gilesdavies From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 2985 posts, RR: 2 Posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 8898 times:
Luton Airport has revealed their new and revised master plan for growth up to 18 million passengers by 2025...
This is a revised plan, after the airport operator LLAOL and Abertis had differing views to how the airport should grow to what the airports owners Luton Borough Council had... Now all parties have agreed to these new plans, making them more affordable and realistic for the operators who have a contract to run the airport until around 2030.
On the surface the plans look quite limited, but the airport is remaining realistic to what markets it can attract and focusing on the Low Cost Carriers which are the airports "bread and butter" and need to offer this sector value for money... Looking to maximise use out of the current facilities while improving the customer experience at the same time.
Main Aspects of the Plans
- The passenger drop off zone is going to get a major overhaul to increase throughput into the Central Terminal Area (CTA).
- New multi storey Car Park for Short Stay Parking in the CTA.
- Dual carriage the road from the Holiday Inn Express, under the taxiway into the CTA.
- Full parallel taxiway to maximise runway usage.
- New southern pier, to provide additional gates.
- Bringing back into use areas of the old adjacent terminal (previously occupied by SilverJet).
- Extending the front of the terminal building to create a new entrance foyer with more passenger seating and retail areas on the upper level.
- Reorganising the internal layout of the terminal building to create a more logical route through the building from check in, through security to passenger waiting lounges and then to the aircraft boarding gates. This will also apply to arriving passengers who will have an easier route from their aircraft through to immigration control, baggage reclaim and then out of the terminal building.
- 15 additional aircraft stands - through some reorganisation and the creation of some new areas of hardstanding.
The airport boasts in their documentation, they have the smallest land footprint of any UK Airport per million passengers and do not have any intention to acquire new land or extend the 7000ft runway. In many respects the airport has very little choice in this matter, they are located on the edge of Luton with residential and industrial buildings to the north, the airport is located on top of a hill and to the west hill drops off very steeply as can be seen at the end of runway 26 and to the south and east it borders Hertfordshire who are vehemently against any expansion of the airport.
In the airports own footprint they are also limited to where they can build, as around the old western apron the airport is bordered by hangars for easyJet, Monarch, Thomson, Flightline, Harrods and Signature.
GCT64 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 1323 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 8824 times:
So, in simple terms, they have given up any immediate aspiration to increase the airport's footprint but, instead, maximuise throughput within the existing footprint - which seems a sensible pragmatic approach that, hopefully, won't get tied up in planning enquiries / consultations.
I note the document says "the flow of traffic around the Central Terminal Area needs to be improved", that must rank as one of the biggest understatements ever in such documents!
Other changes I can see:
The old Signature hangars (by "the pond") to go, replaced by a smaller footprint FBO building
"Indicative" new FBO hangar down by the Cargo ramp, although access looks tricky if any cargo aircraft are present
No net increase in bizjet ramp space, possibly a decrease (but there is a lot of dual-use ramp space)
Most of the new airliner stand capacity is going to need to be accessed by bus (rather than jetway/walk) [although Pier B goes from bus to jetway]
and the top of the new multi-story car park should be good for spotting
babybus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 8634 times:
I've only been through LTN once but I thought it was ok. I do wish it had better transport links with central London. The M1 was terrible and I believe if you catch a train you need a bus trip to the airport. A bit fussy.
One thing I liked was that departing passengers go up an escalator to security. Friends and family are left at the bottom waving you off as you glide up to the next floor and out of sight.
I like the look of the new plan. Airports always seem to double up as building sites for most of their existence.
atpg5 From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 10 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6707 times:
Full parallel taxiway to maximise runway usage.
Well shoot, if you are going to add FULL parallel taxiways, make them FULL. This will still require some back taxi. We back taxi now as soon as landing traffic passes. This robs precious time/spacing between arrivals.
gilesdavies From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 2985 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3364 times:
Quoting atpg5 (Reply 6): Well shoot, if you are going to add FULL parallel taxiways, make them FULL. This will still require some back taxi. We back taxi now as soon as landing traffic passes. This robs precious time/spacing between arrivals.
That's as near to a full parallel taxiway the airport is going to get! The land around by the turning circles drops away, and on quite a slope...
I'd imagine about 95% of all aircraft that use Luton, if not more will be able to use these facilities, without back tracking down the final section as this is only going to give them about 50 metres more run up.
I assume its the pilots final decision, but the vast majority of Ryanair flights departing on Runway 26 (westerly departure), take off from the current taxiway exit on to the runway and do not backtrack. Giving them only about 5500-6000ft of runway! Always makes me feel nervous when they do that when I am on the flight, as would rather they optimise the full runway, to give you that security blanket. They even do this on their longer sectors to MLA, RAK and Canaries, when the aircraft is heavier!
Quoting Mcoov (Reply 5): How many passengers does Luton see now? I can imagine Luton becoming something of a Gatwick reliever, along with Stansted.
The airport current passenger figures are hovering just under 10 million, and are hoping they break this figure this year...
I think they have learnt a lot from the downturn STN has experienced in recent years, whose passenger numbers have dropped from 24 million to around 17 million. Regardless of the facilities the airport offers to LCC, they want value for money basic facilities and I think this is what the current plans represent.
I am unable to see in the plans, the luxury of for example air bridges being added.
r2rho From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2497 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3141 times:
Some very welcome and very necessary improvements, although I would have liked to see a bit more. In particular, a runway extension.
Also, I would have at least liked to see a provision for a branch or loop to provide a direct rail link to the terminals. If the airport really aims to have 18million pax, this starts becoming necessary.
A disappointment. A longer runway is IMO a necessary condition for LTN to reach its full potential, and would open up interesting development opportunities. But the airport administrators are surely well aware of how impossible that is to do these days, and therefore choose to stay out of trouble and do a low-profile, low-risk improvement of the existing layout.
Quoting gilesdavies (Thread starter): affordable and realistic for the operators who have a contract to run the airport until around 2030.
This of course further limits any large-scale/ambitious expansion, as it would have to be paid off by then. Within that timeframe, improving existing facilities is the only option, maximizing value for money, which this plan seems to do. LTN's dependency on LCC's also imposes limits on the amount of fees they can charge.
BeakerLTN From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2009, 290 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3134 times:
Just on the subject of not backtracking..
I'm with you on this, I know the calculations must add up, but with some of those heavier 738's it must be extremely close to the edge by the time they get to V1 that they'd have enough braking to stop by the runway end in the event of a aborted takeoff - especially in wetter weather - and as mentioned above, it's hardly forgiving should you run off the end of 26.
As pasenger, I for one would by far appreciate using the full length next time I fly (which is in a couple of weeks on a 319)
Giancavia From Vatican City, joined Feb 2010, 1303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2496 times:
Quoting r2rho (Reply 8): Some very welcome and very necessary improvements, although I would have liked to see a bit more. In particular, a runway extension.
I dont really see any need for extending our runway, Nearly all movements in and out are Executive or A320/737 family aircraft. When its required airlines like ELAL have used the 777 into LTN. Cargo airlines have operated in with MD11.. 747 can and have also tasted the tarmac without problems. If one of those fully ladened Caledonian tristars can get out of here I am not worried about most modern aircraft struggling to much. I think new long haul routes will come. New kinds of aircraft like the 787 should be able to use LTN if there is a need.. Air Blue is starting flights to Pakistan using smaller equiptment. Gone are the days of needing an extremely long runway and huge parking bays for long distance flights.
Im not sure alot of people realise at the end of 08 you are dropping off a massive cliff lol. I know.. I live right next to it. Building a runway all the way down here and a taxiway to the end would be alot of work to say the least.
Luton will grow and grow and grow. Primarily in my opinion because of location. It has great catchment areas in all directions. Is base to Monarch, Thomson, Easyjet and home away from home for Wizzair. Gulfstream has hangars here.. and its rather easy to get to London in no time.
For me the worst thing about the airport has always been the roads into it.. under the bridge, all the traffic.. I would like to think they will fix these problems during these planned upgrades.
The day it reaches capacity, There is actually room to keep expanding to the right of the above picture^. If the government is so desperate for more aviation capacity.. Im sure they would find a way for LTN to buy up the golf course/recycle dump/open fields that are over that way.. Lots of earth would be required to keep everythign level though.
Even now they could make 4 or 5 more stands over the engine run up bay area.
Luton council is 26 million in debt, The airport provides the town with most of its money and jobs. I dont see much standing in its way nowdays other then the nimbys in stevenage who cant do a whole lot about it.