Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
kaitak744
Topic Author
Posts: 2231
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 1:32 pm

3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Wed Nov 09, 2016 10:52 pm

This is a rough rendering. Please excuse the details.

I think this layout would work, and would upset the least amount of people as far as land and noise is concerned. It would also be the cheapest option to add a 3rd runway. T2 would just have to be built out to its full master-plan to accommodate T4 traffic. The reconfigured T3 is not necessary, it is just shown as an option.

Thoughts?

Image
 
mcoatc
Posts: 173
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 2:23 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Wed Nov 09, 2016 11:42 pm

From an air traffic control perspective, your proximity to the other runway would limit simultaneous operations in IFR weather, which is certainly commonplace in London. That's why you generally see parallel runways 4300' apart, at least here in the States. Don't know JAA rules.

To add to that, there's no space for 1000' overruns (which I know are required here), and while I don't claim to know the performance data, landing an A380 or 77W on an 8000' runway doesn't allow much room for error, especially if it's wet or icy. Without a doubt, you could use the runway for narrowbody aircraft only, but that certainly creates operational restrictions.

The trade-off would obviously be less disruptions to the folks around LHR, but I think it would be a less than ideal solution from an operational standpoint. Someone with a bit more knowledge of European regs may correct me on this.
 
kaitak744
Topic Author
Posts: 2231
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 1:32 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 12:36 am

Its no perfect solution. The new 8000 foot runway would be for landings. This would allow for the 2 runways to the south to be used 1 for landing and 1 for takeoff, and then the north runway can be mixed use. It will open up a lot more slots, though maybe not as many as a further spaced runway. You basically have a net gain of 1 mixed use runway. The attraction here is the fraction of the cost of what is being proposed with the runway in the north.

And regarding runway overruns. If space is needed, that would be a small amount of land to be purchased at either end.
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 12:48 am

Too close. The CAA would never approve simultaneous operations for the two south runways.

Part of the thinking for the new northern runway is it can be operated mixed mode, with a T6 separating it from the two actives. Placing it where T4 and the Royal/cargo terminals are would also create much more difficulty than it solves as it introduces even more active runway crossing for ground manoeuvring aircraft. Having the new runway away from existing traffic and primarily feeding T6 effectively creates an airport within an airport with less need to waste time trying to cross active runways.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9652
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 12:49 am

The European regs are rather more stringent than in the USA, fewer exemptions regarding taxiway and or runway separation. Old structures get exemptions, to be able to keep operating, new structures have to conform. All proposals for LHR for a third runway have it completely independent with the necessary separation from other runways.

The needed separation is, 1035m between centre lines of the runways for full independent parallel approaches and It can be reduced by 30m for each 150m the arrival runways are staggered toward arrival aircraft down to 300m between centre line of two runways. That should be the ICAO standard.
 
User avatar
EK413
Posts: 5663
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:11 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 1:17 am

Just build the new runway on reclaimed land and get it over and done. These proposes are band aid solutions not a long term solution. In other news AMS 7th runway has been approved.

EK413
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
airbazar
Posts: 10380
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 2:11 am

With the amount of narrowbody, short haul flying you have from LHR, even a 7,000ft runway would be better than no runway at all.
Channex757 wrote:
Part of the thinking for the new northern runway is it can be operated mixed mode, with a T6 separating it from the two actives. Placing it where T4 and the Royal/cargo terminals are would also create much more difficulty than it solves as it introduces even more active runway crossing for ground manoeuvring aircraft. Having the new runway away from existing traffic and primarily feeding T6 effectively creates an airport within an airport with less need to waste time trying to cross active runways.

That's all great but it's fantasy because it will never happen.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9652
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 2:13 am

The separation between runways in the drawing by the thread starter is about 360m, it would need to be nearly triple that to be acceptable.
 
kaitak744
Topic Author
Posts: 2231
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 1:32 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 2:24 am

mjoelnir wrote:
The separation between runways in the drawing by the thread starter is about 360m, it would need to be nearly triple that to be acceptable.


mjoelnir wrote:
The European regs are rather more stringent than in the USA, fewer exemptions regarding taxiway and or runway separation. Old structures get exemptions, to be able to keep operating, new structures have to conform. All proposals for LHR for a third runway have it completely independent with the necessary separation from other runways.

The needed separation is, 1035m between centre lines of the runways for full independent parallel approaches and It can be reduced by 30m for each 150m the arrival runways are staggered toward arrival aircraft down to 300m between centre line of two runways. That should be the ICAO standard.


Channex757 wrote:
Too close. The CAA would never approve simultaneous operations for the two south runways.

Part of the thinking for the new northern runway is it can be operated mixed mode, with a T6 separating it from the two actives. Placing it where T4 and the Royal/cargo terminals are would also create much more difficulty than it solves as it introduces even more active runway crossing for ground manoeuvring aircraft. Having the new runway away from existing traffic and primarily feeding T6 effectively creates an airport within an airport with less need to waste time trying to cross active runways.


You wouldn't do parallel approaches on the two southern runways. One would be for take offs, and one for landings. (similar to how each of the north and south runway complexes at LAX normally operates)

You would have the southern most runway for landings, the middle for take offs, and the north for mixed use. I don't see a separation issue there.
 
mcoatc
Posts: 173
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 2:23 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 2:49 am

You wouldn't do parallel approaches on the two southern runways. One would be for take offs, and one for landings. (similar to how each of the north and south runway complexes at LAX normally operates)

You would have the southern most runway for landings, the middle for take offs, and the north for mixed use. I don't see a separation issue there.


You're only thinking of lateral separation between arrivals. You may not realize that separation also needs to exist between the arriving and departing aircraft on parallel runways, and yours are too close for anything other than visual separation. You have to protect for a missed approach, and if the ceilings are too low where the controllers cannot provide visual until some sort of radar separation is established (i.e. degrees divergence or altitude), then you have to work with the extra spacing requirements of radar separation. Thus, more spacing is required, and either your arrival rate is reduced, departure rate reduced, or a combination of both.

It slows down everything. I know, because it's the weather I've been dealing with all week. It's the sort of weather that London is known for, and it unfortunately renders your runway ineffective on all but the nicest of weather days. This is a problem that the LA basin doesn't share with England, so it's not noticeable. And for that matter, if LAX were built today, don't think for a second those runways would be anywhere near that close.

LHR needs 3 widely-spaced parallels, allowing simultaneous arrivals to the outboard runways that do not conflict with the center runway's departures in all weather conditions.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9652
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 3:02 am

kaitak744 wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
The separation between runways in the drawing by the thread starter is about 360m, it would need to be nearly triple that to be acceptable.


mjoelnir wrote:
The European regs are rather more stringent than in the USA, fewer exemptions regarding taxiway and or runway separation. Old structures get exemptions, to be able to keep operating, new structures have to conform. All proposals for LHR for a third runway have it completely independent with the necessary separation from other runways.

The needed separation is, 1035m between centre lines of the runways for full independent parallel approaches and It can be reduced by 30m for each 150m the arrival runways are staggered toward arrival aircraft down to 300m between centre line of two runways. That should be the ICAO standard.


Channex757 wrote:
Too close. The CAA would never approve simultaneous operations for the two south runways.

Part of the thinking for the new northern runway is it can be operated mixed mode, with a T6 separating it from the two actives. Placing it where T4 and the Royal/cargo terminals are would also create much more difficulty than it solves as it introduces even more active runway crossing for ground manoeuvring aircraft. Having the new runway away from existing traffic and primarily feeding T6 effectively creates an airport within an airport with less need to waste time trying to cross active runways.


You wouldn't do parallel approaches on the two southern runways. One would be for take offs, and one for landings. (similar to how each of the north and south runway complexes at LAX normally operates)

You would have the southern most runway for landings, the middle for take offs, and the north for mixed use. I don't see a separation issue there.


If you do not have the full separation they can not be in use at the same time. Landings have to wait for the take off and vice versa. It is for having a good separation in the air if for example the airplane landing has to execute a go round. The extra runway with too little separation would speed up the process, but not in the way a full independent runway would do.
You can not look at what some older airports are doing, they can run on exemptions from the rules, newly build infrastructure has to conform to the rules, They would get nobuilding permission otherwise. It is not only nimbys that are a problem when building new runways and airports, but also strict regulations.

It would also play havoc with the noise rules around LHR, they switch take offs and landings between the runways, to give areas a break from the noise for defined periods.
 
Bongodog1964
Posts: 3542
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 6:29 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 7:48 am

You've wiped out T4, BA World cargo, most of the 3RE party cargo handlers, and the VIP suite. Land would then need to be found to re site them. You mention expanding T2, at some point the limit will be reached on what traffic can be crammed into the central access tunnel. The last factor is that a runway in this position would cause a lot of taxying issues to the point that it would add little capacity.
 
User avatar
speedbored
Posts: 2230
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:14 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 9:21 am

Even if we ignore the ATC/separation and central area access issues (all of which are probably show-stoppers), the main problem with this plan would be terminal space.

Any expansion of terminal 2 would, at best, offset the loss of terminal 4. Then you would be left with 50% more runway capacity needing to be served with 0% additional terminal space. The airport is already operating with less than ideal gate capacity.

Any third runway needs to be built with sufficient separation to allow concurrent operations on all 3 runways, and with sufficient additional land to build an additional terminal at least as large as terminal 5 (with its satellites).
 
finnishway
Posts: 563
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 5:17 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 9:44 am

Why don't they move most of the cargo operations to other London airports? I understand BA needs cargo facilities for belly cargo, but why don't move all-cargo airlines to other airports? That should make available slots and space at LHR.
 
vfw614
Posts: 4008
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 12:34 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 10:45 am

How much relief could such a runway provide if the arriving aircraft all need to cross the runway used for departures? It would either slow down departures or limit the number of arrivals. FRA's new runway for landings does not havethat problem as arriving aircraft can taxi to the stands without crossing existing runways.
 
giblets
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 8:34 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 10:59 am

As above FAR too close to the other runways, you would also be knocking down T4, where would they go?

Other options for decreasing the cost of the third runway, how about a 7k ft runway (as opposed to 10k) in the proposed 3rd runway position (i.e to the north), this would avoid having to build over the M25, though would reduce the cost and disruption.

Other option on that is to open the northern runway 'early' as a 7k ft runway, whilst the construction over the M25 takes place where it will be a full 10k runway?

In terms of terminals, personally I'd remove 'T3' and expand T5 east into it's position, then build T6 to the north (as a replacement for T3).
146, ATR72, Q400, Saab 340, PA-46 Jetprop, Jetstream, E175/195, 707/727/737/747/757/767/777, DC-3/9/10, MD-11/80, A300/310/319/320/321/330/340/350/380 Tristar, BAC 1-11, Trident, Chipmunk, Bell 206/222, Chinook, Puma, Cessna 172, Fokker 70, 100, SRN4!
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9652
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 11:28 am

finnishway wrote:
Why don't they move most of the cargo operations to other London airports? I understand BA needs cargo facilities for belly cargo, but why don't move all-cargo airlines to other airports? That should make available slots and space at LHR.


LHR is only big in belly cargo, the other operations have mostly moved. No London airport is really big in dedicated freighters, but perhaps STN. For dedicated freighter cargo look at EMA.
 
concordeforever
Posts: 170
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:51 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 11:57 am

IAG Cargo (BA, Iberia, Aer Lingus) have just started to build their new 55 million pound Premia Cargo facility right where you want to put the new runway. I don't think they would be too happy if it has be pulled down!
 
Bongodog1964
Posts: 3542
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 6:29 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 1:40 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
finnishway wrote:
Why don't they move most of the cargo operations to other London airports? I understand BA needs cargo facilities for belly cargo, but why don't move all-cargo airlines to other airports? That should make available slots and space at LHR.


LHR is only big in belly cargo, the other operations have mostly moved. No London airport is really big in dedicated freighters, but perhaps STN. For dedicated freighter cargo look at EMA.


Are there any dedicated cargo flights into LHR these days ?. Even BA when they operated 747-8F's based them at STN.
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 4567
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 6:29 pm

How about this one?

Image

Red is the runway, orange are the taxiways. It's not parallel, but it's not in the way of anything.
 
ahmetdouas
Posts: 310
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2015 2:23 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 6:40 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
How about this one?

Image

Red is the runway, orange are the taxiways. It's not parallel, but it's not in the way of anything.




Hahaha that runway should make some interesting crosswind approaches!
 
Fitlikemin
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 6:20 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 6:44 pm

Let's hope inbounds from the NE don't cross traffic climbing out to the west!
 
G-CIVP
Posts: 1562
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 6:38 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 7:30 pm

The problem with your solutions is that your proportions are out of kilter as you haven't factored in minimum separation and those reservoirs are raised not sunk. Moreover, you would need to demolish Stanwell Moor. Also, I don't like the idea of aircraft taking off between the bulk of London's drinking water. You should realise that numerous Civil Engineers have been looking at solutions for this for many years; if it was that easy they would have done it by now! In hindsight it is a pity that Terminal 4 was built where it was as it may have been possible to squeeze a third runway in before circa 1984 and the subsequent development of the Cargo area.
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 4567
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 8:14 pm

No need to demolish Stanwell Moor, it can stay where it is. There'll be a few taxiways around it, but that's all. Roads can be tunneled under the taxiways. Maybe a few houses need to be demolished, but certainly not the whole town.

It does indeed cross with the existing runways, but with the right kind of management that doesn't have to be a problem. Runway 18/36 at FRA also crosses with all the other runways and it's not a problem there either.

About the water reservoirs, any aircraft using this proposed runway will not fly straight over any of them. They'll be nearby, certainly, but they're nearby the other runways as well. Traffic from/to the west flies straight over some of these water reservoirs, can't call that very healthy either. Still nobody makes a problem of it.
 
G-CIVP
Posts: 1562
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 6:38 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 10:58 pm

"No need to demolish Stanwell Moor, it can stay where it is".

But look at 27L and the taxiway (the old outer taxiway) and compare it to the mocked up diagram; the proportions are all wrong. Sure, there may be some houses standing but not alot. It is unfeasible.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9652
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Thu Nov 10, 2016 11:15 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
It does indeed cross with the existing runways, but with the right kind of management that doesn't have to be a problem. Runway 18/36 at FRA also crosses with all the other runways and it's not a problem there either.


Your statement is just simply wrong. That runway could reduce difficult cross wind landings, but would do little to increase capacity, but in limited wind directions, allowing starts away from the runways it could cross. There are many examples of such a runway being of little use.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Fri Nov 11, 2016 2:51 am

PatrickZ80 wrote:
Runway 18/36 at FRA also crosses with all the other runways and it's not a problem there either.



Technically there's no runway 36 at FRA since that runway is only used for takeoffs to the south on runway 18. Zoom in on the runway in Google Maps and you'll note there aren't even any runway numbers painted on the 36 end.

https://goo.gl/maps/eHFrsfYFaQ42
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7652
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Fri Nov 11, 2016 3:03 am

Wouldn't it be easier to move all cargo traffic from LHR to the other London airports? That would surely free up a handfull of slots.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9652
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Fri Nov 11, 2016 3:13 am

The 18/36 runway t FRA was build for the US military, when the Rhein-Main Air Base was still in full swing, to reduce cross wind operations.
The Rhein-Main Air Base closed in 2005 and the Air Mobility Command moved to SPM, since than the 18/36 is superfluous
The area of the air base will become terminal 3 someday.
 
User avatar
lcycs300
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Fri Nov 11, 2016 9:42 am

TWA772LR wrote:
Wouldn't it be easier to move all cargo traffic from LHR to the other London airports? That would surely free up a handfull of slots.

There are currently 10 dedicated cargo airlines at Heathrow so moving them to another airport would free up a significant amount of slots. However the only other London airport that would be capable of handling these flights is Stansted.
 
Bongodog1964
Posts: 3542
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 6:29 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Fri Nov 11, 2016 9:56 am

lcycs300 wrote:
TWA772LR wrote:
Wouldn't it be easier to move all cargo traffic from LHR to the other London airports? That would surely free up a handfull of slots.

There are currently 10 dedicated cargo airlines at Heathrow so moving them to another airport would free up a significant amount of slots. However the only other London airport that would be capable of handling these flights is Stansted.


Just because wikipedia lists 10 cargo airlines running services into LHR, does not mean that the cargo is not in the belly of passenger aircraft. Any dedicated freight services that do use LHR will certainly be using off peak slots. I admit my LHR spotting is infrequent, but I cannot recall seeing a single freighter when I've been there.
 
User avatar
lcycs300
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Fri Nov 11, 2016 10:16 am

Bongodog1964 wrote:
lcycs300 wrote:
TWA772LR wrote:
Wouldn't it be easier to move all cargo traffic from LHR to the other London airports? That would surely free up a handfull of slots.

There are currently 10 dedicated cargo airlines at Heathrow so moving them to another airport would free up a significant amount of slots. However the only other London airport that would be capable of handling these flights is Stansted.


Just because wikipedia lists 10 cargo airlines running services into LHR, does not mean that the cargo is not in the belly of passenger aircraft. Any dedicated freight services that do use LHR will certainly be using off peak slots. I admit my LHR spotting is infrequent, but I cannot recall seeing a single freighter when I've been there.


I know for definite that EK sky cargo does operate 747's to Heathrow however I have not personally seen any others although DHL have been there in the past.
 
G-CIVP
Posts: 1562
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 6:38 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Fri Nov 11, 2016 10:19 am

TWA772LR - I actually agree. Manston should have been developed into a major cargo hub but I know what the counter argument would be; it is too far from London and the majority of cargo is hold cargo in the majority of airlines that fly into LHR.
 
TheReckoner
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 9:32 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Fri Nov 11, 2016 3:59 pm

I have seen EK Skycargo, Singapore Cargo, DHL and I think Cathay recently (last few years). I only seem to see them at the weekends.
 
redroo
Posts: 594
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2016 10:28 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Fri Nov 11, 2016 9:49 pm

Why not bite the bullet now, buy up all the necessary land and build a new full length runway to the north and a new full length runway to the south? Expensive, but you know its eventually going to happen :-)
 
User avatar
lcycs300
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Fri Nov 11, 2016 11:41 pm

redroo wrote:
Why not bite the bullet now, buy up all the necessary land and build a new full length runway to the north and a new full length runway to the south? Expensive, but you know its eventually going to happen :-)

Because instead of doing the smart thing politicians are far more interested in being re elected

Although out of interest where exactly to the south do you think it should be built, as the area which is in line with the current southern runway is considerably more built up than that of the northern one.
 
Bongodog1964
Posts: 3542
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 6:29 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Fri Nov 11, 2016 11:44 pm

redroo wrote:
Why not bite the bullet now, buy up all the necessary land and build a new full length runway to the north and a new full length runway to the south? Expensive, but you know its eventually going to happen :-)


When did practicality and sensibility ever enter the equation ? Heathrow should have been buying up every available property in the vicinity for decades, that way they would not only ultimately control the land, but also the noise footprint.

Meanwhile at STN where the then BAA bought up over 260 houses in anticipation of the 2nd runway, the present owner Manchester Airports Group have just started to sell them off. In a few years when a 2nd runway is talked about again, they wil of course have to buy them all back again.
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 2128
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Sat Nov 12, 2016 1:48 am

mcoatc wrote:
. And for that matter, if LAX were built today, don't think for a second those runways would be anywhere near that close.


Tell that to ORD, which just completed a close dependent parallel runway with one more in the works. Or CLT, which is about to get started on another. ICN, PVG, the future Beijing airport... plenty of modern examples of dependent parallel runway design which provide much increased capacity.
FLYi
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9652
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Sat Nov 12, 2016 2:38 am

flyPIT wrote:
mcoatc wrote:
. And for that matter, if LAX were built today, don't think for a second those runways would be anywhere near that close.


Tell that to ORD, which just completed a close dependent parallel runway with one more in the works. Or CLT, which is about to get started on another. ICN, PVG, the future Beijing airport... plenty of modern examples of dependent parallel runway design which provide much increased capacity.


I have to assume that regulations are less strict in the USA
 
redroo
Posts: 594
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2016 10:28 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Sat Nov 12, 2016 2:48 am

If we're sticking with heathrow then i'd buy up everything bounded by M4, Parkway, Staines Road, A30, M25 and back round to M4. This would a loss of Cranford, East Bedfont, Stanwell, Stanwell Moor, Harmondsworth, Sipson, Harlington and all the hotels, etc just north of the current northern runway. If people want to stick with LHR, then long term this will need to happen.

Alternatively I would personally flatten the whole place and start again either north around Potters Bar or out in the estuary with 8 runways and capacity for 150m passengers.
 
Andy33
Posts: 2570
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 9:30 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Sat Nov 12, 2016 7:00 am

The official report on LHR slot allocation at the start of the current winter timetable is here:
http://www.acl-uk.org/wp-content/upload ... eason1.pdf
You'll see that the only pure-cargo airline with slots is DHL, and they are allowed 19 Air Traffic Movements per week (thats takeoffs and landings added together) so just over 2 flights a day. Any other freighter aircraft using LHR are either operated by airlines with both cargo and passenger planes so all the flights are included in the airline total, or are the result of one-off applications.
On page 4 there's a bar chart showing the number of movements by planes in different seating capacity bands. Freighters are lumped in with 1-49 seaters because there are so few of either - in fact there are no scheduled passenger movements at all in planes of 49 seats or less, so what we see is basically freight plus a few one-off VIP flights.
 
concordeforever
Posts: 170
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:51 pm

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Fri Feb 24, 2017 5:22 pm

TheReckoner wrote:
I have seen EK Skycargo, Singapore Cargo, DHL and I think Cathay recently (last few years). I only seem to see them at the weekends.


Most of the cargo only flights are on a Thursday evening or on Saturday afternoons, however DHL are daily, operating for British Airways.

Airlines operating full freight services are the four listed in the quotes above plus Korean Air Cargo, and now CargoLogicAir.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3811
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: 3rd runway at LHR without buying more land

Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:33 am

PatrickZ80 wrote:
How about this one?

Image

Red is the runway, orange are the taxiways. It's not parallel, but it's not in the way of anything.


This would send planes over a large neighborhood at the end of your runway. A 100% no go option.
 
EK006
Posts: 81
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 8:34 am

Cheaper runway plan introduced for LHR

Sun Jul 09, 2017 7:52 am

A weathly businessman has proposed an idea which will have a lower environmental impact and not affect the M25 and use up less land.

[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40546225/[url]
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Cheaper runway plan introduced for LHR

Sun Jul 09, 2017 8:00 am

Yup saw that (as a Londoner) would love to see the revised approach.
Personally I always thought the very first idea (short runway north) was the best plan - but what do I know!
 
User avatar
winterlight
Posts: 1432
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Cheaper runway plan introduced for LHR

Sun Jul 09, 2017 8:19 am

Trying to save his hotels from being demolished?
Question everything. Trust no-one.
 
finnishway
Posts: 563
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 5:17 pm

Re: Cheaper runway plan introduced for LHR

Sun Jul 09, 2017 8:35 am

I thought 3rd runway was approved about a year ago already.
 
StTim
Posts: 3809
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: Cheaper runway plan introduced for LHR

Sun Jul 09, 2017 9:38 am

finnishway wrote:
I thought 3rd runway was approved about a year ago already.

Yes - but the design isn't finalised.
 
User avatar
readytotaxi
Posts: 7967
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:09 am

Re: Cheaper runway plan introduced for LHR

Sun Jul 09, 2017 9:39 am

Yes, it was approved in October 2016.
As to the motive why an hotel owner and businessman wants to save us £5bn, this might help.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surinder_Arora
you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
Growing older, but not up.
 
skipness1E
Posts: 4936
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

Re: Cheaper runway plan introduced for LHR

Sun Jul 09, 2017 9:42 am

Quiet news day then.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos