Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
DL717
Posts: 2153
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 10:53 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:27 pm

aamd11 wrote:
chonetsao wrote:
LGW needs to attract as many airlines and passengers as possible. A modern facility will certainly help.

While the first statement is absolutely true, I disagree with the second statement.

The passengers themselves won't really concern themselves with the state of the facility they are flying from or to. It's a consideration much further down the list than price and location. In many cases, you don't really have much of a say - if the airline/route you want to take only goes to LGW, you're not terribly likely to go to CDG because the facility is a bit more modern. You could perhaps connect somewhere along the way and land at LHR perhaps, but you're probably not going to do that if it's 10% more expensive, unless your final destination is much more convenient from LHR.

Then there are the airlines themselves. A brand new facility will cost an arm and a few legs, and it's got to be paid for somehow. That'll be passed on to airlines (and ultimately passengers) via increased landing fees and so on. You generally don't attract new airlines (and passengers) by increasing your fees. Premium facilities must attract premium traffic that's less sensitive to price. When your major operations are currently low cost airlines, you've got to be careful about increasing cost. And in the LON market especially, considering there are a number of alternatives in the region. For an Airline wishing to serve LON, if LGW gets too pricey, they could go to STN, LTN or even SEN instead.

"If you build it, they will come" is not a strategy for success in the airport business. It's just like most other bits of infrastructure - everyone would love for it to be shiny, new and well maintained but nobody wants to pay for it. See also: roads, bridges, railways, etc.


If that’s true, then La Guardia could have saved a few billion. :roll:

A terminal beyond its useful like will cost just as much as a new one. They new one will have far more space and provide vastly superior better customer service unless your plan was a crappy one to begin with. Airlines pay for it through rates and charges, and the cost is small when spread across its entire operation.

Failing to take advantage of the current condition in terms of infrastructure development and expansion to meet the long term needs of the airport is foolish. Traffic will return and airports with programs on the table that act now to improve facilities so their pre-COVID capacity problems don’t return will benefit both in facility development timelines and reduced cost. Cost savings on a new terminal build right now is on the order of 20-25% and timeline reductions for existing airports that need to remove old terminals (or parts of them) to build new ones are measured in years, not months. Greenfield project timelines don’t have a shift, but the cost savings will be tremendous.
Welcome to Nothingburgers. May I take your order?
 
airhansa
Topic Author
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:18 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:59 pm

1) I'm sorry about referring the airport as a "hub", though I do consider the airport to be influential in some mid-haul markets (connecting from domestic destinations like Aberdeen). It was more about how the airport would become "yet another base for low cost airlines" and possibly steal airlines from other airports. Too many low cost airports.

2) I believe that the departure of BA and Virgin will be permanent if the former gets more slots at Heathrow. Virgin will just be a causality of the times and eventually market liberalism (globalism) will provide alternative airlines and competition will be more fierce. Norwegian might scale back operations at LGW (Brits tend to be less wealthy than Scandinavians and the market may in fact expand for DY in the Nordics where DY has more short haul operations), whereas TUI might focus on overseas operations as a condition of the aid its getting from Germany (giving them less of a hand in reducing German workforce). Legacy carriers from other countries may take this opportunity to seize LHR slots and leave Gatwick. A lot of posters are overlooking that aviation growth has been focused on the far east for most of the last few years, and that the combination of low cost airlines and rail transport will force European legacy carriers to scale back.

3) I strongly prefer any airport with good public transport links, which places LHR as my favorite London airport. It's however not a good airport generally. To the poster who questioned why people would travel through a better airport, a good airport is often worth the money if it offers something good - some airports add to the holiday experience (holidays aren't about saving money) whereas other airports offer stress-free transit. London airports are generally stressy and add virtually nothing to the holiday experience. But of the London airports, LHR has the best public transport links, followed by Gatwick. I'd rate London Southend and London Stansted similarly due to both having rail links. Luton is basically a nightmare and probably a lead weight on EasyJet.
 
User avatar
LuxuryTravelled
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 7:06 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Tue Jun 23, 2020 4:58 pm

jghealey wrote:
jamsco99 wrote:
If ba Is not back at gatwick they will increase the presence of level there
Wizz is after some gatwick slots
I still see Gatwick being a mix of legacy carriers such as Emirates, Qatar, tap, icelandair, turkish etc
low cost such as air transat, west jet, easy jet
Secondary national carriers such as pegasus.

Could any airlines move from stn to lgw?

And we've seen 'FlyLevel UK Ltd' being established registered under BA at Waterside. Does not bode well for BA's LGW ops:

https://twitter.com/Tim_the_Pilot/statu ... 33921?s=19

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/10630383


FlyLevel UK was set up in 2017, nothing more than a shell company effectively.
 
BA777FO
Posts: 577
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2018 2:58 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Tue Jun 23, 2020 6:30 pm

joeyw wrote:
CrawleyBen wrote:
f4f3a wrote:
Iv always thought it odd when most of LHR traffic goes onto somewhere else why lgw couldn't be a hub . Before low-cost you had bcal hub and Dan air had a massive presence . With those airlines gone and BA taking over what was left lgw always played second fiddle. Lgw was always holiday flying or those they couldn't fit into LHR . Long haul will be much reduced there now with no Norwegian and BA and virgin gone


Has something official come out about BA leaving Gatwick for good then? I still work full time at LGW and have been advised BA are planning to resume Ops from there in August, so maybe it's best to wait and see about whether they do drop long haul flying etc or not.

Ben


Looks like BA is planning to outsource Gatwick if they do restart ops there...

(which to me looks like; it's an easy way to pick & choose when/if they restart LGW without committed/surplus staffing costs - I'd guess short-term they won't start LGW, medium possible return with short-haul and long-haul following VS to LHR).

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-53069014


LGW ops are due to restart fot BA in August.

Back in 2009 the below-wing activity was outsourced to Swissport. The above wing ground staff were kept in house with productivity and pay savings. The Swissport move was an operational catastrophe, but financially the penalties for poor performance resulted in Swissport paying BA one month for the privilege of handling them!

Swissport couldn't make money as they were a shambles at Gatwick and ultimately GGS was born - it's a wholly-owned subsidiary of BA. The plan is to now outsource above wing roles at Gatwick to GGS - it gets them onto cheaper contracts etc. So this is just completing the circle of outsourced ground handling - just like every outstation.

Once south terminal capacity ramps up as staff are taken off furlough the LGW ops will resume. The threat of pulling out was merely to extract concessions from staff. They'll be back.
 
jghealey
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri May 11, 2018 5:46 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Tue Jun 23, 2020 7:18 pm

LuxuryTravelled wrote:
jghealey wrote:
jamsco99 wrote:
If ba Is not back at gatwick they will increase the presence of level there
Wizz is after some gatwick slots
I still see Gatwick being a mix of legacy carriers such as Emirates, Qatar, tap, icelandair, turkish etc
low cost such as air transat, west jet, easy jet
Secondary national carriers such as pegasus.

Could any airlines move from stn to lgw?

And we've seen 'FlyLevel UK Ltd' being established registered under BA at Waterside. Does not bode well for BA's LGW ops:

https://twitter.com/Tim_the_Pilot/statu ... 33921?s=19

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/10630383


FlyLevel UK was set up in 2017, nothing more than a shell company effectively.


Maybe, but it would still seem odd for them to register it in that name. Clearly they're leaving the option open later down the line.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
 
SueD
Posts: 260
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2019 11:35 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Tue Jun 23, 2020 8:12 pm

StTim wrote:
The major issue for Gatwick is its location. It is appallingly placed for most residents of the south east of England. For low cost traveller to Europe the cost of getting to/from the airport is a critical factor.


Right where to start what’s appalling about Gatwick - Direct trains to Bedford and simple same platform change at London Bridge to points as far north as Cambridge and Peterborough .

Hop over the bridge at Farringdon and the ENTIRE northern lines of the LUL - the Metropolitan, the Hammersmith and City both west and even east to Barking feed the
Thameslink hub and shortly the Elizabeth line will add further points both east and west.

The Southern Rail connections serve all points south of the river and all the way to Southampton and there are an albeit a bit slow stopper services to Reading (In between connecting some of the most affluent parts of the UK). Whilst with a simple change at Redhill you can head to Tonbridge and on the Dover and and Tunbridge Wells or Even back North towards Orpington and Bromley with ease.

By rail Gatwick is exceptionally well connected right across the South East .

There are a multitude of options -its not just Victoria !

Driving so you have to use the M25 /23 indeed going to any of the main airports (LCY excluded) and the M25 is a factor period stop.

It a total myth the Gatwick is somehow difficult to get to; Indeed the fact that in normal times the airport handles - what is 45 million visitors and predominantly O & D including copious amounts of the price conscious, surely compares very favourably with the O & D throughput at Slough Windsor, Spelthorne, Hounslow and Hillingdon regional !

Take out the double counted transfer traffic (30 ish %) at LHR and I’d suggest the location isn’t a problem for Londoners that you believe it to be !

Oh and from what you have said i assume you recide in North West London around Harrow and Watford ? If so what’s difficult about getting the half hourly Milton Keynes to East Croydon Southern service and simply walking left onto the regular Gatwick services .
 
jamsco99
Posts: 106
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 11:02 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Tue Jun 23, 2020 8:22 pm

People have been predicting the demise of Gatwick for decades but it always grows.
9/11, open skies was meant to see the demise of gatwick
 
StTim
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Tue Jun 23, 2020 8:23 pm

SueD wrote:
StTim wrote:
The major issue for Gatwick is its location. It is appallingly placed for most residents of the south east of England. For low cost traveller to Europe the cost of getting to/from the airport is a critical factor.


Right where to start what’s appalling about Gatwick - Direct trains to Bedford and simple same platform change at London Bridge to points as far north as Cambridge and Peterborough .

Hop over the bridge at Farringdon and the ENTIRE northern lines of the LUL - the Metropolitan, the Hammersmith and City both west and even east to Barking feed the
Thameslink hub and shortly the Elizabeth line will add further points both east and west.

The Southern Rail connections serve all points south of the river and all the way to Southampton and there are an albeit a bit slow stopper services to Reading (In between connecting some of the most affluent parts of the UK). Whilst with a simple change at Redhill you can head to Tonbridge and on the Dover and and Tunbridge Wells or Even back North towards Orpington and Bromley with ease.

By rail Gatwick is exceptionally well connected right across the South East .

There are a multitude of options -its not just Victoria !

Driving so you have to use the M25 /23 indeed going to any of the main airports (LCY excluded) and the M25 is a factor period stop.

It a total myth the Gatwick is somehow difficult to get to; Indeed the fact that in normal times the airport handles - what is 45 million visitors and predominantly O & D including copious amounts of the price conscious, surely compares very favourably with the O & D throughput at Slough Windsor, Spelthorne, Hounslow and Hillingdon regional !

Take out the double counted transfer traffic (30 ish %) at LHR and I’d suggest the location isn’t a problem for Londoners that you believe it to be !


I call it as I find it. Yes you can get to it by train. I can get to Birmingham by train much quicker. I can get to Heathrow in similar times by train.
I can get to Luton in 30 mins, Heathrow in 60 mins and Gatwick in 105 minutes. That is much longer. For me LCY is irrelevant in reality.

Regarding the M25. Yes it is a bad road. About the worst section is that between the M4 junction and the M3. It is awful and that is the additional part I have to get through.

I am sorry we have differing views but it is allowed to see things differently.
 
QR1350
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2019 7:11 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Tue Jun 23, 2020 8:52 pm

I never got people’s fascination with arguing over which Airport is in London etc. Central London is rammed, you’re never going to get an airport on Oxford Street!

As for Gatwick, I’d say it easily has the best train network. You can get direct trains to various parts of Southern England. Heathrow Express to Paddington, yes, is ultimately quicker. But GatEx or Southern are way quicker than the Piccadilly line. Personally I don’t care where the airport is. If the London airport was 200 miles away but was served by a high high ultra speed rail line from Central London every ten minutes that takes ten minutes to cover those 200 miles, does it matter that you would ultimately lift off 200 miles away from ‘London’?
 
brilondon
Posts: 3158
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:56 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Tue Jun 23, 2020 9:35 pm

QR1350 wrote:
I never got people’s fascination with arguing over which Airport is in London etc. Central London is rammed, you’re never going to get an airport on Oxford Street!

As for Gatwick, I’d say it easily has the best train network. You can get direct trains to various parts of Southern England. Heathrow Express to Paddington, yes, is ultimately quicker. But GatEx or Southern are way quicker than the Piccadilly line. Personally I don’t care where the airport is. If the London airport was 200 miles away but was served by a high high ultra speed rail line from Central London every ten minutes that takes ten minutes to cover those 200 miles, does it matter that you would ultimately lift off 200 miles away from ‘London’?


You obviously like LGW for some reason. I can't stand it. Even before the covid-19 situation, the connectivity to other points in Europe was disappointing. My choice will be to fly to LHR and spend a night, then continue on to my destination the next day. Unless you're absolutely against LHR, it's easier to use than LGW.
Rush forever Closer To My Heart
 
QR1350
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2019 7:11 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Tue Jun 23, 2020 10:34 pm

brilondon wrote:
QR1350 wrote:
I never got people’s fascination with arguing over which Airport is in London etc. Central London is rammed, you’re never going to get an airport on Oxford Street!

As for Gatwick, I’d say it easily has the best train network. You can get direct trains to various parts of Southern England. Heathrow Express to Paddington, yes, is ultimately quicker. But GatEx or Southern are way quicker than the Piccadilly line. Personally I don’t care where the airport is. If the London airport was 200 miles away but was served by a high high ultra speed rail line from Central London every ten minutes that takes ten minutes to cover those 200 miles, does it matter that you would ultimately lift off 200 miles away from ‘London’?


You obviously like LGW for some reason. I can't stand it. Even before the covid-19 situation, the connectivity to other points in Europe was disappointing. My choice will be to fly to LHR and spend a night, then continue on to my destination the next day. Unless you're absolutely against LHR, it's easier to use than LGW.



Actually I prefer LHR and would take LHR and LCY over LGW if I have the choice. I’d happily pay a little bit extra for the choice too. I just don’t see what’s wrong with Gatwick. I think it’s well connected and has trains to different London Terminals and parts of London, the south coast. I think it’s easily accessible and a good airport.

In terms of distance, like my earlier point, I don’t think the distance is necessarily the issue, but the time and ease of journey. For example, I live near Cambridge and so naturally STN is closest to me. But from Cambridge train station, only recently did a second tph begin to STN. Gatwick started at two immediately. From the other station I more frequently use just south of Peterborough, I can only get to Gatwick. If I was to only use public transport, which is quite common for me, my house in Cambridgeshire takes only a fraction longer to get to Gatwick. It’s also a lot more reliable to comfortable to get to Gatwick too. I guess what I’m saying is there are so many factors that people go by
 
Antarius
Posts: 2425
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Tue Jun 23, 2020 10:41 pm

brilondon wrote:
QR1350 wrote:
I never got people’s fascination with arguing over which Airport is in London etc. Central London is rammed, you’re never going to get an airport on Oxford Street!

As for Gatwick, I’d say it easily has the best train network. You can get direct trains to various parts of Southern England. Heathrow Express to Paddington, yes, is ultimately quicker. But GatEx or Southern are way quicker than the Piccadilly line. Personally I don’t care where the airport is. If the London airport was 200 miles away but was served by a high high ultra speed rail line from Central London every ten minutes that takes ten minutes to cover those 200 miles, does it matter that you would ultimately lift off 200 miles away from ‘London’?


You obviously like LGW for some reason. I can't stand it. Even before the covid-19 situation, the connectivity to other points in Europe was disappointing. My choice will be to fly to LHR and spend a night, then continue on to my destination the next day. Unless you're absolutely against LHR, it's easier to use than LGW.


LGW sucks as an airport, but it is convenient. LHR is a larger airport with many more connections, but if I could fly in to any airport it would be LCY > LGW > LHR in terms of convenience and connectivity.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
Westerwaelder
Posts: 240
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2020 12:27 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Wed Jun 24, 2020 5:10 am

StTim wrote:
SueD wrote:
StTim wrote:
The major issue for Gatwick is its location. It is appallingly placed for most residents of the south east of England. For low cost traveller to Europe the cost of getting to/from the airport is a critical factor.


Right where to start what’s appalling about Gatwick - Direct trains to Bedford and simple same platform change at London Bridge to points as far north as Cambridge and Peterborough .

Hop over the bridge at Farringdon and the ENTIRE northern lines of the LUL - the Metropolitan, the Hammersmith and City both west and even east to Barking feed the
Thameslink hub and shortly the Elizabeth line will add further points both east and west.

The Southern Rail connections serve all points south of the river and all the way to Southampton and there are an albeit a bit slow stopper services to Reading (In between connecting some of the most affluent parts of the UK). Whilst with a simple change at Redhill you can head to Tonbridge and on the Dover and and Tunbridge Wells or Even back North towards Orpington and Bromley with ease.

By rail Gatwick is exceptionally well connected right across the South East .

There are a multitude of options -its not just Victoria !

Driving so you have to use the M25 /23 indeed going to any of the main airports (LCY excluded) and the M25 is a factor period stop.

It a total myth the Gatwick is somehow difficult to get to; Indeed the fact that in normal times the airport handles - what is 45 million visitors and predominantly O & D including copious amounts of the price conscious, surely compares very favourably with the O & D throughput at Slough Windsor, Spelthorne, Hounslow and Hillingdon regional !

Take out the double counted transfer traffic (30 ish %) at LHR and I’d suggest the location isn’t a problem for Londoners that you believe it to be !


I call it as I find it. Yes you can get to it by train. I can get to Birmingham by train much quicker. I can get to Heathrow in similar times by train.
I can get to Luton in 30 mins, Heathrow in 60 mins and Gatwick in 105 minutes. That is much longer. For me LCY is irrelevant in reality.

Regarding the M25. Yes it is a bad road. About the worst section is that between the M4 junction and the M3. It is awful and that is the additional part I have to get through.

I am sorry we have differing views but it is allowed to see things differently.


Surely that is the whole point of the discussion? It all depends. Where you live in London will make one or the other airport more convenient. Having to travel across London is generally a pain so people favour the airport that offers them the best connection. There is no single airport that is "the best or easiest to get to". It all depends on where you live/work. That's why London has five airports (six if you include SEN).
 
SueD
Posts: 260
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2019 11:35 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Wed Jun 24, 2020 6:01 am

StTim wrote:
SueD wrote:
StTim wrote:
The major issue for Gatwick is its location. It is appallingly placed for most residents of the south east of England. For low cost traveller to Europe the cost of getting to/from the airport is a critical factor.


Right where to start what’s appalling about Gatwick - Direct trains to Bedford and simple same platform change at London Bridge to points as far north as Cambridge and Peterborough .

Hop over the bridge at Farringdon and the ENTIRE northern lines of the LUL - the Metropolitan, the Hammersmith and City both west and even east to Barking feed the
Thameslink hub and shortly the Elizabeth line will add further points both east and west.

The Southern Rail connections serve all points south of the river and all the way to Southampton and there are an albeit a bit slow stopper services to Reading (In between connecting some of the most affluent parts of the UK). Whilst with a simple change at Redhill you can head to Tonbridge and on the Dover and and Tunbridge Wells or Even back North towards Orpington and Bromley with ease.

By rail Gatwick is exceptionally well connected right across the South East .

There are a multitude of options -its not just Victoria !

Driving so you have to use the M25 /23 indeed going to any of the main airports (LCY excluded) and the M25 is a factor period stop.

It a total myth the Gatwick is somehow difficult to get to; Indeed the fact that in normal times the airport handles - what is 45 million visitors and predominantly O & D including copious amounts of the price conscious, surely compares very favourably with the O & D throughput at Slough Windsor, Spelthorne, Hounslow and Hillingdon regional !

Take out the double counted transfer traffic (30 ish %) at LHR and I’d suggest the location isn’t a problem for Londoners that you believe it to be !


I call it as I find it. Yes you can get to it by train. I can get to Birmingham by train much quicker. I can get to Heathrow in similar times by train.
I can get to Luton in 30 mins, Heathrow in 60 mins and Gatwick in 105 minutes. That is much longer. For me LCY is irrelevant in reality.

Regarding the M25. Yes it is a bad road. About the worst section is that between the M4 junction and the M3. It is awful and that is the additional part I have to get through.

I am sorry we have differing views but it is allowed to see things differently.


You can get to Birmingham either West Midlands stopping (Not quicker than getting to Gatwick from Watford area i can tell you) or Avanti (costs a arm and leg)

Luton via the motorway can be as much of a mare round Hemel and indeed on the link road

And as someone that travels the M25 through that very stretch and on to A24 EVERY DAY for work, I know the road better than many; Its not so bad as you make out going south to be honest.

Much worse coming home especially Junction 14 through 17 !

Still the main point you made about the Gatwick traffic profile remains frankly misleading and wrong .

Primarily its actually VERY EASY to get to right across the South East and secondly the location does not put off the cost conscious- Far from it .
 
SueD
Posts: 260
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2019 11:35 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Wed Jun 24, 2020 6:23 am

Westerwaelder wrote:
StTim wrote:
SueD wrote:

Right where to start what’s appalling about Gatwick - Direct trains to Bedford and simple same platform change at London Bridge to points as far north as Cambridge and Peterborough .

Hop over the bridge at Farringdon and the ENTIRE northern lines of the LUL - the Metropolitan, the Hammersmith and City both west and even east to Barking feed the
Thameslink hub and shortly the Elizabeth line will add further points both east and west.

The Southern Rail connections serve all points south of the river and all the way to Southampton and there are an albeit a bit slow stopper services to Reading (In between connecting some of the most affluent parts of the UK). Whilst with a simple change at Redhill you can head to Tonbridge and on the Dover and and Tunbridge Wells or Even back North towards Orpington and Bromley with ease.

By rail Gatwick is exceptionally well connected right across the South East .

There are a multitude of options -its not just Victoria !

Driving so you have to use the M25 /23 indeed going to any of the main airports (LCY excluded) and the M25 is a factor period stop.

It a total myth the Gatwick is somehow difficult to get to; Indeed the fact that in normal times the airport handles - what is 45 million visitors and predominantly O & D including copious amounts of the price conscious, surely compares very favourably with the O & D throughput at Slough Windsor, Spelthorne, Hounslow and Hillingdon regional !

Take out the double counted transfer traffic (30 ish %) at LHR and I’d suggest the location isn’t a problem for Londoners that you believe it to be !


I call it as I find it. Yes you can get to it by train. I can get to Birmingham by train much quicker. I can get to Heathrow in similar times by train.
I can get to Luton in 30 mins, Heathrow in 60 mins and Gatwick in 105 minutes. That is much longer. For me LCY is irrelevant in reality.

Regarding the M25. Yes it is a bad road. About the worst section is that between the M4 junction and the M3. It is awful and that is the additional part I have to get through.

I am sorry we have differing views but it is allowed to see things differently.


Surely that is the whole point of the discussion? It all depends. Where you live in London will make one or the other airport more convenient. Having to travel across London is generally a pain so people favour the airport that offers them the best connection. There is no single airport that is "the best or easiest to get to". It all depends on where you live/work. That's why London has five airports (six if you include SEN).


The point i was demonstrating is that many people remain somewhat embedded in the 1980s mind set where the North/South London divide required crossing the centre of town in a deep tunnel connection on decrepit tube stock at some point between the 19th century terminal stations.

This is no longer so and over recent years the heavy rail network has been built out with the exprèss purpose of eliminating this .

The very purpose of the Thames Link and Elizabeth line combined is the allow through train services via Farringdon to all points of the compass.

Indeed the one of the purposes of Farringdon is to fully connect ALL of Londons airports via a single hub (cepting Stansted which does require a short one stop via Liverpool Street.
 
Blerg
Posts: 4071
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Wed Jun 24, 2020 6:36 am

Have airlines suspended or reduced LHR flights these days or was it just LGW?
 
RvA
Posts: 380
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 12:37 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Wed Jun 24, 2020 8:03 am

I lived about 40kms west of LHR but it was significantly quicker (by public transport) to reach LGW. Once there I didn’t find LGW anything special. It was fine. LHR in my experience was equally fine but also nothing special though more interesting for an AVgeek obviously :)
 
jamsco99
Posts: 106
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 11:02 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Wed Jun 24, 2020 8:11 am

RvA wrote:
I lived about 40kms west of LHR but it was significantly quicker (by public transport) to reach LGW. Once there I didn’t find LGW anything special. It was fine. LHR in my experience was equally fine but also nothing special though more interesting for an AVgeek obviously :)


I'm 20 mins for Heathrow or 45 from Gatwick so prefer Heathrow for quickness of getting home on arrival. Gatwick has some good options of places to eat - lots of high street chains such as wagamama
 
oldannyboy
Posts: 2573
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:28 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:45 am

StTim wrote:
BlueTrue wrote:
I travelled Gatwick to central London by train in January this year for £5.60 in about 32 minutes. What is the issue with that? The number of comments I read on this site about the issues/time/cost of getting from Gatwick into London really puzzles me. Do the people who make these posts know what they are talking about or are they just plainly anti Gatwick?


Once again - for UK based low cost travellers - they are not travelling from central London.

This is the dilemma for airlines. The originating travellers need easy access from the region. The travellers from abroad probably want to access London.

As I say Gatwick is almost my least favourite airport in the wider region. It takes circa 1hr 45 to drive depending on the nightmare that is the M25.

LTN (for me) is 30 mins. That is a reasonable taxi fare. Don't need to leave the car in the over priced airport car parks. LTN is a bit of a dive but usually from wheels on ground to key in the front door it is an hour.


Just switch the thinking...
Think South London, Kent, Surrey, Sussex, and the nightmare the takes the shape of Luton and Heathrow. For most of Kent even STN is easy via Dartford.
Your issue is not the rest of the world's problem...
 
StTim
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:54 am

I realise this - hell I was born in Kent. I also realise that Gatwick is the best placed airport for a part of the population - but it isn't for a many many more.

Luton is a poor airport - but it is best placed for me and has (or rather had) connections to many European locations. Flying long haul is nearly always, for me, LHR as again this had the best timings etc.

I forsee the future of Gatwick as another just another regional airport. It won't be a hub, it really never was.
 
Westerwaelder
Posts: 240
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2020 12:27 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:59 am

SueD wrote:
Westerwaelder wrote:
StTim wrote:

I call it as I find it. Yes you can get to it by train. I can get to Birmingham by train much quicker. I can get to Heathrow in similar times by train.
I can get to Luton in 30 mins, Heathrow in 60 mins and Gatwick in 105 minutes. That is much longer. For me LCY is irrelevant in reality.

Regarding the M25. Yes it is a bad road. About the worst section is that between the M4 junction and the M3. It is awful and that is the additional part I have to get through.

I am sorry we have differing views but it is allowed to see things differently.


Surely that is the whole point of the discussion? It all depends. Where you live in London will make one or the other airport more convenient. Having to travel across London is generally a pain so people favour the airport that offers them the best connection. There is no single airport that is "the best or easiest to get to". It all depends on where you live/work. That's why London has five airports (six if you include SEN).


The point i was demonstrating is that many people remain somewhat embedded in the 1980s mind set where the North/South London divide required crossing the centre of town in a deep tunnel connection on decrepit tube stock at some point between the 19th century terminal stations.

This is no longer so and over recent years the heavy rail network has been built out with the exprèss purpose of eliminating this .

The very purpose of the Thames Link and Elizabeth line combined is the allow through train services via Farringdon to all points of the compass.

Indeed the one of the purposes of Farringdon is to fully connect ALL of Londons airports via a single hub (cepting Stansted which does require a short one stop via Liverpool Street.


I agree with you there. Train fares can be expensive to the point of making it a nonsense to cross town. We live south of Cambridge and while we have a through service to LGW nearby, a single mid week train ticket is well over £30 one way. I can get to LHR or LCY for little more than a tube fare. So I'd pick them any day of the week. STN and LTN are short car journeys. It all really depends on where you live.
 
noviorbis77
Posts: 1030
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2017 3:23 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Wed Jun 24, 2020 10:35 am

StTim wrote:
jghealey wrote:
chonetsao wrote:

It has the best railway linkage and adequate National Express coaches.

It does indeed, I've found LGW is actually easier to get to central London than LHR - the train is so much quicker than the tube from LHR and it's still reasonably priced. And switching between terminals on the Heathrow Express at LHR to get on the right tube is also an absolute pain!


From central London I wouldn't disagree. But most low cost travellers are coming from central London.

From the North or West of London it is a pain to get to.

I can do it by rail with a change. I can do Birmingham with no change.
I can do Luton in less than 30 mins.
I can do LHR in about 60.

STN also a pain is actually slightly better for me than LGW.


You can go Watford to Clapham Junction and jump on a train to Gatwick.

Thameslink allows a huge number of people to have only one change and go direct from St Pancras or West Hampstead to Gatwick. Reading to Gatwick has a direct rail service. As does Southampton, Hastings. Anywhere in Kent is only one train change away from a direct service from London Bridge or St Pancras if you use HS1.
 
User avatar
FabDiva
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2016 6:42 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Wed Jun 24, 2020 11:22 am

I prefer Heathrow because direct coach* (I live in the South West) - for Gatwick I have to change at Heathrow, add in connection times to allow for M25 delays and Gatwick is completely off the radar. It would need to offer a huge saving to cancel out the time penalty

*It still takes 3.5-4 hrs, Bristol is an option but limited by the short runway so Long Haul means London, or connecting flight via Dublin or Amsterdam.
 
Breathe
Posts: 671
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:06 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Wed Jun 24, 2020 12:50 pm

bombayduck wrote:
Seeing as there are only two actual London airports, Heathrow cannot take much more. As for London City airport too short a runway and not enough stands. And before people moan about Heathrow, that airport is near Hounslow which is outer London. And if people want to get pedantic London City is the only that is in London itself.

Heathrow is in the London Borough of Hounslow, so it is in London, or Greater London before some pedant comes along.

As everyone knows though, real London is the square mile within the City of London Corporation. :D
 
User avatar
chunhimlai
Posts: 602
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2015 11:03 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Wed Jun 24, 2020 1:32 pm

Gatwick is the only airport in London which have enough space to build 6 runways
 
davidjohnson6
Posts: 858
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 10:10 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Wed Jun 24, 2020 1:54 pm

chunhimlai wrote:
Gatwick is the only airport in London which have enough space to build 6 runways

Why does Gatwick need to even dream of building 6 runways ? It's currently got a main runway and a reserve. In the next 30 years, Govt policy is very unlikely to let it go to more than 2 runways plus a reserve
 
AirbusA6
Posts: 1654
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 5:53 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Wed Jun 24, 2020 2:05 pm

LGW IS the best connected London airport for rail connections, as uniquely of the London airports, it's actually located on the main railway line, rather than a branch or a separate rail service, thus it has far more direct trains or easy one change trains to far more connections.

Of this doesn't mean it's the most convenient for ALL passengers in London and the southeast, but it's connectivity will ensure it has a healthy long term future.
it's the bus to stansted (now renamed National Express a6 to ruin my username)
 
DobboDobbo
Posts: 1127
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 1:02 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Wed Jun 24, 2020 2:34 pm

The mid to long term future of LGW as a facility is secure, assuming the world returns to some sort of normality in a reasonable period of time. This is because London will almost certainly remain an Alpha++ city, and as many posters have mentioned LGW has fantastic mainline rail connections across the London and the south east region.

Perhaps the most interesting connection is what role in the U.K. aviation sector LGW will play moving forwards. At the London level, it will continue to offer a phenomenal range of short and mid haul services. It’s role in the long haul space is more uncertain at the moment, with VS departing (for now), and the status of BA and Norwegian being uncertain. I’m confident that any spare slots would be hoovered up very quickly at LGW, as to whether they would be taken up by a long haul carrier is far less certain.

Added to this, there is (IIRC from ore-COVID times) a review of UK aviation policy (I think there is another one that captures the aerospace industry as a whole - which is slightly different) I don’t know what if any impact this will have on LGW in particular but it is there and in the aftermath of the pandemic the U.K. government might be tempted to shake things up.
 
jamsco99
Posts: 106
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 11:02 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Wed Jun 24, 2020 3:10 pm

chunhimlai wrote:
Gatwick is the only airport in London which have enough space to build 6 runways


Really? Where? As the building of a second runway would flatten the village of charlwood
 
airhansa
Topic Author
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:18 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Fri Jun 26, 2020 6:19 am

DobboDobbo wrote:
The mid to long term future of LGW as a facility is secure, assuming the world returns to some sort of normality in a reasonable period of time. This is because London will almost certainly remain an Alpha++ city, and as many posters have mentioned LGW has fantastic mainline rail connections across the London and the south east region.

Perhaps the most interesting connection is what role in the U.K. aviation sector LGW will play moving forwards. At the London level, it will continue to offer a phenomenal range of short and mid haul services. It’s role in the long haul space is more uncertain at the moment, with VS departing (for now), and the status of BA and Norwegian being uncertain. I’m confident that any spare slots would be hoovered up very quickly at LGW, as to whether they would be taken up by a long haul carrier is far less certain.

Added to this, there is (IIRC from ore-COVID times) a review of UK aviation policy (I think there is another one that captures the aerospace industry as a whole - which is slightly different) I don’t know what if any impact this will have on LGW in particular but it is there and in the aftermath of the pandemic the U.K. government might be tempted to shake things up.


What I'm wondering if we could see something like EasyJet moving its base to Gatwick and adding flights at Stansted. Luton at this moment has very poor public transport connections.
 
davidjohnson6
Posts: 858
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 10:10 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Fri Jun 26, 2020 6:50 am

Easyjet recently signed up a lease for new office space at Luton, just before Covid arrived. Why would they move corporate HQ again ?
Public transport at Luton will improve once the Dart is complete
 
Bhoy
Posts: 548
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:50 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Fri Jun 26, 2020 7:55 am

I don’t see Luton as being that poorly connected - sure, it’s a 5 minute bus journey to Luton Parkway* (but there’s a monorail coming), but once there, you can get to pretty much any other train station without having to change too often - Thameslink to Central London/Gatwick/Brighton, East Midlands Railway services to Nottingham, from where you can connect to anywhere in the Midlands/East Coast Mainline via Cross Country).

I don’t really see that as any different to arriving at Gatwick North Terminal and having to take the monorail to the South Terminal for the Train Station, or arriving at CDG1 and needing to take the monorail to the Train Station at 2E.

*free if you’ve bought an advance through train ticket (even online, which can be collected from the ticket machine at the Airport)
 
RvA
Posts: 380
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 12:37 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Fri Jun 26, 2020 8:12 am

jamsco99 wrote:
chunhimlai wrote:
Gatwick is the only airport in London which have enough space to build 6 runways


Really? Where? As the building of a second runway would flatten the village of charlwood


With enough money and a lack of care for what anyone says or what you destroy you can probably build 60 runways anywhere :)
 
brilondon
Posts: 3158
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:56 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Mon Jun 29, 2020 12:17 pm

Antarius wrote:
brilondon wrote:
QR1350 wrote:
I never got people’s fascination with arguing over which Airport is in London etc. Central London is rammed, you’re never going to get an airport on Oxford Street!

As for Gatwick, I’d say it easily has the best train network. You can get direct trains to various parts of Southern England. Heathrow Express to Paddington, yes, is ultimately quicker. But GatEx or Southern are way quicker than the Piccadilly line. Personally I don’t care where the airport is. If the London airport was 200 miles away but was served by a high high ultra speed rail line from Central London every ten minutes that takes ten minutes to cover those 200 miles, does it matter that you would ultimately lift off 200 miles away from ‘London’?


You obviously like LGW for some reason. I can't stand it. Even before the covid-19 situation, the connectivity to other points in Europe was disappointing. My choice will be to fly to LHR and spend a night, then continue on to my destination the next day. Unless you're absolutely against LHR, it's easier to use than LGW.


LGW sucks as an airport, but it is convenient. LHR is a larger airport with many more connections, but if I could fly in to any airport it would be LCY > LGW > LHR in terms of convenience and connectivity.


I'm looking at it from a person arriving in London from North America. I don't want to go to an airport that requires a 30 train ride just to finish off my overnight flight. 15 minutes is perfectly okay with me after landing at LHR. The customs is far better at LHR as well.
Rush forever Closer To My Heart
 
8herveg
Posts: 1488
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:01 am

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Mon Jun 29, 2020 12:45 pm

brilondon wrote:
Antarius wrote:
brilondon wrote:

You obviously like LGW for some reason. I can't stand it. Even before the covid-19 situation, the connectivity to other points in Europe was disappointing. My choice will be to fly to LHR and spend a night, then continue on to my destination the next day. Unless you're absolutely against LHR, it's easier to use than LGW.


LGW sucks as an airport, but it is convenient. LHR is a larger airport with many more connections, but if I could fly in to any airport it would be LCY > LGW > LHR in terms of convenience and connectivity.


I'm looking at it from a person arriving in London from North America. I don't want to go to an airport that requires a 30 train ride just to finish off my overnight flight. 15 minutes is perfectly okay with me after landing at LHR. The customs is far better at LHR as well.


It’s only 15 mins to Paddington though from terminals 2 & 3. It’s longer from terminal 5. And what if you’re wanting to get to the City or East London? Then it’s quicker to land at LGW and get the overground train from there to London Bridge, which is 30 mins and you’re right in the heart of the financial district. Paddington is only good if you need to be in West London.
 
BlueTrue
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2017 10:09 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Mon Jun 29, 2020 1:12 pm

To save 15 mins?
 
Antarius
Posts: 2425
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: What is the future of LGW? What will it mean for the other hubs?

Mon Jun 29, 2020 1:53 pm

8herveg wrote:
brilondon wrote:
Antarius wrote:

LGW sucks as an airport, but it is convenient. LHR is a larger airport with many more connections, but if I could fly in to any airport it would be LCY > LGW > LHR in terms of convenience and connectivity.


I'm looking at it from a person arriving in London from North America. I don't want to go to an airport that requires a 30 train ride just to finish off my overnight flight. 15 minutes is perfectly okay with me after landing at LHR. The customs is far better at LHR as well.


It’s only 15 mins to Paddington though from terminals 2 & 3. It’s longer from terminal 5. And what if you’re wanting to get to the City or East London? Then it’s quicker to land at LGW and get the overground train from there to London Bridge, which is 30 mins and you’re right in the heart of the financial district. Paddington is only good if you need to be in West London.


Exactly. London isn't a small singular place.

It really sunk in more when I was heading to Cambridge in Feb. My BFS-STN flight got cancelled due to the cyclone and I rebooked BHD-LHR. What a difference that made in terms of time taken
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL

Who is online

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