe some rights, too, Germany is not a state where the government can act arbritary. The life of the neighbors is important, too, and too much noise pollution impairs their quality of life. That's why all of us are hoping that we find a solution which is good for all (airport, entrepreneurs, neighbors etc). Sure the neighbors realize the importance, but they have a life, too
25 TriStar500: Since RWY18 is almost aligned at 90 degress to the other two RWY's you would not be able to increase the Koordinationseckwert (number of movements tec
26 DBOBA: ... and an final approach direct over Kelsterbach (?) from the North - grrrrr.
27 FraT: Mrniji, when you mention Neu-Isenburg. Right now the approaches go directly over the "city" center. The approach for a new runway north of the A3 Auto
28 Mrniji: FraT, since you seem to knowing the situation, a question. I lived long North of Frankfurt (Kronberg) and I was wonderin why le, luckily, did not get
29 FraT: The reason is runway 18 (Startbahn West). It is designed only for take offs towards the South and not for landings. AFAIK the main reason for that is
30 Racko: Because the people in charge of the airport expansion live there and don't want noise
31 DBOBA: But the question is - to stay with our headline - if there is a chance that Lufthansa may say 'goodbye' to Frankfurt and will go south to Munich. Woul
32 Mrniji: But the question is - to stay with our headline - if there is a chance that Lufthansa may say 'goodbye' to Frankfurt and will go south to Munich No wa
Sponsor Message: 
From Germany, joined Mar 2004, 176 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4142 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
