Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
LHR Losing The Battle, FRA / CDG / AMS Winning  
User currently offlineGonzalo From Chile, joined Aug 2005, 1987 posts, RR: 2
Posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 17078 times:

The former CEO of IATA, G. Bisignani, said in a statement that London Heathrow Airport has lost its position as Europe’s primary hub airport, due to its runway capacity shortage, and the better performance of direct competitors as FRA, CDG and AMS.

The third runway expansion looks more and more necessary every day...


http://atwonline.com/airports-routes...irport-loses-leading-position-1203


Rgds.
G.


80 Knots...V1...Rotate...Gear Up...DC-3 / EMB-110 / Fairchild-227 / Ab318-19-20 / B732 / B763
74 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinejporterfi From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 444 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 16995 times:

I'm surprised that's the only reason! From a passenger perspective, if I had to choose one of those airport to connect at, there's a good chance it wouldn't be LHR. IMO, they need to rethink their terminals when they create their next Master Plan. It takes a very long time to travel from security to your gate at LHR, plus with only two runways at BA's largest hub, I not surprised that those other airports are performing better (at least in terms of flights being on-time).

User currently offlineLDVAviation From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 1067 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 16771 times:

Quoting Gonzalo (Thread starter):

The former CEO of IATA, G. Bisignani, said in a statement that London Heathrow Airport has lost its position as Europe’s primary hub airport, due to its runway capacity shortage, and the better performance of direct competitors as FRA, CDG and AMS.

Yet, the passengers keep coming.


User currently offlinemiaintl From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 1049 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 16433 times:

The only solution to London's LHR problem is for them to build a new international airport near the Thames estuary which will replace LHR. The terminal layout in LHR is a pain for transiting passengers unless your transiting within terminal 5.

User currently offlinefactsonly From Montserrat, joined Aug 2012, 894 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 15941 times:

Some recent statistics:

AIRPORT MOVEMENTS - last 12 months upto July 2012:

- CDG 505 510 = (1.0)
- FRA 487 321 = 1.5
- LHR) 479 205 = 0.9
- AMS 440 932 = 3.9

PASSENGERS - last 12 months upto July 2012:

- LHR 69 866 219 = 1.7
- CDG 61 747 867 = 2.7
- FRA 57 533 259 = 4.0
- AMS 50 686 048 = 5.1

FREIGHT - last 12 months upto July 2012:

- CDG 1 958 153
- FRA 1 955 822 = (9.5)
- AMS 1 495 932 = (3.5)
- LHR 1 465 754 = (1.7)


User currently offlineraffik From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2006, 1716 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 15558 times:

Quoting factsonly (Reply 4):
PASSENGERS - last 12 months upto July 2012:

That completely contradicts the poster's claim that LHR was losing the battle.

Parts of the airport are of a dated design but if you are connecting to most BA services, this will be done within T5.
(Apart from a handful of Middle East destinations that the midhaul 321s serve)

We do need the third runway or a completely new airport to boot but it doesn't seem the government want to spend the cash or commit. Plus there has been a lot of resistance from local house owners and green parliament members who worry that the increase in traffic will result in higher pollution levels.

What really annoys me is the huge increases in airport taxes and duty we have to pay



Happy -go- lucky kinda guy!
User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7531 posts, RR: 17
Reply 6, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 15323 times:

Quoting Gonzalo (Thread starter):
said in a statement that London Heathrow Airport has lost its position as Europe’s primary hub airport

Of course there are lies, damn lies and statistics.

If we take these statistics:

Quoting factsonly (Reply 4):
PASSENGERS - last 12 months upto July 2012:

- LHR 69 866 219 = 1.7
- CDG 61 747 867 = 2.7
- FRA 57 533 259 = 4.0
- AMS 50 686 048 = 5.1

and project the stated growth figures forward ten years this is what we get:

PASSENGERS (000s) 12 months up to July 2022:

- LHR 79,953 at 1.7 per cent growth per annum
- CDG 76,416 at 2.7 per cent growth per annum
- FRA 78,738 at 4.0 per cent growth per annum
- AMS 75,459 at 5.1 per cent growth per annum

Is such a projection using actual annual growth figures as at July 2012 fair? Possibly not. History is not necessarily a guide to the future. But it is all we have got other than an intelligent guess (better known by "experts" as a "forecast").

Nevertheless since current growth rates at LHR are restricted by capacity I would hazard a guess that as more and more 380s come into service, of the four airports LHR stands to benefit most in terms of passenger numbers.

Finally note that on historic projections the airport that will actually decline most in RELATIVE importance is CDG which has (in my figures) been overtaken by FRA by 2022 and will be overtaken by AMS in 2023. And it is also 2023 when FRA edges ahead of LHR in terms of passenger numbers. But that is a long time away.

However the chances of all of this actually happening are not that good. Nothing is certain.


User currently offlineAndyEastMids From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 1017 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 15223 times:

LHR hasn't lost it's position for largest number if passengers, just as a hub. If that's the case - fair enough. Hubbing transfer passengers don't do that much for the UK economy - they don't stay in the country, they don't spend in hotels bars and restaurants or on taxis and other travel etc and hubbing passengers don't do business in the UK. So if Johnny Foreigner goes elsewhere in Europe just to change planes, let them get on with it. Who says LHR really needs to be a (or the) hub for Europe? OK, some ex-LHR routes are currently propped up by transfer traffic, but LHR (complimented by LGW) can stand on its own as an O&D airport for London servings the majority of destinations folks coming from or to the UK need. And as air travel growth continues, if declining transfer traffic makes room for more O&D traffic, that's not a bad result at all.

User currently offlinefinnishway From Finland, joined Jul 2012, 309 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 15172 times:

Quoting miaintl (Reply 3):
The only solution to London's LHR problem is for them to build a new international airport near the Thames estuary which will replace LHR.

I disagree. That would take years or even a decade to develop. New terminal 2 will help LHR, but third runway is necessary. There is many ways to make this situation better, but they need a new runway, if they want to keep LHR as a Europe’s primary hub.


User currently offlineGALLEYSTEW From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 159 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 15136 times:

Also, let us not forget. The incredible airport fees and taxes you have to pay to leave LHR. I know several people that fly back to the states from CDG or AMS. It saves $$$.


All Posts are my opinions only.
User currently offlineGonzalo From Chile, joined Aug 2005, 1987 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 15108 times:

Quoting raffik (Reply 5):
That completely contradicts the poster's claim that LHR was losing the battle.

It's not "my" claim, I'm just posting here a statement of Mr. Bisignani.

Quoting AndyEastMids (Reply 7):
Who says LHR really needs to be a (or the) hub for Europe?

Willie Walsh ?  

Rgds.
G.



80 Knots...V1...Rotate...Gear Up...DC-3 / EMB-110 / Fairchild-227 / Ab318-19-20 / B732 / B763
User currently offlineSKAirbus From Norway, joined Oct 2007, 1737 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 14952 times:

Quoting jporterfi (Reply 1):
I'm surprised that's the only reason! From a passenger perspective, if I had to choose one of those airport to connect at, there's a good chance it wouldn't be LHR. IMO, they need to rethink their terminals when they create their next Master Plan. It takes a very long time to travel from security to your gate at LHR, plus with only two runways at BA's largest hub, I not surprised that those other airports are performing better (at least in terms of flights being on-time).

Well this is changing:

- Terminal 5 has been voted one of the world's best airport facilities on numerous occasions and has improved the BA experience quite considerably.

- Terminal 2 will offer a similar experience to Star Alliance carriers on its completion and will eventually replace Terminal 1 as well as the old T2.

- Terminal 4 has undergone a big refurbishment and currently provides easy transition for Sky Team carriers and other carriers.

- Terminal 3 is LHR's one remaining problem.. My guess would be that it will be gradually replaced after the Terminal 2 project is complete...

So essentially LHR is getting there... slowly but surely. It is a much better experience than it was 10 years ago and in the next 5 years it will rank up there with the likes of AMS and FRA for passenger service.

The only problem really now is runway capacity... but unfortunately the government are in deadlock.. They see the need for it but bearing in mind there are a lot of Tory voters under the flightpath, it would be tantamount to political suicide. Thena gain if LHR gets moved, who will be the first to complain... said Tory voters.



Next Flights: LHR-OSL (319-BA), OSL-LHR (319-BA), LHR-CPH (320-BA), VXO-BMA (S20-TF), ARN-CPH (738-SK), CPH-LHR (320-BA)
User currently offlineAndyEastMids From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 1017 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 14877 times:

Yes, the reality is that BA and BAA are the only large organisations with an immediate vested interest in trying to continue to sustain LHR as a hub rather than allowing it to become an O&D airport. Again, as air travel continues to grow getting shut of pure transfer traffic to other hubs (taking with them the airport congestion, pollution and lack of significant input to the economy) won't be a bad result as it'll create more room for O&D traffic. Whilst some LHR routes undoubtedly benefit from transfer traffic, I don't believe LHR needs to be dependent on transfer traffic and as growth continues LHR will continue to thrive serving UK markets.

User currently offlinefactsonly From Montserrat, joined Aug 2012, 894 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 14482 times:

Another way to look at the four airports:

NUMBER OF DESTINATIONS served Summer 2012:

- FRA = 277
- AMS = 247
- CDG = 236
- LHR = 162

DOMESTIC UK:
- AMS = 23
- CDG = 14
- FRA = 10
- LHR = 7

CHINA:
- AMS = 6
- FRA = 4
- CDG = 4
- LHR = 3

RUSSIA:
- FRA = 11
- LHR = 3
- AMS = 2
- CDG = 2

USA:
- FRA = 21
- CDG = 21
- LHR = 21
- AMS = 19

AFRICA:
- CDG = 40
- FRA = 28
- AMS = 23
- LHR = 21


User currently offlineGCT64 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 1398 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 14249 times:

Quoting AndyEastMids (Reply 12):
Whilst some LHR routes undoubtedly benefit from transfer traffic, I don't believe LHR needs to be dependent on transfer traffic and as growth continues LHR will continue to thrive serving UK markets.

LHR/London is the one place in Europe that doesn't need to be a hub because of the dominant position London occupies in O&D compared with the rest of Europe.

IATA, BA and the airlines all care about whether somewhere is a hub but from the perspective of the population of very densely populated SE England they would probably prefer that the transfer pax (and their associated noise and polution) go somewhere else in Europe and clog up their airports and airspace.

I think we focus too much here on whether LHR can compete for transfers versus CDG, AMS or FRA when actually it doesn't need to.

(my perspective is as a local LHR resident who wants/needs good global air links and is an aviation enthusiast)



Flown in: A30B,A306,A310,A319,A320,A321,A332,A333,A343,A346,A388,BA11,BU31,B190, B461,B462,(..51 types..),VC10,WESX
User currently onlinefcogafa From United Kingdom, joined May 2008, 799 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 13852 times:

Here is Heathrow's explanation why a hub is a good thing...

34% pax are transitting
Creates many jobs
Creates more routes that wouldn't be sustainable without hubbing

http://mediacentre.heathrowairport.c...x?MediaDetailsID=1105&SizeId=-1%20


User currently offlineoffloaded From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2009, 885 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 13478 times:

Quoting AndyEastMids (Reply 7):
they don't spend in hotels bars and restaurants or on taxis and other travel etc and hubbing passengers don't do business in the UK. So if Johnny Foreigner goes elsewhere in Europe just to change planes, let them get on with it.

Not sure the numerous restaurants, bars, and shops at LHR would agree....

FRA is fighting its own battle.
Frankfurt Night Flight Ban



To no one will we sell, or deny, or delay, right or justice - Magna Carta, 1215
User currently offlineLufthansa From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 3213 posts, RR: 10
Reply 17, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 13271 times:

Quoting fcogafa (Reply 15):
34% pax are transitting
Creates many jobs
Creates more routes that wouldn't be sustainable without hubbing

  

And with that, comes corporate head quarters, distribution centres, and even, believe it or not
factories. Some good need to get to places as fast as possible, or have heaps of staff having to travel the world
to get the good out there. Time is money and the ability to do that is a major economic driver. Look at the US and how
fiercely states fight to maintain Hub Status, and how cities that are hubs like Minneapolis and Atlanta enjoy significant
advantages over their rivals. London is always gonna have lots of direct routes, but think of say secondary cities in China or even in north America. Say somewhere like Phoenix. Would it be sustainable without transfer traffic? At a guess I'd say no, but having it there is very good for british business to get in and out of America fast.


User currently offlinespud757 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 338 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 12904 times:

Quoting SKAirbus (Reply 11):
The only problem really now is runway capacity... but unfortunately the government are in deadlock.. They see the need for it but bearing in mind there are a lot of Tory voters under the flightpath, it would be tantamount to political suicide. Thena gain if LHR gets moved, who will be the first to complain... said Tory voters.

Exactly! Not that the Tories need to worry about being in government again for some time (likewise for LibDems); it'll be UKIP / Labour coalition I suspect that still won't make a decision. Heathrow is a political can that keeps getting kicked down the road for after the next general election and so on. We either need UK political parties to get on with the needs of the country, not worrying about the next election (can't see that happening) or we need such major economical and strategic infrastructure decisions to be made by independent non-political bodies rather than HM Government to get anything done. Such a body would be directed by HM Government to set up a panel into, for example, runway expansion in the UK. The panel should have representatives from the local communities affected, from commerce (e.g. IoD), from the specific industry concerned (e.g. airport operator), civil servents from relevent government department (e.g. Dept for Transport), topic experts, legal experts etc with each member having an equal vote in the decision process. Then at least the government can say it's not our decision!

Heathrow needs a 3rd runway to ease capacity issues and allow for weather related congestion.
Heathrow needs direct connection to the UK national rail network, preferably the new HS one. I just find it so odd that major airports like LGW, STN & MAN have national rail stations within terminal complex, but the UK's hub, LHR, doesn't. Domestic air connections in the UK are discouraged by high APD so LHR needs to be connected to the nation by rail.


User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4737 posts, RR: 39
Reply 19, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 12794 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting spud757 (Reply 18):
Heathrow needs direct connection to the UK national rail network, preferably the new HS one.

The competitors CDG, FRA and AMS already have a large train station including High Speed Trains within the terminal complex. That is a major advantage which Heathrow currently is lacking.

I agree that the third runway should have been built already but the politicians just can not make a decision. Which is too bad.  .


User currently offlineLufthansa From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 3213 posts, RR: 10
Reply 20, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 12591 times:

Quoting spud757 (Reply 18):
Domestic air connections in the UK are discouraged by high APD so LHR needs to be connected to the nation by rail.

I have a fair easier to implement and cheaper solution. Abandon the APD tax. All these wonderful ideas about replacing LHR etc... well i have news for your all. the UK has higher priorities than shutting down functional airports to replace them with new ones. It will come down to this, LHR expands or nothing at all. At least in the short and medium term. Plus what will likely happen to STN and LGW? They'll of course expand! It might even be easier if you want to go down the replacement path of building several additional runways at one of these airports and terminals and shutting heathrow down. That's going to be cheaper than building on water.


User currently offlinehohd From United States of America, joined May 2008, 421 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 12390 times:

Who says CDG or FRA are that much better ? In CDG, you have to catch buses to remote "gates" to transfer. In FRA, the departure terminals are cramped and you have to take trams and walk a lot to transfer. Only at AMS, the transfer is smooth.

LHR would be stronger if not for the high airport taxes and APD (for UK originating passengers).

And the number of cities served by LHR to USA consistently is much higher than any European airport, inspite of what is mentioned above.


User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4737 posts, RR: 39
Reply 22, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 12229 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting hohd (Reply 21):
In FRA, the departure terminals are cramped and you have to take trams and walk a lot to transfer.

That is why they are building the huge Terminal South (Süd). Which will require airport trains to transfer to the other terminals.

Quoting hohd (Reply 21):
Only at AMS, the transfer is smooth

But the walking distances can also be quite big. Also the "one terminal concept" has its limitations. But of these 4 airports I do like AMS best.  .


User currently offlineincitatus From Brazil, joined Feb 2005, 4014 posts, RR: 13
Reply 23, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 12157 times:

Quoting AndyEastMids (Reply 7):
Hubbing transfer passengers don't do that much for the UK economy - they don't stay in the country, they don't spend in hotels bars and restaurants or on taxis and other travel etc and hubbing passengers don't do business in the UK.

Transfer passengers help make viable services that would not exist otherwise. When taken together those additional services make a difference in how the local economy grows because it is a factor on where companies decide to locate facilities and hold events. A limited Heathrow is sinking London in the long run.



Stop pop up ads
User currently offlineLufthansa From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 3213 posts, RR: 10
Reply 24, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 12086 times:

what about the heathwick idea? The high speed train linking the two airports in 15 mins, after security to act as a 'seemless' connection?

25 Eurohub : With successive governments shying away from a third runway, can you really imagine one pushing a new-build high speed line through the South East?
26 Post contains images readytotaxi : I agree, now if you could get on one of those "Segways" and zip through the terminal from one end to the other.
27 PanHAM : That's what they proposed at FRA as well, to connect HHN with a HSR or "Transrapid" line. besides the costs, who's going to pay for the € 50 upwards
28 Focker : What is the distance? You can put the high speed line underground, which is a bit complicated for a 3rd runway on LHR...
29 Semaex : Let's be factual about this topic. So where does factsonl get his numbers from, and where does hohd get his from? References would be appreciated, bu
30 brilondon : Yeah right, LHR is not going to become redundant as an international airport. I don't think that people are going to go to different airports just bec
31 toobz : I am really kind of shocked at how much AMS has grown! On that note I will say, I will choose AMS over FRA and LHR and day to connect.
32 fcogafa : I can do the LHR 21 - BOS, EWR, JFK, PHL, BWI, IAD, ATL, DTW, ORD, MSP, DEN, LAS, PHX, SAN, LAX, SFO, IAH. DFW, MIA, RDU, SEA any prizes?
33 Post contains links VV701 : According to the very detailed analysis on page 5 here: http://www.msmaviation.com/publicdocs/Transat_Winter_2011_2012.pdf of the top twenty trans-Atl
34 skiaplg : For business travelers, I don't feel the LHR will have too much of an issue. However, APD is a serious issue, at least for me, and has discouraged me
35 AirbusA6 : Other than 'my dog is bigger than your dog' type arguments, does anyone care who has the biggest airport, biggest hub, largest number of movements etc
36 777klm : Although I agree with you that LHR is far from loosing out, you do realize there's more than just transatlantic service?
37 RyanairGuru : It's growing slower than the others. Note "losing", not "lost" And the rest! Borris Island is, by a liberal estimate, 20 years away. Soon to be 22 wi
38 EPA001 : I do not think it is misleading at all. LHR is serving Greater London, which lies on a relatively small island (Great Britain) compared to continenta
39 incitatus : This is not about being relevant. It is about being number ONE. Rome is the Italian capital, center of the Catholic Church, major tourist city. Rome
40 VV701 : Quite. But as this thread is somewhat misleadingly titled ""LHR Losing The Battle, FRA / CDG / AMS Winning" I thought it worthwhile pointing out just
41 tommyy : Hi, as a frequent international traveler I try to avoid LHR like the plague, especially if you have to change terminal, it can take you up to a hour,
42 delimit : If you have to lose a battle, this isn't a terrible one to lose. O&D traffic is far more valuable than connecting. And while there is an argument
43 Post contains images ZaphodB : He's entitled to his opinion. One of his predecessors, Bob Ayling didn't think connecting traffic was worth chasing. If you look at TATL fares connec
44 PanHAM : I was once on a flight LHR-EWR (B777)with 29 passengers including myself, 5 of us in club world. I was connecting from FRA- I would not say that the c
45 raffik : I connected for the first time coming from SFO to LHR via FRA and I was shocked at FRA. It was a very dark and dingy airport- low ceilings and quite g
46 Post contains images EPA001 : The old terminal at FRA has these characteristics. But still they do not bother me that much, I still like it and was not shocked when I saw it for t
47 Post contains images r2rho : Exactly. A lot of people in this thread are missing that. Of course LHR is and will remain a major airport. Of course it will continue to post high p
48 cmf : There is no APD when you fly thru. FRA is a much better hub with the 4th runway and extended night ban than it was before.
49 babybus : That's exactly what i think. You can't go on adding capacity to LHR by building more runways, soon enough you'll run out of land to build on. It's al
50 AirbusA6 : But LHR isn't the only London airport, and that's a key difference to AMS and FRA. From wiki for 2011 LHR 69m passengers LGW 34m STN 18m LTN 10m Thus
51 spud757 : BA also offer UK connections via LHR at other regional airports than the ones you've mentioned:- NCL, LBA, ABZ, BHD. Of course with a third runway BA
52 PanHAM : Tell that to the people who got stranded because their aircraft had to taxi back to the stand at 23h01. last night they were lucky, winter weather an
53 cmf : Talk with the people who used the additional daytime movements.
54 DLPMMM : The last 3 times I went to the UK this year, I flew through FRA, CDG, and AMS....and one of the times I was going to LON. I avoided most of the APD bi
55 Shuttle9juliet : I cannot ever see LHR ever getting a third runway now? The governments not got the balls to do it. It's laughable because creating a third runway, cre
56 factsonly : Some contributors to this discussion mis-interpret the statement by Mr. Bisignani. He did NOT state LHR (or the London air passenger market) is or wil
57 Post contains images EPA001 : It is, but you are missing the point here. I requote what I said: The geographical situation of England (or Great-Brittain) is what makes more then o
58 AndyEastMids : The only direct economic benefit to be derived from hubbing (as opposed to O&D) is to the airlines that hub at the airport, to the airport itself,
59 brilondon : My imagination is running on overdrive with thinking about the high-speed line running from LHR to the SE England and may be not only SE England but
60 Post contains images Pihero : Money gained by all the above is benefit to the country's accounting... or it isn't ? Another illustration of the state of affairs is seeing the rela
61 factsonly : A perfect illustration of what Bisignani said ....and it continues today, see 2012 below: Passengers last 12 month - July 2012: - LHR 69 866 219 = 10
62 AirbusA6 : But then it's not London that has the unemployment problem, but rather the rest of the UK. How would 2 new runways for LHR help, say Scotland or the
63 Viscount724 : No it does not. Bisignani's statement was referring to LHR's position as a "HUB" which implies connectivity. A much higher proportion of LHR passenge
64 Post contains images Shuttle9juliet : Hi AIrbusA6 Yeah I see your point ,I know that LHR is in a highly built up urban area, flight path over the city ect ect, but it does seem that every
65 AndyEastMids : Aviation policy has missed a trick really... HS2 should go straight underneath LHR and offer links to Birmingham, Manchester, the East Midlands, Leeds
66 danielkandi : I like t5, but they lack the same thing that AMS does, a proper steakhouse haha! , joking aside. I pick AMS because like CPH, it's easy to get around,
67 VV701 : I think you may have answered your own question: These are both British companies. They employ British workers - more business, more income, more job
68 Post contains links and images lightsaber : Six months ago I did a thread on the most connected airports. Scoll down to post #29 for the updated table: Airports With Greatest Number Of Connected
69 Aesma : One year doesn't mean much. I have no idea what will happen but one thing is certain, CDG is not capacity restricted by a long shot. The third runway
70 theginge : That is what should happen, like FRA airport has a decent high speed railway line in to it where people not only transfer from train to plane but fro
71 factsonly : AMS, CDG and FRA all have integrated airport railway stations for both high speed international and local trains located under/at the airport. The Ne
72 starrymarkb : I wish we had such a policy. But here Public Transport is expected to compete with itself even where it wouldn't benefit the passenger (and where the
73 factsonly : Though some airports publish their ratio of O&D versus transfer traffic, it is hard to find credible data for airlines. But with some serous Goog
74 Post contains images GCT64 : But a good effort none the less, and adds some factual perspective to the discussion It shows why LHR (54M O&D = more than 50% bigger than the ne
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...
"Delta Bulls Losing The Battle On Message Boards" posted Fri Jun 18 2004 01:51:44 by InnocuousFox
Who's Winning The Battle Of BWI-BOS posted Wed May 19 2010 16:20:09 by 727LOVER
Gulf Air Inflight Chefs LHR/FRA/CDG A Good Idea? posted Mon Feb 3 2003 16:51:03 by GF-A330
FRA, CDG Or Lhr? Most International Destinations? posted Mon Aug 5 2002 13:24:53 by Godbless
Anyone Here Work In FRA Or LHR On The Ramp? posted Wed Oct 3 2001 12:24:37 by Abhi
Delta To Increase CDG/AMS Services In 2013 posted Fri Oct 5 2012 05:49:58 by panamair
Why No DL 744 Service To LHR During The Olympics? posted Sun Aug 12 2012 20:00:55 by AV8AJET
European Heavies At LHR During The Olympics posted Sat Jul 14 2012 06:29:40 by DAL763ER
Is MIA Losing The LH A388? posted Wed Feb 8 2012 21:07:25 by fpetrutiu
Diversions On UA 757: CDG/AMS-IAD Will It Last? posted Wed Oct 26 2011 15:46:55 by TOMMY767