Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Does El Al Use Terminal 1 At LHR?  
User currently offlinejgw787 From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 208 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 12164 times:

I heard El Al uses T1 at lhr because other terminals host airlines from countries that don't see Isreal as a nation. Is this really true??????

34 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineoa260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 26909 posts, RR: 58
Reply 1, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 12147 times:

Maybe its true LY have always used T1 since I can remember many years back. There are always armed Police with machine guns around the check in areas and on the balconies above. Historically all other Middle Eastern airlines have used T3 .

User currently offlinelhr380 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 12092 times:

Quoting oa260 (Reply 1):
Maybe its true LY have always used T1 since I can remember many years back. There are always armed Police with machine guns around the check in areas and on the balconies above.

Was in T1 today as their flight was checking in. Lots of police around!!


User currently offlineCXA330300 From South Africa, joined May 2004, 1560 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 12088 times:

CY has also been out of T1 for a while. LY operates in the same terminal as some Arab carriers in some smaller airports, but because of historical events involving LY at LHR (an attempted bombing in the 80s), they continue to operate at T1 in LHR separate from the T3/T4 carriers.


The sky is the limit as long as you can stay there
User currently offlineoa260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 26909 posts, RR: 58
Reply 4, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 12046 times:

An interesting article somewhat linked :

Airport security checks are not only intrusive, demeaning and a mind-numbing drain on our precious time. They don't actually work. But as David Rose reports from Israel

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/mosl...p-bomber-asking-Are-terrorist.html


User currently offlinejgw787 From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 208 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 11790 times:

Yes, I think at EWR Continental has a "secured gate area" for its Tel Aviv flight.

User currently offlineA380US From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2358 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 11594 times:

Quoting CXA330300 (Reply 3):
CY has also been out of T1 for a while. LY operates in the same terminal as some Arab carriers in some smaller airports, but because of historical events involving LY at LHR (an attempted bombing in the 80s), they continue to operate at T1 in LHR separate from the T3/T4 carriers.

Well in JFK they're in T4 and they have plent of other middle eastern carriers there; Egypt Air, Emirates, Etihad, Kuwait, Pakistan, Qatar, and Royal Jordanian. It is actually a sight on some days with all the different cultures.



www.JandACosmetics.com
User currently offlinesantos From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2007, 740 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 11577 times:

What about in Terminal 5? How do they board/operate a flight to TLV and the Gulf states within the same terminal?
All BA routes


User currently offlinenyc2theworld From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 664 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 11561 times:

Quoting jgw787 (Reply 5):
Yes, I think at EWR Continental has a "secured gate area" for its Tel Aviv flight.

When the TLV flight is at the gate all they do is block off C138 (I believe that's the gate) with movable barriers. The only people who can walk in that area are TLV customers and have their carry on luggage hand searched. Once the flight departs, the barriers are removed and anybody can sit by that gate.



Always wonderers if this "last and final boarding call" is in fact THE last and final boarding call.
User currently offlineSpeedbird2155 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 871 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 11393 times:

Quoting santos (Reply 7):
What about in Terminal 5? How do they board/operate a flight to TLV and the Gulf states within the same terminal?
All BA routes

There are no special arrangements. It's not uncommon to find the TLV and the KWI flights boarding from gates next to each other at night. It all depends on which gate is available at the time.


User currently onlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2980 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 11184 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Terminal 1 has special security measures for handling El-AL combined with the historically high risk Northern Ireland flights going back several decades.
El-Al has used Terminal 3 in the past and the separation from other Middle Eastern carriers is incidental.

Given the current threats many of the Middle Eastern operators and PIA may actually be more at risk from murderous criminals today !


User currently offlinewashingtonian From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 10846 times:

Quoting jgw787 (Reply 5):
Yes, I think at EWR Continental has a "secured gate area" for its Tel Aviv flight.

Usually C-138 but last week they were using different gates during the snowstorm.

Quoting A380US (Reply 6):
Well in JFK they're in T4 and they have plent of other middle eastern carriers there; Egypt Air, Emirates, Etihad, Kuwait, Pakistan, Qatar, and Royal Jordanian. It is actually a sight on some days with all the different cultures.

Yes. In fact, it's not uncommon to see some of these airlines using the ticket counters that are normally used by El Al.

In reality, Israel and the rest of the Middle East co-exist physically. No reason they can't share an airport terminal!


User currently offlineVictr From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 18 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 10583 times:

Quoting jgw787 (Reply 5):

This i true c138 has this feature



GO United Air Lines GO Newark Liberty Intl Airport
User currently offlineCPDC10-30 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 4780 posts, RR: 23
Reply 13, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 10518 times:

Quoting nyc2theworld (Reply 8):
When the TLV flight is at the gate all they do is block off C138 (I believe that's the gate) with movable barriers. The only people who can walk in that area are TLV customers and have their carry on luggage hand searched. Once the flight departs, the barriers are removed and anybody can sit by that gate.

Air India also uses a similar procedure at YYZ. I wonder if they have just followed LY's procedures.


User currently offlinePHLwok From United States of America, joined May 2007, 501 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 9841 times:

Quoting jgw787 (Reply 5):
Yes, I think at EWR Continental has a "secured gate area" for its Tel Aviv flight.

Same for A19 at PHL, which US uses for their TLV flight. I have assumed most or all airports in the US with a TLV nonstop have something similar, but can't say I've checked.


User currently offlineferminbrif From Venezuela, joined Dec 2010, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 9620 times:

maybe because the Airport security checks is more tough in T1 than other T´s??? i´m just playing imagination, besides that islamic terrorist groups must be willing to do anything to blast any El-Al aircraft. So, airport security must be really tough.

User currently offlineTravellerPlus From New Zealand, joined Nov 2008, 347 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 9310 times:

El Al has used Terminal 1 since the 1980's. I believe there were political reasons for this. Both it and South African Airways were moved from Terminal 3 to Terminal 1 at a similar time. These airlines were from countries subject to international sanctions and political boycotts. By placing them in the British Airways domestic/European terminal it isolated them from other players who may not have wanted to be placed close to them eg Arab or African carriers. Terminal 1 was also used by British Midland, Aer Lingus and a few others like Cyprus. Indeed the situation with Cyprus and Turkey probably warranted their placement in Terminal 1 as they should have flown from Terminal 2.


What goes around comes around....unless your luggage is not on the carousel...
User currently offlineshamrock604 From Ireland, joined Sep 2007, 4166 posts, RR: 13
Reply 17, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 8707 times:

I believe T1 at LHR is or was the airport's designated "high security terminal", and hence flights to destinations deemed at risk were hosted there.

You had flights by SAA during the days of apartheid, El Al services to TLV, BA and BD shuttles to Belfast etc etc.

Indeed, the central apron at T1 was known by some airport workers by the rather "un PC" nickname of "bomb alley" for a time!

Its nice to see things have changed, at least for South Africa and Northern Ireland, but sadly the security focus has probably just shifted to other parts of the airport!



Flown EI,FR,RE,EIR,VE,SI,TLA,BA,BE,BD,VX,MON,AF,YS,WX,KL,SK,LH,OK,OS,LX,IB,LTU,HLX,4U,SU,CO,DL,UA,AC,PR,MH,SQ,QF, EY, EK
User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 8558 times:

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 10):
combined with the historically high risk Northern Ireland flights going back several decades.

Sorry, but exactly what "historically high risk Northern Ireland flights" are you referring to??? The infamous Gate 52 was nothing but a completely shameful act. At absolutely no time was there ever any 'risk', let alone 'high' on any flight to/from Northern Ireland. Indeed, what special 'security precautions' were ever in place? Let's keep things in perspective, and truthful, here.

Quoting santos (Reply 7):
What about in Terminal 5? How do they board/operate a flight to TLV and the Gulf states within the same terminal?
All BA routes

I don't quite understand your question.....why wouldn't they be handled together?

Quoting ferminbrif (Reply 15):
maybe because the Airport security checks is more tough in T1 than other T´s??? i´m just playing imagination, besides that islamic terrorist groups must be willing to do anything to blast any El-Al aircraft. So, airport security must be really tough.

Not in the slightest. Security procedures are no different irrespective of what terminal is used.

Quoting shamrock604 (Reply 17):
I believe T1 at LHR is or was the airport's designated "high security terminal", and hence flights to destinations deemed at risk were hosted there.

You had flights by SAA during the days of apartheid, El Al services to TLV, BA and BD shuttles to Belfast etc etc.

Indeed, the central apron at T1 was known by some airport workers by the rather "un PC" nickname of "bomb alley" for a time!

As stated above, I have to disagree with you entirely. As asked above, please tell me what special 'security' precautions were ever taken for SAA, BD or BA at T1 which couldn't be implemented at the drop of a hat at any other terminal? What 'security precautions' were ever required for apartheid, because I've certainly never seen/experienced any such which you 'describe'? Have to say I've never heard any such reference to your "bomb alley" at any time.......indeed, for what reason?


User currently offlineshamrock604 From Ireland, joined Sep 2007, 4166 posts, RR: 13
Reply 19, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 8491 times:

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 18):
As stated above, I have to disagree with you entirely. As asked above, please tell me what special 'security' precautions were ever taken for SAA, BD or BA at T1 which couldn't be implemented at the drop of a hat at any other terminal? What 'security precautions' were ever required for apartheid, because I've certainly never seen/experienced any such which you 'describe'? Have to say I've never heard any such reference to your "bomb alley" at any time.......indeed, for what reason?


Not everything has to be an arguement complete with quotation marks around every second word. We can have a friendly exchange, cant we?

I'll allow some other Heathrow regulars to back up my points. I've read this in several books on the subject of Heathrow, and spoken to many a Heathrow worker on the subject. The name "bomb alley" was hardly official, but that doesnt mean that it didnt exist among at least some....

As you very well know, ALL flights from this Island, be it North or Republic were considered "high risk" and special procedures were enacted for flights from here. You may know there was no real risk, and I may know that, but these flights were deemed High risk, hence the armed police that greeted us on every arrival, the extra special loving attention complete with smart remarks we used to receive from security, and the elevated observation area with darkened glass that used to look over us mere mortals in the baggage hall.

South Africa also was frequently under threat from other african states during the apartheid years, and yes, did receive some extra attention.

[Edited 2011-01-02 14:14:22]

[Edited 2011-01-02 14:18:28]


Flown EI,FR,RE,EIR,VE,SI,TLA,BA,BE,BD,VX,MON,AF,YS,WX,KL,SK,LH,OK,OS,LX,IB,LTU,HLX,4U,SU,CO,DL,UA,AC,PR,MH,SQ,QF, EY, EK
User currently offlineoa260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 26909 posts, RR: 58
Reply 20, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 8294 times:

The flights between BFS-LHR-BFS were not a target themselves but more on the ground. When I arrived in NI you had a mirror placed under your car and often had to open your boot at the RUC/Army check points on approach to the airport. On arrival at LHR T1 you were often stopped by Police and asked questions, happened to me a few times.

It was acutally LHR itself that was mortar bombed back in 1994 no less than 3 times in a week ! The check in areas were never anything like the EL AL check in desks as BMI / EI the flights were checking in not just BFS/DUB/SNN but many destinations. The extra security placed at Gate 52 was warranted in my opinion, I was a regular on the Belfast BA shuttle flights and British Midland flights and I saw many a shady character being lifted by Police. There was a significant terrorist threat just like the EL AL flights except the bombs were going off on the Mainland as opposed to the air.


User currently offlinewilld From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2008, 238 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 8231 times:

IIRC back to the early days of the BBC documentary Airport, they follwed two El Al check in staff- the progamme actually made a point of showing the extra security LY flights were subjected to (at the request of the airline) and IIRC they even had check in located in a room that was not part of the main terminal check in area (to get in one had to pass through security).

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 18):
At absolutely no time was there ever any 'risk', let alone 'high' on any flight to/from Northern Ireland.

That is a rather sweeping statement. I am sure at some point during the troubles with the IRA, especially during the height of thr troubles in the 1970's, it would have crossed the minds of the government at the time that a flight could have been targeted. You also seem to forget that LHR itself was an IRA target, of course this was not targeted at any carrier specifically but if the wider airport was a target but there is no reason to not believe that at some point flights could have been targets. After the a number of the bombers in one of the early IRA mainland bombings were arrested at LHR trying to board a flight back to BFS, I am sure that the authorities must have always kept an eye on the BFS bound flights.

To say there was never any risk is a gross dumbing down of the troubles at the time, they certainly was a risk to anyone in London during hte 1970's (just after the Harrods bombing) and would have been a risk to flights operating to BFs. If an empty suitcase left at Waterloo station in the rush hour was considered a risk then any flight to BFS could have conceivably been a risk (or at least the check in areas etc of any airline flying into BFS).


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25117 posts, RR: 22
Reply 22, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 8174 times:

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 18):
Quoting ferminbrif (Reply 15):
maybe because the Airport security checks is more tough in T1 than other T´s??? i´m just playing imagination, besides that islamic terrorist groups must be willing to do anything to blast any El-Al aircraft. So, airport security must be really tough.

Not in the slightest. Security procedures are no different irrespective of what terminal is used.

I don't agree with that. I recall reading years ago that the gate normally by LY at LHR T1 had special bulletproof windows. I then recall using that gate for another flight (probably BA) and you could tell that the windows overlooking the ramp were very thick resulting in a distorted view.

[Edited 2011-01-02 15:20:54]

User currently offlineoa260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 26909 posts, RR: 58
Reply 23, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 8096 times:

Quoting willd (Reply 21):

IIRC back to the early days of the BBC documentary Airport, they follwed two El Al check in staff- the progamme actually made a point of showing the extra security LY flights were subjected to (at the request of the airline) and IIRC they even had check in located in a room that was not part of the main terminal check in area (to get in one had to pass through security).

Some videos :

At 4mins 15sec you can see the armed police guy at the check in .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7U5VkoKu0Nk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnmGll5T8cc

The other seperate room was the gate area.


User currently offlineshamrock604 From Ireland, joined Sep 2007, 4166 posts, RR: 13
Reply 24, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7994 times:

Quoting oa260 (Reply 20):
The flights between BFS-LHR-BFS were not a target themselves but more on the ground
Quoting willd (Reply 21):
IIRC back to the early days of the BBC documentary Airport, they follwed two El Al check in staff- the progamme actually made a point of showing the extra security LY flights were subjected to (at the request of the airline) and IIRC they even had check in located in a room that was not part of the main terminal check in area (to get in one had to pass through security).
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 22):
I don't agree with that. I recall reading years ago that the gate normally by LY at LHR T1 had special bulletproof windows. I then recall using that gate for another flight (probably BA) and you could tell that the windows overlooking the ramp were very thick resulting a distorted view.

Thank you all.



Flown EI,FR,RE,EIR,VE,SI,TLA,BA,BE,BD,VX,MON,AF,YS,WX,KL,SK,LH,OK,OS,LX,IB,LTU,HLX,4U,SU,CO,DL,UA,AC,PR,MH,SQ,QF, EY, EK
25 rutankrd : The various iterations of the "temporary anti-terrorist act" targeting NI groups lead to intelligence agencies determining an implied risk to aviatio
26 TravellerPlus : When I flew with SAA out of Terminal 1, they had extra screening at the gate. All hand luggage was manually inspected by gate staff in addition to th
27 shamrock604 : Yes, there may have been interest in attacking Heathrow, but I think its debatable whether Flights between Northern Ireland and Heathrow were themsel
28 VV701 : From the early 1970s through to the mid 1980s anything associated with Northern Ireland was 'high risk'. At LHR that 'risk' was not only associated w
29 shamrock604 : I just wish to clarify my own point here for the benefit of other contributors - When I say "no real risk" above, I meant that in my opinion, there w
30 Post contains links oa260 : Very true my two trips to Israel with BMI were also the same , whilst the security sweep on our flight as the flight before was from CAI the passenge
31 Glom : Interesting article. I of course enjoy the put downs by the seasoned Israeli intelligence of our reactionary rubbish. But I do wonder about a procedu
32 lofty : LY use T1 as they have extra equipment at the gate for there flights, in the old days gate 23 was their gate, then they moved to the Euro Pier but onl
33 kiwiandrew : What will happen when the T1/T2 redevelopment is finished ? Presumably LY will then be moved to T4 , the " Skyteam + unaligned" terminal ? I can't ima
34 hz747300 : It is not uncommon to see SV and QR next to the El Al flight at the terminal here in HKG. To me, if they are members of IATA, they really have no choi
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
El Al Cancels 777 Order posted Thu Apr 29 2010 18:24:35 by LAXintl
El Al Release New Safety Video posted Mon Apr 26 2010 12:10:55 by EL-AL
El Al 777 To LTN posted Fri Mar 19 2010 19:39:45 by EZYAirbus
El Al Adding 4 Weekly Flights To CDG posted Tue Feb 23 2010 03:42:37 by EL-AL
Now It's Final: El Al Will Fly Domestic posted Thu Feb 4 2010 08:06:37 by EL-AL
El Al Seeks New US Airline Partnership. posted Wed Dec 2 2009 01:09:57 by SeaMeFly
El Al 747 Flies For TAT Nigeria posted Wed Nov 18 2009 04:27:31 by NA
El Al B747 In GRU posted Wed Oct 14 2009 04:30:58 by Hardiwv
El Al Will Fly Domastic: Tel Aviv - Eilat posted Mon Aug 31 2009 03:04:28 by EL-AL
Report : Virgin In Talks With El Al posted Mon Aug 10 2009 09:43:02 by IAD380