300 black “No 3rd runway” planes planted in Southall, by local anti-noise campaigns

On 29th February, campaigners from EANAG (the Ealing Aircraft Noise Action Group) and West London Friends of the Earth ceremonially planted 300 small black card planes in Southall. The planes, each saying “No 3rd runway” at Heathrow were planted on Norwood Green. The number signifies the extra number of planes that would over-fly the area, if there was a 3rd Heathrow runway. The Ealing and Southall area is affected by take-offs from Heathrow, when the airport is on easterly operations – planes taking off towards the east. Flights can be from about 6.45am to 11.45pm. Aircraft overfly much of the borough on a major flightpath from Norwood Green over south Hanwell, Northfields, south and central Ealing and parts of Acton. There are currently around 20 planes per hour overhead, but this would hugely increase with a new runway. Local residents say life and work in the borough’s homes, schools and businesses are continually disrupted by aircraft noise. It interrupts conversation, thought and sleep and prevents residents from enjoying their gardens and the local parks. The planting was joined by Jon Ball, a Liberal Democrat Ealing Councillor and Meena Hans, the Green Party GLA candidate for Ealing and Hillingdon.   
.

 

black planes southall close up 29.2.2016

 

black planes southall 29.2.2016

The 300 planes planted on Norwood Green


 

The Ealing Aviation Noise Action Group

EANAG seeks to limit and diminish disturbance from aircraft flying over Ealing. The borough is particularly affected by flights out of Heathrow during easterly operations, which are in force when the wind is blowing from the east. During easterly operations, planes take off from Heathrow towards Ealing and central London, and overfly much of the borough on a major flightpath from Norwood Green over south Hanwell, Northfields, south and central Ealing and parts of Acton.

When the wind remains in the east, or largely in the east, for the whole day, the flightpath is used from about 6.45am to about 11.45pm without a break, and at the rate of some 20 planes an hour overhead. Life and work in the borough’s homes, schools and businesses are continually disrupted by aircraft noise. It interrupts conversation, thought and sleep and prevents residents from enjoying their gardens and the local parks.

In addition to the noise, the planes generate air pollution and pose a safety risk. Heathrow also gives rise to secondary effects such as congestion on public transport and the roads.

EANAG aims to minimise these effects by pursuing eight campaign goals:

1. Prevent further expansion of capacity

EANAG is against all expansion of capacity at Heathrow. Expansion would exacerbate the noise and disturbance experienced by Ealing residents.

2. Eliminate night flights

3. Reduce Heathrow operations

4. Reduce the level of aircraft noise

5. Distribute the flightpath

6. Alleviate congestion to and from Heathrow

7. Improve air quality

And there is detail about all these campaign goals on the EANAG website

.


 

Earlier:

 

2,000 small “No 3rd runway” planes planted near Parliament (one for each plane per day)

A large group of Heathrow anti-runway campaigners gathered near Parliament, in Victoria Gardens, to plant rows of small black planes, each with the message “No 3rd Runway.”  The number planted – 2,000 – is the number of aircraft that would used Heathrow per day, with a fully used 3rd runway. That is a total of 730,000 flights per year, up from the total cap at present of 480,000 per year.  Heathrow says it could be 740,000 flights ….  The event, timed to coincide with the first day Parliament resumes this year, was to highlight the fact that 2016 will be a grim year for residents if a 3rdrunway is given the go-ahead.  Of the 2,000 planes, about 500 were planted by HACAN; about 400 by CHATR (the group in Chiswick); about 300 by Friends of the Earth; and about 800 by SHE – Stop Heathrow Expansion – to symbolise that around 800 homes would be demolished for the runway. After the government delayed its decision on a runway, expected in December, until some time in summer 2016, or shortly after the summer, the anguish and uncertainty for all those facing the threat of a new runway continue.  There are yet more stressful and worrying months ahead – but the campaign against the Heathrow 3rd runway is in fighting form, and ever more determined. 

http://www.airportwatch.org.uk/2016/01/2000-small-no-3rd-runway-planes-planted-near-parliament-one-for-each-plane-per-day/


 

Read more »

“Why we must thank the Heathrow 13” – Teddington Action Group blog

.

 

Why we must thank the Heathrow 13

Whether you avidly followed the news last week, examined every tweet, or whether you’ve never heard of them and don’t know what the fuss is about, we all owe a debt of gratitude to the Heathrow 13.

As John McDonnell Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer said from the front lines of the Willesden Magistrates Court (respect to him for being there –  and to Sian Berry too –  the only London Mayoral candidate present), we stand by the Heathrow 13 because they stood by us. No-one chains themselves to railings for want of something better to do.  No-one risks prison for the hell of it.

That this small group of people were willing to do so is testament both to their courage and to their fear.

Courage in the face of the onslaught of accusations that were bound to follow on from their actions, fear that the climate is changing, that irreparable damage may already have been done and there is simply not the political will to take unpopular decisions to face this head on. 

What is left when the democratic process fails? Much of the legislation regarding air quality is coming from Europe – now we are faced with the possibility of Brexit, people in the UK may no longer have that protection.

Species are dying out; people are dying prematurely.  Londoners breathe toxic air on a daily basis.  This is not speculation.  It is known science. Storms and floods beyond anything we have witnessed are becoming an annual hazard.

Yet the profiteers and the nay-sayers carry on their merry way.  Heathrow is effectively saying, yes our air quality levels are already illegal but we can still have a third runway,  put another quarter of a million planes in the sky. We’ll manage to stay within the two degree global warming limits.  Maybe.  Sort of.  It’ll be fine.  Trust us, dearie!

A few weeks ago signatories to the Paris Agreement agreed to restrict global warming levels to ‘well below’ two degrees C.  This ‘well below’ 2 degree target requires extensive CO2 mitigation measures which the UK Government seems to be sublimely unaware of –  must be unaware of if it can even countenance more runways in any shape or form.   More than this it has spent a great deal of public money on an Airports Commission to find sound business reasons why Heathrow should be chosen. Pick me! Pick me!

Interestingly, Professor Alice Bows-Larkin giving evidence at the trial of the Heathrow 13 notes that:

“The vast majority of academics working on climate change mitigation would agree that a rapid and significant reduction in the combustion of fossil fuels is needed in the coming decades…I am unaware of any analysis that can demonstrate how aviation could be an exception to this.”

The combination of growing demand and few technical options on the horizon that could dramatically reduce aircraft emissions means that the inability of the aviation industry to curb its environmental impact constitutes a public health risk, says Bows-Larkin.

Of the Heathrow 13 George Monbiot said in the Guardian a few weeks ago they are the heroes in the struggle against  political indifference to climate change.

There has even been talk of them being the climate suffragists.  They have our gratitude and now they have earned a break from being the thin blue line. We cannot leave it to a few brave people to shoulder this burden for us.  It is everyone’s fight.

Even those who are fortunate enough to live somewhere where A380s do not pass over their house at chimney pot height every two minutes.

The planet will survive without us – in one form or another – it is we who cannot survive without the planet.

http://www.teddingtonactiongroup.com/2016/02/29/958/

3840

.


 

The Heathrow ‘hooligans’ are our modern day freedom fighters

Supporters of the Heathrow runway protesters outside court

Supporters of the Heathrow runway protesters on trial for aggravated trespass and being in a restricted area of Heathrow airport without permission. Photograph: Mark Kerrison/Demotix/Corbis

By George Monbiot
Wednesday 20 January 2016

They have been reviled as vandals, hooligans and lunatics. But to me, these people are heroes. The 13 women and men on trial this week for cutting through the perimeter fence around Heathrow airport and chaining themselves together on a runway were excoriated by police, passengers and politicians. (One of the defendants in the case is a member of the cooperative society that rents my house.) If convicted, they all face a possible prison sentence. But there are two trials here: the legal proceedings in a local magistrates court, and a test of something much bigger.

Aviation enjoys some astonishing exemptions from the civilising rules that constrain other sectors. Other industries must limit the noise they make; but aircraft, thanks to an obscure clause in the 1949 Civil Aviation Act, are exempt. Other industries pay duty on the fuel they use; but even when air passenger duty is subtracted, aviation’s various tax holidays amount to a subsidy of some £7bn a year, forgone by the Treasury. Some industries must limit the air pollution they produce; but while in principle airports are subject to pollution laws, in practice they have been allowed to breach them routinely for years. (In this case the legal immunity also seems to extend to motor traffic.)

Most importantly, international flights are free from all climate constraints. They are covered by neither domestic legislation nor international agreements. There are no targets, no timetables, no limits. Airlines operate in a legislative vacuum, a transnational, extralegal limbo, accountable nowhere and to no one. As a result they threaten everything that was agreed at December’s climate talks in Paris.

Aviation accounts for roughly 6% of the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions, and 2% of the carbon dioxide produced by people globally. But as this industry expands while emissions from other sectors are cut, a study commissioned by the European parliament expects it to produce 22% of the world’s CO2 emissions by 2050, unless there is a sharp change in policy. That’s enough to push us past the thresholds our governments promised to avoid.

At one point the draft Paris agreement contained a paragraph about aviation and shipping (another unregulated industry). By December this paragraph had disappeared, without public explanation or debate. The final agreement simply fails to mention either industry.

Governments left the issue instead to the UN’s International Civil Aviation Organisation, a body whose apparent purpose is not to make progress but to impede it. Dominated by the industry it is supposed to regulate, its work is an exercise in finely calibrated uselessness: it makes just enough noise to create the impression of something being done, without actually changing anything.

It has three main policies. The first is to offset the greenhouse gases planes release by encouraging other sectors to make bigger cuts, in lieu of those that aviation refuses to accept. It’s not just that this policy is likely to be unachievable, as the targets agreed for other sectors in Paris will be tough enough to reach. It is also unjust. Why should this sector, used mostly by the world’s richer people, be allowed to dump its responsibilities on the rest of the economy?

The second is replacing mineral jet fuel with biofuel. Already road fuels made from plants have helped to destroy the forests of Indonesia and west Africa, strip soil off the land, evict local farmers and spread starvation, as plantations of palm oil, maize, sugar cane and other crops grown to feed cars have replaced those grown to feed people. Already, governments envisage covering great tracts of the planet’s surface with energy crops to burn in power stations: a plan that’s as fanciful as it is destructive. Now they want to power planes this way as well? Will any corners of the planet be reserved for food production and wildlife?

The organisation’s third policy is promoting speculative and often unfeasible aviation technologies, that are highly unlikely to materialise. Perhaps we could call them mumbo-jumbo jets.

Because of the physical and technological constraints, the only way in which we can realistically reduce aviation’s greenhouse gases is to fly less. You might not have imagined, in the 21st century, that we would still need to hoist 180lb of human flesh 30,000 feet into the air every time we want a conversation. I’ve been limiting my own flights to one return ticket every three years. Yes, it has sometimes cost me opportunities and income, but this restraint has made me no less happy or fulfilled. If we can only challenge our sense of entitlement, I believe we inflict no damage on our lives by taking to the air less often.

But rather than seeking to manage demand, our government, like most others, aims only to meet its own inflated forecasts. It claims that the 219m passenger journeys through the UK’s airports in 2011 will rise to 445m by 2050, and it hopes to build enough capacity to accommodate them. In doing so, it vitiates every promise it has made about preventing climate breakdown.

Last month the government delayed its decision on a third runway at Heathrow, ostensibly because of concerns about local pollution (though the real reason was to avoid sabotaging the Conservative candidate’s campaign to become London mayor). But this represents no change in policy: Cameron intends to build the new capacity somewhere, even if it’s not in west London.

Each of aviation’s exemptions is a democratic deficit: a failure to hold the industry responsible for the harms it causes. So what are citizens to do, where the writ of government does not run? Sit back and watch? By doing so, we commit a disservice to democracy. A breach of the contract between state and citizens becomes normalised and ratified by our inaction.

Two verdicts will emerge from this trial. One will concern the legal status of what the protesters did, and there is no way of knowing what it will be.

The other will concern the moral status. I suspect that if they are locked up then history will pass the same verdict upon them as it has passed upon suffragettes, Chartists, the pioneers of trade unionism, and civil and gay rights activists. Vilified, prosecuted, but – in the court of public opinion – ultimately vindicated: this is what happens to the heroes of democracy.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/20/heathrow-third-runway-protesters-trial-freedom-fighters

.

.

.

 

Read more »

Top Gatwick bosses stand to make personal fortunes if airport price raised by 2nd runway

The Sunday Times has found that several of Gatwick’s senior bosses are signed up to a bonus scheme that should pay out handsomely if the airport is sold.  In small print in Gatwick’s 2011 accounts the bonuses of “certain members” of its board are directly linked to the amount GIP gets from sale of the airport.  It has long been suspected that Stewart Wingate, Nick Dunn (and others?) would stand to gain significantly, themselves, if they could raise the value of the airport by getting a 2nd runway.  Now the disclosure has proved it.  The cap on how much they could make is not revealed. Gatwick lent the executives £2.8m to buy into the share scheme, with the interest-free loans repayable once they sell their shares.  GIP owns 42% of the airport, with much of the rest held by investors from Abu Dhabi, California, Korea and Australia. Gatwick have been doing all they can to block a Heathrow runway, to get their own.  They are also doing all they can to increase the maximum number of flights per hour through flight path changes – again to raise the airport’s price. GIP bought Gatwick for £1.5 billion in 2009, and has just sold London City airport for almost x3 what they paid for it – and almost x32 its annual underlying profits. 
.

 

Comment from a Kent resident – sufferer from increased, unacceptable Gatwick noise

“GIP is thought to have done very well indeed from its sale of London City airport, with  a record 32 x multiple of earnings for an airport. GIP is licking its lips at the prospect of flogging Gatwick. Many have long believed that GIP intends to sell Gatwick well before any work to build a 2nd runway started.

“The reality appears to be that with a 2nd Gatwick runway, GIP could turn a profit of billions. It only paid £1.5 billion for the airport in 2009.  But if they don’t get a second runway but flog the airport with capacity for 55/60 movements per hour (as ‘recommended’ by the Bo Redeborn and Graham Lake, “Arrivals Review”) it could still make a profit of hundreds of millions. Either way Stewart Wingate, Nick Dunn and others, make millions and innumerable areas within 30 or more miles from the airport are permanently destroyed, by the plane noise nuisance. Longer term – it’s game over for many communities.

“How about calling for GIP to commit to owning Gatwick for x years if it were to be granted a 2nd runway? That would change things because Gatwick’s plan has more holes than an Alabama road sign and there is no way it will deliver on infrastructure – or, ask for a ‘windfall tax’ to be imposed on foreign hedge funds speculating on vital UK infrastructure?

“People need to rubbish Gatwick’s sham Arrivals Review, which just crystallises Gatwick’s world record throughput. Gatwick needs to be slammed for its shameless land grab. Everything else is shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic.”


 

Gatwick links bosses’ bonuses to airport sale

Airport lends senior executives £2.8m to buy shares that could bring bonanza with sell-off

By John Collingridge (The Times)
 28 February 2016

GATWICK’S bosses have signed up to a bonus scheme that should pay out handsomely when the West Sussex airport is sold.

In the small print of Gatwick’s annual accounts, the bonuses of “certain members” of its board are directly linked to the amount received from a sale

The government is currently wrestling with whether to back expansion at Gatwick or Heathrow. The Sussex airport’s value is likely to soar if it wins approval for a second runway.

The disclosure will fuel controversy because it indicates, for the first time, that management are likely to gain personally from expansion.

Gatwick was bought from BAA in 2009 for £1.5bn by the private equity giant Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP) and a consortium of investors.

GIP last week sold London City airport in Docklands for £2.3bn — about 32 times its annual underlying profits — setting a record for an airport. It was bought in a fiercely contested auction by a consortium of three Canadian investors and Kuwait’s sovereign wealth fund. GIP bought the airport in 2006 for about £750m.

The share scheme for Gatwick executives was set up in 2011 and rewards them on the basis of the “internal rate of return achieved by the company’s controlling shareholder from acquisition to sale of their investment in the company”. As well as performance and profits, that rate of return hinges on the “level of any future sale”. It is capped at an undisclosed level.

Gatwick lent the executives £2.8m to buy into the scheme, with the interest-free loans repayable once they sell their shares. The company declined to say which of its executives are in the scheme, but they are likely to include chief executive Stewart Wingate and finance director Nick Dunn, appointed in 2009 and 2010, respectively.

GIP last year insisted it had no plans to sell up immediately if it won planning permission for the runway. It owns 42% of the airport, with much of the rest held by investors from Abu Dhabi, California, Korea and Australia.

Gatwick has grown strongly since its 2009 takeover, handling 40.3m passengers last year compared with 32m in 2009. It has continued an advertising offensive to promote a second runway even though Sir Howard Davies’s Airports Commission last summer called Heathrow the “clear and unanimous” choice for another runway in southeast England. The government has deferred a decision until at least the summer.

Former British Airways pilot Jock Lowe, whose plan to extend a Heathrow runway is also being weighed up by the government, said: “The real motive of the owners and management at Gatwick is to stop Heathrow expanding — and then, having got permission to expand themselves, sell Gatwick to the highest bidder.”

Heathrow said its executives do not have an incentive scheme tied to the sale of the airport or runway expansion. Gatwick declined to comment.

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/business/Industry/article1672775.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-2016_02_28

.


 

See also:

Anger at revelation that Gatwick bosses to personally profit (millions of £s) if 2nd runway allowed

The Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign (GACC) has expressed anger at the revelation in the Sunday Times that Gatwick bosses are set to benefit personally by several million pounds if permission is given for a 2nd runway. GACC says a 2nd runway would bring misery to tens of thousands of people. There would be three times as many people affected by serious amounts of aircraft noise, and new flight paths over peaceful areas. About 50,000 people would suffer from worse air quality. A new runway would mean traffic jams on motorways and local roads, overcrowding on the trains and an influx of new workers with a need to build 40,000 new houses on green fields. But with all these negative impacts on ordinary people, Gatwick bosses would walk away with huge bonuses. GACC chairman, Brendon Sewill, commented: “Until now Gatwick Airport Ltd have tried to persuade the public that a 2nd runway would be in the national interest. Now the cat is out of the bag! There is no real need for a new runway at Gatwick.” GACC will be investigating how far these new bonus payments will be subject to the normal full 45% rate of income tax. Despite making large profits, Gatwick Airport has paid no corporation tax since being bought by GIP due to tax fiddles similar to those operated by Starbucks or Google.

Click here to view full story…


 

Read more »

Anger at revelation that Gatwick bosses to personally profit (millions of £s) if 2nd runway allowed

The Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign (GACC) has expressed anger at the revelation in the Sunday Times that Gatwick bosses are set to benefit personally by several million pounds if permission is given for a 2nd runway. GACC says a 2nd runway would bring misery to tens of thousands of people. There would be three times as many people affected by serious amounts of aircraft noise, and new flight paths over peaceful areas. About 50,000 people would suffer from worse air quality. A new runway would mean traffic jams on motorways and local roads, overcrowding on the trains and an influx of new workers with a need to build 40,000 new houses on green fields. But with all these negative impacts on ordinary people, Gatwick bosses would walk away with huge bonuses. GACC chairman, Brendon Sewill, commented: “Until now Gatwick Airport Ltd have tried to persuade the public that a 2nd runway would be in the national interest. Now the cat is out of the bag!  There is no real need for a new runway at Gatwick.” GACC will be investigating how far these new bonus payments will be subject to the normal full 45% rate of income tax.  Despite making large profits, Gatwick Airport has paid no corporation tax since being bought by GIP due to tax fiddles similar to those operated by Starbucks or Google.
.

 

Gatwick links bosses’ bonuses to airport sale

Airport lends senior executives £2.8m to buy shares that could bring bonanza with sell-off

By John Collingridge (The Times)
 28 February 2016

GATWICK’S bosses have signed up to a bonus scheme that should pay out handsomely when the West Sussex airport is sold.

In the small print of Gatwick’s annual accounts, the bonuses of “certain members” of its board are directly linked to the amount received from a sale

The government is currently wrestling with whether to back expansion at Gatwick or Heathrow. The Sussex airport’s value is likely to soar if it wins approval for a second runway.

The disclosure will fuel controversy because it indicates, for the first time, that management are likely to gain personally from expansion.

Gatwick was bought from BAA in 2009 for £1.5bn by the private equity giant Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP) and a consortium of investors.

GIP last week sold London City airport in Docklands for £2.3bn — about 32 times its annual underlying profits — setting a record for an airport. It was bought in a fiercely contested auction by a consortium of three Canadian investors and Kuwait’s sovereign wealth fund. GIP bought the airport in 2006 for about £750m.

The share scheme for Gatwick executives was set up in 2011 and rewards them on the basis of the “internal rate of return achieved by the company’s controlling shareholder from acquisition to sale of their investment in the company”. As well as performance and profits, that rate of return hinges on the “level of any future sale”. It is capped at an undisclosed level.

Gatwick lent the executives £2.8m to buy into the scheme, with the interest-free loans repayable once they sell their shares. The company declined to say which of its executives are in the scheme, but they are likely to include chief executive Stewart Wingate and finance director Nick Dunn, appointed in 2009 and 2010, respectively.

GIP last year insisted it had no plans to sell up immediately if it won planning permission for the runway. It owns 42% of the airport, with much of the rest held by investors from Abu Dhabi, California, Korea and Australia.

Gatwick has grown strongly since its 2009 takeover, handling 40.3m passengers last year compared with 32m in 2009. It has continued an advertising offensive to promote a second runway even though Sir Howard Davies’s Airports Commission last summer called Heathrow the “clear and unanimous” choice for another runway in southeast England. The government has deferred a decision until at least the summer.

Former British Airways pilot Jock Lowe, whose plan to extend a Heathrow runway is also being weighed up by the government, said: “The real motive of the owners and management at Gatwick is to stop Heathrow expanding — and then, having got permission to expand themselves, sell Gatwick to the highest bidder.”

Heathrow said its executives do not have an incentive scheme tied to the sale of the airport or runway expansion. Gatwick declined to comment.

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/business/Industry/article1672775.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-2016_02_28

.


 

Comment from GACC – Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign:

 

GACC has expressed anger at the revelation in a Sunday newspaper that Gatwick bosses are set to benefit personally by several million pounds if permission is given for a second runway.

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/business/Industry/article1672775.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-2016_02_28

‘A second runway would bring misery to tens of thousands of people – three times as many affected by serious noise,[1] new flight paths over peaceful areas, 50,000 suffering from worse air quality,[2] traffic jams on motorways and local roads, overcrowding on the trains and an influx of new workers with a need to build 40,000 new houses on green fields.[3]  Ordinary people suffer while the bosses walk away with huge bonuses,’ according to GACC chairman Brendon Sewill.

‘Until now Gatwick Airport Ltd have tried to persuade the public that a second runway would be in the national interest:  now the cat is out of the bag!  There is no real need for a new runway at Gatwick – Stansted is only half full and won’t be full until after 2040.  The main reason for all the ballyhoo is to enable the bosses to line their own pockets.’

GACC will be investigating how far these new bonus payments will be subject to the normal full 45% rate of income tax.  Despite making large profits, Gatwick Airport has paid no corporation tax since being bought by the American hedge fund Global Infrastructure Partners – as a result of a tax fiddle similar to those operated by Starbucks or Google.[4]

[1]   Airports Commission Consultation November 2014

[2]  Airports Commission Consultation April 2015

[3]  GACC response.  www.gacc.org.uk/the-runway-issue

[4]  Complex, not illegal but currently the subject of international discussions

www.gacc.org.uk

.

.

.

 

Read more »

Report for Heathrow shows the Compton route is indeed being flown differently and more noisily than before

People complaining about Heathrow flights on the Compton route have been adamant there have been changes,  planes are over different areas and they are lower. Heathrow has said, month after month, that these people are mistaken.  Now research carried out by consultants have shown there are indeed changes. The report says there has been an increase in traffic from 2007 to 2015 – from 65 flights per day to 89 per day. There has been an increase in the proportion of flights using the northern edge of the departure route rather than across the 3km swathe. There has been an increase in the number of heavy aircraft (e.g. 747s and A340s) using the Compton route, and many are now going to ultra-long-haul destinations, so are very heavy with fuel; these planes are now lower over areas near the airport – and therefore noisier.  The consultants say the Compton route was designed before huge planes like the A380, which has difficulty flying it. Though Heathrow is meant to fine aircraft that do not stick to the NPR, this has not been happening. The planes cannot stick to the route – but are still using it as if they could. A very unsatisfactory situation.  Heathrow says it will be working with NATS and members of the Heathrow Community Noise Forum this year to “revisit the procedures used on the Compton route.”
.

 

Heathrow vows to take action over ‘illegal’ flights

28 FEB 2016
BY ROBERT CUMBER  (Get West London)

.
The airport’s own research shows many more large aircraft are flying outside their permitted route and at lower heights

Heathrow has vowed to address the problem of ‘illegal’ flights, after a study showed increasing numbers of heavy aircraft are straying from their designated departure route.

Bosses at the airport have promised to work with residents of Ashford and surrounding areas, who have complained of a huge rise over the last two years in the number of planes flying low over their homes, which lie outside the approved flight path.

An investigation by Heathrow showed many more large aircraft like Airbus A380s have been flying beyond the permitted corridor, and at significantly lower heights than before, in recent years on the Compton route.

The airport says the problem is specific to that route, used by planes departing to the east from the southern runway and banking to the west, towards the US.

Route not designed with larger planes in mind

As with all departure routes, aircraft are meant to follow the “noise preferential route” (NPR)– a 3km wide corridor designed in the 1960s to minimise disturbance for those living near the airport.

But Heathrow says the Compton route was not designed with today’s larger planes like the A380 in mind.

Heathrow Airport.   This map shows the Compton route, which is marked by orange lines
It says those heavier planes – many of which are heading to the USA’s west coast, so are laden with fuel – cannot climb as steeply and struggle to stick to the corridor, much to the annoyance of those living below.

Kevin Young, who lives in Ashford, says it is like a “bombing raid” some days, with more and more planes flying low over his house in the past two years, despite it lying outside the flight path.

‘Like a bombing raid’

“The noise over the last year in particular has been unacceptable. These planes have full thrust on because they’re trying to gain height quickly but they’re not able to,” he said.

“It’s like a bombing raid some days because there are so many planes passing overhead and they’re flying so low.”

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) says aircraft are required to follow the specific flight path unless directed otherwise by air traffic control.

The regulator states that an aircraft’s ability to follow an exact route is affected by factors including wind and the plane’s weight.

Airports have the power to fine airlines whose planes fail to comply, and the Government is able to ban those consistently flouting the rules.

Heathrow setting up working group to look at options

Heathrow says it has chosen not to impose fines as the Compton route was not designed with today’s aircraft in mind and they are often directed by air controllers to leave the path before reaching 4,000ft.

However, Mr Young claims that if planes are not able to follow the route they should not be allowed to choose that route in the first place.

Heathrow Airport  These charts show how many aircraft, especially A380s, are flying outside the permitted flight path

.
He says they should only be allowed to veer from the path without getting fined if it is for unforeseeable safety reasons.

Heathrow says more than 90% of flights keep to their designated departure paths but the Compton route has been a headache for many years.

Although the number of flights deviating from the permitted route has not risen in the last couple of years, it says, there has been a significant increase the number of A380s flying low over areas outside the corridor.

It insists the issue is a priority and it is setting up a working group with local residents to look at all possible options.

A Heathrow spokeswoman said: “Heathrow is aware of the long standing issues with the Compton departure route during periods of easterly winds.

“Working with industry partners and local community representatives, we will be reviewing the procedures used on the Compton route over the next few months, in order to address the concerns raised by residents.”

You can see the full report here .

.


Heathrow’s website says: 

 

Compton flight analysis – February – 2016

Over the last few months, there has been an increase in the number of residents from Ashford, Middlesex contacting us about flights using the departure route that passes over this area (known as the Compton route) during periods of easterly operations (i.e when there are easterly winds). Residents are concerned that there has been an increase in flights flying outside the departure route.In response to concerns we asked independent consultants, PA Consulting, to carry out some detailed analysis to assess whether there have been changes to flight patterns or altitudes over the last few years, and in particular to ascertain whether the procedural changes made by NATS to the route in 2014 had an impact to flight patterns below 4,000ft.

Broadly the findings show that:

– There has been an increase in traffic from 2007 to 2015 – from 65 flights per day to 89 per day, however over the last 3 years this has been remained fairly static;

– There has not been any increase in the proportion traffic flying outside the departure route however there is a higher concentration of aircraft flying towards the northern edge of the departure route, and therefore closer to areas like Ashford;

– There has been an increase in the number of heavy aircraft (e.g. 747s and A340s) using the route;

– There has been a large increase in flights going to ultra-long-haul destinations from 2011 which means aircraft will be carrying more fuel, and therefore heavier on take- off;

– There has been a decrease in the average and minimum height of aircraft over the analysis area (approx. 200ft) coinciding with the increase in large aircraft and long haul destinations.

 

The full report can be downloaded here

While the analysis confirms there hasn’t been an increase in flights outside the specified departure route, we are fully aware that there are long standing issues with flights using the Compton route route during periods of easterly winds.

In comparison to Heathrow’s other departure routes, the percentage of aircraft flying keeping within the prescribed 3km swathe (up to 4,000ft) of the Compton route is much lower than others.  The main reason for this is because the route involves a 180 degree turn which modern fleets find difficult to follow. In addition traffic departing on this route have to be tactically managed by NATS air traffic controllers to avoid the arriving aircraft from the holding stacks to the south.

This year Heathrow will be working with NATS and members of the Heathrow Community Noise Forum to revisit the procedures used on the Compton route.

For more information please contact us on noise@heathrow.com                                              or by calling 0800 344844.

.


Earlier Teddington Action Group also got evidence that they have been suffering from more aircraft noise, despite months of denials from Heathrow:

 

Teddington Action Group show – from Heathrow report – that they are now suffering more aircraft noise

Residents in Twickenham and Teddington have been aware of greatly increased aircraft noise from Heathrow, over the past year. However, Heathrow have for months insisted that the noise has not increased. Now an independent report commissioned and paid for by Heathrow, by PA Consulting has shown that the residents are right.  Examining data between November 2011 and May 2015, the report confirms that planes – especially the heavier, noisier types – are flying lower than previously over the area, in greater numbers and concentrated within flight paths. Also that the periods of greatest disruption are increasingly late at night and early in the morning. Rather than being associated with the 2014 Flight Path Trials, which saw record numbers of noise complaints from residents, the report states that these developments merely reflect the general trend of fleet development and air traffic movements. TAG say they have more of the noisiest long haul planes flying over lower than before, sometimes at little more than 2,000 feet in Teddington and 1,400 feet in Twickenham. Worryingly, if this disruption stems from new flight trends, it is only likely to get worse, and for many other areas overflown by Heathrow planes.

http://www.airportwatch.org.uk/2015/10/teddington-action-group-show-from-heathrow-report-that-they-are-now-suffering-more-aircraft-noise/

 

Read more »

With referendum awaited, 10 – 15,000 attend another massive protest against new Nantes airport

On the 9th January, there were estimated to have been 20,000 people at huge protests against the planned new airport for Nantes in countryside at Notre-Dame-des-Landes. Then on 26th January, the local court confirmed that 11 families would be evicted from their homes on the ZAD (zone à défendre) within about two months. On 13th February, President Hollande declared there would be a referendum on whether the airport should be built. This has caused local concerns. But neither the date nor the exact questions, nor the scope of the consultation’s geographical area, have been settled. In response to the referendum proposal, the local campaign organised another massive demonstration (manifestation), to show the authorities the strength of feeling against the airport. Around 10,000 to 15,000 people came, from all across France. There are over 100 support committees across the country. They filled all 4 lanes of two local dual-carriageways, for many hours – in a peaceful protest, with a festival atmosphere. Two of the Heathrow 13 (spared prison on 24th February, with suspended 6 week sentences for their Heathrow runway occupation) attended the protest, showing solidarity from the London campaign. Campaigners in Turkey, against the new Istanbul airport,  also sent messages of support.
.

 

Nantes nddl manif 27.2.2016

Solid mass of people, as well as tractors and bikes.

walking  27.2.2016

Thousands walking

4 lanes blocked near zad nddl 27.2.2016

4 lanes of traffic blocked for hours.

part of the manif 27.2.2016

10,000 to 15,000 people attended – from all across France.

le climat vote non 27.2.2016

The new airport at Nantes (or a new runway for the UK) are both fiercely opposed due to the extra carbon emissions that would be generated by the extra air travel they would facilitate.

kara and ella at nddl with joint banner 27.2.2016

Kara and Ella, from the #Heathrow13 (spared prison on Wednesday 24th, with suspended prison sentences, for their runway invasion in July 2015) went over to show solidarity with the protest at Nantes and Notre-Dame-des-Landes.

London PS solidarity with nddl 27.2.2016

Mel, Graham and Ali, from the #Heathrow13, with a banner outside the London offices of Vinci, the company that plans to build the new Nantes airport at Notre-Dame-des Landes.

Turkish banners with ZAD 27.2.2016

In Turkey, campaigners against the massive 3rd airport planned for Istanbul had banners is solidarity with the campaigners at the ZAD at Notre-Dame-des-Landes.

.


 

Links to earlier stories (in English) about the campaign at Notre-Dame-des-Landes


 

Great demonstration of opponents at the airport in Notre-Dame-des-Landes

27.2.2016  (Imperfect translation into English, from Huffington Post article)

NOTRE-DAME-DES-LANDES – A crowd of opponents of the planned airport at Notre-Dame-des-Landes demonstrated on Saturday 27 February, in a festival atmosphere and under a cold sun, on the proposed site for the airport project, north of Nantes. It was their first major event since the announcement of a referendum by François Hollande.

Some 15,000 people according to the prefecture, 50,000 according to organizers, marched peacefully on the axis Nantes-Rennes and Nantes-Vannes roads – which encircle the perimeter of the future airport- before converging towards the Temple-de-Bretagne.

“This demonstration is important to show our determination and to show politicians that we are the most numerous,” he told a spokesman for the Coordination of opponents to the airport, Dominique Lebreton, in an allusion to the referendum to decide the issue that is nearly a half-century old, of which Aéroports du Grand Ouest, a subsidiary of Vinci, was appointed dealer (contractor).

“We have the duty to preserve these lands and peasants to produce food tomorrow,” he continued, before chanting with the crowd “Vinci out!”

This mobilization “is a response to the Prime Minister who said that the referendum should legitimize the project. The answer is no,” said Green MEP José Bové, in the ranks of the event. “The only solution is that the President of the Republic declares the project not of public usefulness,” José Bové said to the press, though he was however, attacked by some hooded youths who described him as “treacherous”.

“The proposed referendum can be yet another dirty trick that has the appearance of being democratic but you don’t do a referendum on case that has been false from the beginning,” denounced Françoise Verchère, who is co-president of the Collective of elected representatives who doubt the relevance airport (CEDPA), on the four-lane Nantes-Vannes road, closed to traffic and filled with people for several kilometers.

A floor where opponents also played music, and that was “decorated” by gigantic slogans and drawings in chalk or paint, “the sky for birds”, a plane pierced by a carrot a dozen meters long …

“Nobody has ever seen a mobilization like this at Notre-Dame-des-Landes”, commented Dominique Fresneau, co-chair of the ACIPA, one of the main associations of opponents, who recorded 60 buses of protesters, coming from all over France.

Alain Adriaens had made the trip from Brussels, “because Notre-Dame-des-Landes is a symbol, people look to you from all over the world,” he explained.

“Against concreting”

For another protester, Jean Bernard, perched on his bike, mobilization “goes beyond” the challenge of airport infrastructure, “it is a system that wants to fight,” he says.

“It is clear that there is a citizen mobilization throughout France. When Jean-Marc Ayrault wants to focus on Nantes or the countyside of Notre-Dame-des-Landes , we see that it is much broader than that and that people are there to support the people being evicted, but also a project about society, against concreting over agricultural land,” adds Sylvain Fresneau a farmer of Notre-Dame-des-Landes who is due to be evicted from his farm.

Originally, the mobilization Saturday aims to combat the expulsion of the last 15 historical inhabitants of the area set aside for airport infrastructure, who had their last appeal rejected by the justice at the end of January.

Since that decision, the President of the Republic announced the organization of a referendum and Prime Minister Manuel Valls expressed his wish to start work in October in case of victory of a “yes” vote. But neither the date nor the exact question, nor the scope of the consultation’s geographical area, which raises complex legal issues, have been settled.

In February 2014, at least 20,000 people had gathered in the city center of Nantes to say no to the transfer of the Nantes airport in the grove of Notre-Dame-des-Landes, resulting in parallel to violence and degradations. Opponents had managed a show of force on January 9th, bringing together between 7,200 and 20,000 people on the Nantes ring road.

In Auch, one hundred people have also expressed their support against the airport of Notre-Dame-des-Landes, according to an AFP correspondent.

 

The original French below:

Grande manifestation des opposants à l’aéroport de Notre-Dame-des-Landes

AFP

Publication:

NOTRE-DAME-DES-LANDES – Une foule d’opposants à l’aéroport de Notre-Dame-des-Landes ont manifesté samedi 27 février, dans une ambiance de kermesse et sous un soleil froid, sur le site prévu pour le projet au nord de Nantes. Il s’agissait de leur première grande manifestation depuis l’annonce d’un référendum par François Hollande.

Quelque 15.000 personnes selon la préfecture, 50.000 selon les organisateurs, ont défilé dans le calme sur les axes Nantes-Rennes et Nantes-Vannes –entourant le périmètre du futur aéroport– avant de converger vers le Temple-de-Bretagne.

notre dame des landes manifestation

“Cette manifestation est importante pour montrer notre détermination et montrer aux politiques que nous sommes les plus nombreux”, a lancé un porte-parole de la Coordination des opposants à l’aéroport, Dominique Lebreton, dans une allusion au référendum destiné à trancher ce dossier vieux de près d’un demi-siècle, dont Aéroports du Grand Ouest, filiale de Vinci, a été désigné concessionnaire.

“Nous avons le devoir de conserver ces terres et ces paysans pour produire l’alimentation de demain”, a-t-il poursuivi, avant de faire scander à la foule “Vinci dégage!”

Cette mobilisation “est une réponse au Premier ministre qui a dit que le référendum devrait légitimer le projet. La réponse est non”, a estimé l’eurodéputé écologiste José Bové, dans les rangs de la manifestation. “La seule solution, c’est que le président de la République déclare ce projet d’inutilité publique”, a affirmé à la presse José Bové, qui a toutefois été pris à partie par quelques jeunes cagoulés qui l’ont qualifié de “traître”.

“Ce projet de référendum peut être une énième entourloupe qui a une apparence démocratique mais on ne fait pas un référendum sur un dossier mensonger depuis le début”, a dénoncé Françoise Verchère, coprésidente du Collectif des élus doutant de la pertinence de l’aéroport (Cedpa), sur une quatre-voies Nantes-Vannes fermée à la circulation et noire de monde sur plusieurs kilomètres.

notre dame des landes manifestation

Une chaussée où les opposants ont aussi joué de la musique, et qui a été “décorée” de gigantesques slogans et de dessins à la craie ou à la peinture: “le ciel aux oiseaux”, un avion transpercé par une carotte d’une dizaine de mètres de long…

“On a jamais vu une mobilisation comme ça à Notre-Dame-des-Landes”, s’est félicité Dominique Fresneau, coprésident de l’Acipa, l’une des principales associations d’opposants, qui a comptabilisé 60 cars de manifestants, venus de toute la France.

Alain Adriaens, lui, a fait le déplacement depuis Bruxelles, “parce que Notre-Dame-des-Landes est un symbole, on vous regarde de partout dans le monde”, a-t-il expliqué.

“Contre le bétonnage”

Pour un autre manifestant, Jean Bernard, juché sur son vélo, la mobilisation “va bien au-delà” de la contestation de l’infrastructure aéroportuaire, “c’est tout un système qu’on veut combattre”, explique-t-il.

notre dame des landes manifestation

“On voit bien qu’il y a une mobilisation citoyenne de toute la France. Quand Jean-Marc Ayrault veut le concentrer sur Nantes ou le bocage de Notre-Dame-des-Landes, on voit que c’est beaucoup plus vaste que ça et que les gens sont là pour soutenir les expulsés mais aussi pour un projet de société, contre le bétonnage des terres agricoles”, renchérit Sylvain Fresneau, un agriculteur expulsable de Notre-Dame-des-Landes.

A l’origine, la mobilisation de samedi vise à combattre l’expulsion des 15 derniers habitants historiques de la zone prévue pour l’infrastructure, qui ont vu leurs derniers recours rejetés par la justice fin janvier.

Depuis cette décision, le président de la République a annoncé l’organisation d’un référendum et le Premier ministre Manuel Valls a dit son souhait de lancer les travaux dès octobre en cas de victoire du “oui”. Mais ni la date, ni la question exacte, ni le périmètre de cette consultation, qui pose de complexes questions juridiques n’ont été tranchés.

En février 2014, au moins 20.000 personnes s’étaient rassemblées dans le centre-ville de Nantes pour dire non au transfert de l’aéroport nantais dans le bocage de Notre-Dame-des-Landes, donnant lieu en parallèle à des violences et des dégradations. Les opposants avaient réussi une démonstration de force le 9 janvier, réunissant entre 7200 et 20.000 personnes sur le périphérique nantais.

A Auch, une centaine de personnes ont également manifesté leur soutien contre l’aéroport de Notre-Dame-des-Landes, selon un correspondant de l’AFP.

Lire aussi

:• NDDL: le gouvernement dévoile ses conditions pour le référendum

• Toutes les expulsions approuvées sur le site de Notre-Dame-des-Landes

http://www.huffingtonpost.fr/2016/02/27/notre-dame-des-landes-manifestation-aeroport-opposants-site-projet-zad-nantes_n_9334044.html

.


 

 

Notre-Dame-des-Landes : plus de 10.000 manifestants défilent entre Nantes et Vannes contre l’aéroport

Forte mobilisation samedi 27 février contre le projet de construction d’aéroport à Notre-Dame-des-Landes.

Des "dizaines de milliers de manifestants" réunis samedi 27 février contre le projet d'aéroport à Notre-Dame-des-Landes
Des “dizaines de milliers de manifestants” réunis samedi 27 février contre le projet d’aéroport à Notre-Dame-des-Landes

 

Vélos, tracteurs et marcheurs ont remplacé les automobilistes sur la route nationale 165 entre Nantes et Vannes. Ils sont plus de 10.000 personnes, selon la préfecture, “plusieurs dizaines de milliers” selon les organisateurs, à manifester samedi 27 février contre l’aéroport de Notre-Dame-des-Landes non loin du site prévu pour le projet, au nord de Nantes.

Il s’agit de la première grande manifestation des opposants au transfert de l’aéroport nantais vers Notre-Dame-des-Landes depuis l’annonce d’un référendum sur ce sujet par François Hollande le 11 février. Le 8 janvier, les manifestants n’étaient que 7.200 selon la police, cette annonce de la tenue d’un référendum n’a donc pas atténué la colère des opposants.

Cette manifestation est importante pour montrer notre détermination et montrer aux politiques que nous sommes les plus nombreux“, a lancé un porte-parole de la Coordination des opposants à l’aéroport, Dominique Lebreton, dans une allusion au référendum pour trancher sur ce projet d’aéroport vieux de près d’un demi-siècle, dont Aéroports du Grand Ouest (AGO), filiale de Vinci, a été désigné concessionnaire. “Nous avons le devoir de conserver ces terres et ces paysans pour produire l’alimentation de demain”, a-t-il poursuivi, depuis un camion-tribune, avant de faire scander à la foule “Vinci dégage !”. Plusieurs personnalités politiques sont présentes dont José Bové.

http://www.rtl.fr/actu/societe-faits-divers/notre-dame-des-landes-plus-de-10-000-manifestants-defilent-entre-nantes-et-vannes-contre-l-aeroport-7782092438

Read more »

London City airport sold to Canadian Pension funds, for £2 billion (bought by GIP in 2006 for £760 million)

A Canadian-led consortium of pension funds has beaten rivals to buy London City airport, from GIP, which paid £760 million for it.  So that is a hefty profit. The valuation has proved controversial because the largest airline at City airport, BA, threatened to pull most of its aircraft out of the airport if the new owner raised airline charges to cover the high sale price. Willie Walsh, CEO of BA’s owner IAG, considers £2 billion a foolish price.  GIP owns 75% of the airport, and Oaktree Capital own 25%. The consortium that has bought the airport is led by the Ontario Teachers’ pension fund. It includes Borealis Infrastructure, which manages funds for one of Canada’s largest pension funds, and also Japanese pension funds. The consortium is made up of AIMCo (Alberta Investment Management Corporation), OMERS (Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System), Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan and Wren House Infrastructure Management.  Kuwait’s Wren House Infrastructure Management is an investment vehicle owned by the Kuwait Investment Authority. The Canadian Teachers’ pension fund has $160bn in assets, and already owns 4 airports (share of Birmingham, Bristol, Brussels and Copenhagen).  HS1 Ltd is jointly owned by Borealis Infrastructure and Ontario Teachers Pension Plan, both Canadian pension funds.  GIP bought the airport for an estimated £750m in 2006 from Dermot Desmond, the Irish financier, who paid just £23.5m for it in 1995 from Mowlem.
.

Aerial Views Of Canary Wharf And The City...Skyscrapers in the Canary Wharf business, financial and shopping district, including HSBC Holdings Plc, center left, One Canada Square, center, and Citigroup Inc., are seen in this aerial photograph, as London City airport, far left, and the Thames Barrier, far right, are seen in the background in London, U.K., on Tuesday, June 16, 2015. Britain had its smallest budget deficit for any May since 2007 as tax income jumped, handing a boost to Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne as he prepares to unveil the first budget of the new Conservative-only government. Photographer: Matthew Lloyd/Bloomberg

Canadian consortium buys London City airport for £2bn

Group led by Ontario Teachers’ pension fund and HS1 investor Borealis, saw off strong competition to purchase the capital’s smallest airport

By Gwyn Topham, Transport correspondent (Guardian)

Thursday 25 February 2016

London City Airport has been sold to a Canadian consortium for around £2bn.

The airport in Docklands largely serves a clientele of business executives and has been bought by a consortium led by the Ontario Teachers’ pension fund and Borealis, the pairing whose UK infrastructure investments include HS1.

Other reported bidders were the Chinese transport company HNA and another Canadian consortium, as the price for the capital’s smallest airport exceeded early expectations.

The value of the airport, which serves around four million passengers a year, has rocketed over the past two decades. Global Infrastructure Partners, its owner until now, also has Gatwick and Edinburgh in its portfolio. It paid a third of that price a decade ago to buy the airport from Irish businessman Dermot Desmond, who had purchased it in 1995 for just £23.5m. It was an investment that had been considered risky while Canary Wharf, a major source of business passengers, was in administration.

The Ontario Teachers and Borealis consortium also included Aimco and Wren House, while the defeated Canadian consortium included PSP Investments, a pension fund that covers the country’s mounted police.

Expansion plans for the central London airport have been blocked by the mayor, Boris Johnson. City airport is appealing against Johnson’s decision to block its proposed £200m expansion plan, which would have doubled its passenger traffic by 2030, extending the terminal and airfield to allow 50% more flights.

London City Airport is in the middle of a planning battle over a £200m development that would increase the number of passengers it handles to 6m by 2023. The plans were blocked last year by Boris Johnson, mayor of London, over concerns of sound pollution. London City is appealing against the mayor’s decision. The appeal starts on 15th March.

Campaigners attempting to curb its present operations due to noise and pollution concerns have warned that the 2030 vision would mean a huge increase in flights and disruption over inner north-east London.

The sale may raise the eyebrows of the boss of London City’s biggest customer, British Airways. Willie Walsh, chief executive of BA’s ower IAG, recently dismissed the £2bn valuation as “foolish”. He warned that BA was prepared to move its operations elsewhere should any buyer attempt to increase landing charges to cover the cost of its purchase.

The price is around 30 times London City’s earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation in 2015. Walsh said he could not see how any buyer could “recover or make any return on that investment unless they make significant increases in airport charges”.

The price tag dwarfs the £1.5bn paid by Manchester Airports Group for Stansted two years ago, which carries more than five times as many passengers and has permission to double that number.

However, London City airport, which is near Canary Wharf, has an unparalleled location and investors may believe airlines could sustain higher fares – despite Walsh’s claim about the margins BA makes at City.

Global Infrastructure Partners declined to confirm or comment on the reported sale. London City airport and Ontario Teachers did not respond to requests for comment.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/feb/25/canadian-consortium-buys-london-city-airport-2bn

.


London City airport sold to Canadian pension funds

25.2.2016 (FT)

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2d675756-dbe6-11e5-a72f-1e7744c66818.html#axzz41EJLGzga

.


 

More details about the buyers and those whose bids did not succeed at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/11809995/Kuwait-eyes-consortium-bid-for-London-City-Airport.html.  Telegraph. August 2015


 

The Ontario Teachers Pension Plan owns, just Europe, the Middle East and Africa:

(and lots more elsewhere in the world)

http://www.otpp.com/investments/asset-groups/infrastructure/portfolio

 

Birmingham Airport, located in the Midlands near the city of Birmingham, is one of the UK’s premier regional airports.

Bristol Airport, located 13km away from central Bristol, is the principal international airport in the South West of England.

Brussels Airport, the principal airport in Belgium, is a key gateway for business and leisure travelers and an important hub for Star Alliance.

Copenhagen Airports is the largest airport in Scandinavia, serving as a both a natural Scandinavian hub and as a point of origin and destination.

High Speed 1 (HS1) is a 109 km high speed railway connecting London to the Channel Tunnel.

Koole Terminals is a leading platform of storage terminals in Northwestern Europe, with storage capacity for a wide range of liquid bulk products spread across assets in the Netherlands, the UK and Poland

SGN (Scotia Gas Networks) is the UK’s second largest gas distribution company.

Latin America


Borealis Infrastructure owns:

Transportation – Roads, rail, tunnels, bridges, ports and airports
The Borealis transportation asset portfolio represents a diverse and essential set of assets in the freight and passenger-based transportation infrastructure sectors.
Each asset is critical to the safe, efficient passage of goods and people between continents, countries and cities that is vital in today’s global economy.

HS1

HS1 is the only high speed railway in the UK serving Eurostar and Southeastern.
http://www.highspeed1.com
Through High Speed 1 (“HS1”), Borealis is party to a concession until 2040 to operate, manage and maintain the 109 km high speed rail line connecting London, St. Pancras Station to the Channel Tunnel. HS1 is the UK’s first high speed rail line and forms part of the Paris-Brussels-London trans-European high-speed rail network.

Port of Southampton

The Port of Southampton is home to the UK’s second busiest container terminal handling more than 1.5 million TEUs each year.
http://www.abports.co.uk
The UK’s leading ports group, Associated British Ports (“ABP”) owns and operates 21 ports in England, Scotland, and Wales, and handles approximately a quarter of the country’s seaborne trade.

TANK & RAST. Germany

http://tank.rast.de/en/
Tank & Rast (“T&R”) is the owner and the landlord of over 90% of motorway service areas (“MSAs”) on the German Autobahn network. Founded in 1951 as a state-owned entity and privatised in 1998, T&R’s network includes c. 400 sites located on all major motorway routes throughout Germany and visited by c. 500m visitors each year – c. 350 fuel stations, c. 390 service stations, c. 390 restaurants and c. 50 hotels. The MSAs operate under long-term regulatory concession agreements granted by the German government.
.
.

The Borealis website says:

Borealis identifies and manages all GSIA assets

Since its formation in 1999, Borealis has been investing in infrastructure assets on behalf of OMERS, one of Canada’s largest pension plans. The OMERS pension plan hasapproximately 450,000 members and net assets in excess of $72 billion.*

Commencing in 2010, OMERS led an initiative to assemble a capital pool to acquiremulti-billion dollar infrastructure assets with the capacity to generate large and sustainable cash flows over the long term. The Global Strategic Investment Alliance (GSIA) was officially formed in 2012. The GSIA brings together like-minded, long term, global institutional investors in pursuit of attractive, large-scaleinfrastructure assets mainly in North America and Europe.

Current members of the GSIA include a consortium led by Mitsubishi Corporation, Pension Fund Association of Japan, Government Pension Investment Fund and the Development Bank of Japan, McMorgan Infrastructure Fund I, LP, and OMERS. The total capital committed to the GSIA is US$12.58 billion**.

The GSIA alliance members have exclusively engaged Borealis to identify, pursue and manage infrastructure investments on their behalf.

http://www.borealis.ca/about-us/our-investors

.

.

.

 

Read more »

Heathrow 13 get suspended, 6 week, prison sentences with community service and fines

The Heathrow 13 sentencing took place at Willesden Magistrates court, with the defendants fully expecting that all, or most, of them would be given custodial sentences.  A crowd of about 300 cheered the Heathrow 13 as they arrived, and remained outside – with speeches and music – all day. By lunch time, mitigations had been discussed for all the defendants, and they emerged for lunch. Finally at about 4pm, the news filtered out to the crowd that all 13 had 6 weeks prison sentences, suspended for one year. The term could have been 13 weeks, but was reduced to 6 weeks as they had properly considered safety and were all of good character. In addition, ten have to do 120 hours of community service, and 3 (those with previous convictions) have to do 180 hours. There will also be fines, ranging from £500 to £1,000. It was learned that an email had been sent to the court, that morning, from Sir David King – past chief scientist to the UK government – saying that the defendants should not be imprisoned, as their concerns about carbon emissions are justified. Delighted have their freedom, the activists say the campaign against any new runway will continue. One commented that what was intended as a deterrent to climate direct action seems to had the opposite effect.
.

 

They occupied the end of Heathrow’s northern runway on 13th July 2015, and were all convicted in January of aggravated trespass and entering a security restricted area of an aerodrome.

Six minute video, from the Guardian of the Heathrow13 talking about their relief not to be imprisoned, and the reasons why they took their action.
.

Some photos:

crowd scene

Part of the crowd waiting, listening to speeches, while the defendants were inside court.

Rob and Kara with banner

Kara and Rob, before going into court

Danni with banner and umbrella

Danni in the lunch break – still thinking she would probably be going to prison

TAG stronger together banner

Teddington Action Group (TAG) placard – showing logos of many of the groups united in fighting a Heathrow 3rd runway

The crowd waiting

More waiting – the press had to wait till well after 4pm, after arriving at 9am …..

Relief and joy after sentencing

Some of the 13 climate change activists celebrate outside Willesden magistrates’ court PA

Sheila making a statement

Sheila, making a statement after the sentencing, on the importance of not allowing the extra carbon emissions that a new runway would generate. She said “People power will stop a 3rd runway again” 

Afterwards with banner

The Heathrow 13 after emerging from court, with suspended (6 week) prison sentences. The banner behind them reads:  We’ll be back.


Heathrow 13: climate change protesters avoid jail

24.2.2016 (Guardian – by Guardian staff and agencies)

Activists found guilty of aggravated trespass and entering restricted area of an aerodrome given suspended sentences

Hundreds of supporters came out in solidarity to support the Heathrow 13, who were sentenced at Willesden magistrates court.
Hundreds of supporters came out in solidarity to support the Heathrow 13, who were sentenced at Willesden magistrates court. Photograph: Natasha Quarmby/Rex Shutterstock These could have been farewells with friends and family for many weeks …..

 

Six women and seven men have avoided jail for trespassing at Heathrow, following a protest against the possible expansion of the airport.

The activists, dubbed the Heathrow 13, were given sentences of six weeks suspended for 12 months, meaning they would not have to go to prison immediately.

They had been found guilty in January of aggravated trespass and entering a security-restricted area of an aerodrome. They had been warned by district judge Deborah Wright to expect a custodial sentence.

During the trial at Willesden magistrates court in north-west London, the defendants had argued that their actions were reasonable, proportionate and necessary to prevent death and serious injury via air pollution and climate change, saying that 31 people a year die prematurely around Heathrow due to its pollution, and thousands die due to the effects of climate change.

They had also been backed by John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, and Caroline Lucas, the Green party MP – who both said jailing the group would be a mistake.

Sentencing the 13 on Wednesday, Wright said: “It was very clear your stated intention was to cause as much disruption as possible. You have achieved your aim.” She said the protest led to 25 flights being cancelled and that “each and every one of those people who had their journeys disrupted was a victim of your actions”.

Judge Wright said she was impressed by the defendants’ good character and commitment. However, she said “the fact that you are principled and have strong views about public interest doesn’t mean you can break the law”.

[The Judge did not ask for compensation despite what she called “enormous losses” to Heathrow Airport.  In considering sentence, judge would have given 13 weeks but reduced to 6 weeks due to the Heathrow 13’s consideration of safety, in their protest, and their good character. The Judge listed, one by one, the defendants and their traits and principles – including their academic degrees and their charity work.

All Heathrow13 are banned from coming within 500 metres of Heathrow terminal buildings and 5 meters of perimeter fence – for ?? one year.

The Judge gave the number of victims affected as 92,000 – including those affected by flight cancellations and delays, though the actual number was difficult to establish, as by early afternoon on 13th July 2015, it was very windy. Therefore some flight delays were due to wind, not the occupation].

A loud cheer went up as the defendants left the dock. Outside the court, one of them, Danielle Paffard, said: “I’m so relieved. It’s a triumph for democracy, a triumph for the movement.”

She said that while the sentence meant she was banned from Heathrow for a year, others would continue protesting against the third runway.

Activists led by Dannielle Paffard (centre) outside Willesden magistrates court earlier on Wednesday.
Activists led by Dannielle Paffard (centre) outside Willesden magistrates court earlier on Wednesday. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA

“As a result of today’s sentencing there will be plenty more people prepared to go out and cut the perimeter fence,” she added.

The families of the 13, aged 22 to 67, watched proceedings from the public gallery following emotional scenes as their loved ones prepared themselves for a jail sentence.

Speaking earlier in the day, the families made clear their anger at the prospect of prison terms. David Thacker, whose son Edward is one of the 13, said: “I’m feeling very proud of both Edward and the wonderful people who made this stand. But I’m angry at the possibility of a custodial sentence.”

Demonstrators against the proposed third runway at Heathrow airport hold banners at Willesden magistrates court in London.
Demonstrators against the proposed third runway at Heathrow airport hold banners at Willesden magistrates court in London. Photograph: Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP

 

Kirsty Brimelow QC, of Doughty Chambers, who represented four of the defendants, described all 13 as professional, qualified individuals who were “not fanciful or frivolous”, but instead “people who have real conscience who care about the planet and the human beings on the planet”.

Brimelow said all 13 had acted in the public interest and felt that all other avenues of protest had been exhausted. She said there was no evidence anyone was endangered by the protest, that the activists had taken steps to alert the police and had caused “minimal effect” on the airport.

Brimelow said that Britain’s history of political protest was long and honourable. “We’ve come a long way since the suffragettes and those people would be locked up and treated appallingly,” she said.

She said the last time someone was sent to prison for environmental protest was over the Kinder Scout mass trespass in 1932.  [ Kinder Scout mass trespass Wikipedia ]

Brimelow objected to the prosecutor’s application for compensation from Heathrow airport for “considerable expense and damages”. It was accepted 25 flights had to be cancelled but, she said, there was no reliable evidence of a figure.

In a statement on Tuesday 23rd February, the Heathrow 13 said: “Clearly, none of us would choose to go to jail, but this shouldn’t be singled out as the main ‘injustice’.Climate change is the real injustice, with the majority of the world’s population, those in the global south, being the ones who continue to be most affected.

“The science is clear … There can be no new runways in the UK if we are to take climate change seriously.”

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/feb/24/heathrow-13-climate-change-protesters-avoid-jail

[Many commented that though the Heathrow 13 have to carry out community work, they could be considered by some to already be doing that – in their efforts to prevent damage to the global climate, that would have highly negative impacts on all of us.]


Personal letter from David King, advisor to the climate change commission, supporting the action, has been shared with the


 

and part of an article by Danni Paffard

Heathrow 13: I’m terrified at the thought of prison, but have no regret

24.2.2016 (Guardian blog)

While I’m terrified at the thought of prison, I stand by the actions that we took. A third runway at Heathrow would produce as much emissions as the whole of Kenya, make a mockery of any pledges made at the UN climate talks in Paris last December, and David Cameron’s own election promise of “no ifs, no buts … no third runway”.

While our actions in occupying a runway may seem radical, looking at the implications of a new runway at Heathrow, it’s clear who the radicals really are.

If the government commits to build a new runway, it knowingly signs up to breaking its own “legally binding” climate change commitments on emissions reductions and attempts to tackle the defining global threat facing humanity.

Flying is a modern-day miracle, but it is a luxury that comes at a price and we need to be honest about that. In the UK,70% of the flights are taken by just 15% of the population. We’re not saying that ordinary people can’t enjoy travel; we’re saying it’s more likely that the only effect a third runway will have on ordinary people is making the air they breathe dirtier.

And it’s not just about air pollution either: increased CO2 emissions will make extreme weather events more common, like the terrible floods that damaged so many people’s communities in the north of England over Christmas. The third runway is costly, unnecessary and harmful to all of us.

A short time behind bars is nothing compared to the life sentence of climate change for people around the world, and generations to come. So as I hunt for appropriate clothes and sufficient reading material, mentally prepare for life without the internet and figure out what to do with advice like “don’t be alarmed by screaming in the night”, I feel no regret for the action I took.

While we’re on the wrong side of the law on this one, I am sure that we’ll end up on the right side of history.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/feb/24/heathrow-13-terrified-prison-no-regret-danni-paffard

.

.

 

Talking to the crowd after they emerged from the court, Kara Moses said:
“It seemed like they were trying to create a deterrent but it seemed to have the opposite effect.  We’re now out and we’re free and we’re out here to fight along side you, so together we can all do this and build this movement even stronger.”
.

 

‘Heathrow 13’ climate change protesters avoid jail

24.2.2016 (BBC)

Supporters of the 13 convicted protesters were outside court in north LondonImage Supporters of the 13 convicted protesters were outside court in north London

Thirteen climate change protesters whose demonstration at Heathrow caused 25 flights to be cancelled have been handed six-week suspended sentences.

The activists have been banned from Heathrow and will have to do unpaid community work. The ten with no previous convictions have to do 120 hours, and Danni Paffard, Graham Thomson and Rob Basto have to do 180 hours.

The barrister representing four of the activists earlier said the group had acted on “deeply-held beliefs”.

They were found guilty last month of aggravated trespass and entering a security-restricted area.

During the trial the court heard the protesters’ actions caused “astronomical” costs and disruption.

All the defendants must carry out 120 hours unpaid work, apart from protesters Graham Thompson, Danielle Paffard and Roberto Basto, who have previous convictions and will carry out 180 hours.

A Heathrow spokesman said: “When individuals illegally enter the airport, they cause disruption to thousands of passengers going about their business and when their actions extend airside they endanger lives.

“Heathrow supports the right to peaceful protest, but we will always prioritise the safe and smooth running of our airport.”

The demonstration took place last July when the defendants from the direct action group Plane Stupid cut through a fence at Heathrow Airport and chained themselves together on a runway.

They were told when they were found guilty they could expect to receive jail sentences.

Arguing against a prison sentence Kirsty Brimelow QC, speaking for four of the defendants, told Willesden Magistrates Court they believed they had been “acting in the public interest” and highlighted what she called a “hard-fought for” tradition of civil disobedience.

She said: “We have come a long way since the days of the suffragettes, since those people would have been locked up and treated appallingly.”

District Judge Deborah Wright said her understanding was that “immense” costs had been caused by the protest.

Prosecutor Robert Short said prosecution costs had reached about £14,000.

The defendants:

  • Rebecca Sanderson, 28, from Newton Road, Machynlleth, Powys
  • Richard Hawkins, 32 and Kara Moses, 32, both from Heol y Doll, Machynlleth, Powys
  • Ella Gilbert, 23, from Magdalen Street, Norwich
  • Melanie Strickland, 32, from Borwick Avenue, Waltham Forest
  • Danielle Paffard, 28, from Blenheim Grove, Peckham
  • Graham Thompson, 42, from Durlston Road, Hackney
  • Sheila Menon, 44, from Pellerin Road, Hackney
  • Cameron Kaye, 23, from Kenwood Close, Sipson, West Drayton
  • Edward Thacker, 26, from Kenwood Close, Sipson, West Drayton
  • Alistair Tamlit, 27, from Kenwood Close, Sipson, West Drayton
  • Sam Sender, 23, from Kenwood Close, Sipson, West Drayton
  • Robert Basto, 67, from Blackborough Road, Reigate, Surrey

Read more »

“Hurdles” campaign shows the seven insurmountable hurdles faced by a Heathrow 3rd runway

The combined groups opposed to a 3rd Heathrow runway have started a “Seven Hurdles” campaign, setting out some of the key problem posed by a new runway. The hurdles that would have be overcome would be: security, homes, noise, air pollution, costs, carbon emissions, and opposition.  An Advan is touring parts of London that would be affected by a new runway, and will be in action for three days, stopping off at various key places.  It began its trip on Monday 22nd at Chiswick Town Hall, to a lively reception from the local group, CHATR (Chiswick Against the Third Runway), before heading west. On 23rd it will be in central and east London, and then outside the court in Willesden on 24th, for the sentencing of the Heathrow 13. The details of the seven hurdles are explained in short briefings.  They include the 725,000 people already affected by Heathrow plane noise; the increased risk of accident if there are another 50% more flights; the impossibility of the UK meeting its carbon targets if aviation is allowed further expansion; and the cost of at least £5 billion from the UK taxpayer to pay for surface access infrastructure.  Not to mention huge and passionate opposition by thousands.

.

7 hurdles for Heathrow

A great crowd turned out in Chiswick this morning for the launch of the ‘Hurdles’ Campaign. 

The snappy briefing sheets which accompany the campaign. They have been emailed to all MPs.

The “hurdles” include:

Noise: At least 725,000 people are already impacted by aircraft noise from Heathrow.

Air pollution: Air pollution levels around Heathrow already exceed the EU Legal limits.

Destruction of homes: 783 homes would need to be demolished to make way for a 3rd runway.

Opposition:  Millions of people are already firmly opposed to a 3rd runway at Heathrow.

Cost: The transport infrastructure required for a 3rd runway could cost the taxpayer over £5bn.

Security: A 3rd runway would increase the chance of a plane crashing on landing or departure by 60%.

Climate: A 3rd runway would make it realistically impossible for the UK to meet its climate targets.


The Advan was in Westminster on Tuesday 24th February, to coincide  with the press conference for the Heathrow 13, their relatives – and supportive MPs.

Heathrow 13 with the Advan 23.2.2016


The Advan:

7 hurdles

.

The Advan and the hurdles in Harmondsworth on 22nd February

Advan in Harmondsworth 22.2.2016

Read more »

Istanbul with its massive 3rd airport expected to soon take hub business away from Heathrow

The massive new 3rd airport for Istanbul – Istanbul Grand Airport (IGA) – big enough to take 150 million passengers per year in due course, is due to open on October 29th 2017.  With 3 runways built in the first phase, it will have six runways and four terminals when completed. It would mean Istanbul having an airport larger than any in Europe.  It will replace Atatürk Airport and provide the capacity that Turkish Airlines wants for huge expansion. Turkey is not doing well in cutting its carbon emissions overall, with more coal power stations planned and inadequate targets. A total of 25 new airports have opened in Turkey in the last 10 years. It is thought that by 2028, the new Istanbul airport may have enough capacity to shift passengers away from Paris Charles de Gaulle airport, Heathrow, Schiphol, and Dubai.  Even with the existing airports, Istanbul has been taking share from competitors for transfer traffic between Europe and Asia. Istanbul is one of the top-five largest feeders for Europe. It is likely that even if a 3rd runway was built at Heathrow, Istanbul would overtake Heathrow. It is better located to be a major hub airport, and would take its business. That is expected to start even before 2020. The President of Turkish Airlines says: “The world used to be focused on Northern Europe and America. In this century, it’s our turn.” 
.

 

Travel tech industry smells money in gigantic new Istanbul airport

19.2.2016 (tnooz)

Turkey is on track to spend more than $5 billion on Istanbul Grand Airport (IGA), which — if it fulfills its ambitions — will have six runways and four terminals.

By the end of next year, its first phase is scheduled to open, with three runways operating out of a main terminal with two satellite terminals.

By 2028, it may have enough capacity to shift share away from de Gaulle, Heathrow, Schiphol, and Dubai by being able to process 150 million passengers a year.

Already before the new airport opens, Istanbul’s existing airports have been taking share from competitors for transfer traffic between Europe and Asia. The city is one of the top-five largest feedersfor Europe.

In 2013, (the year with the latest comparable data available), Istanbul’s Ataturk international airport processed 51 million passengers, about the same as Amsterdam. It’s on track to overtake Frankfurt in passenger volume by early next year, Bloomberg reports.

In a dozen years, Turkish Airlines has boosted its fleet numbers from 55 aircraft to nearly 300.

All of this growth is good news for airport and airline IT specialist businesses.

http://www.tnooz.com/article/travel-tech-industry-smells-money-in-new-istanbul-airport/


Heathrow, Schiphol, Istanbul etc pax compared

From Anna Aero.   27.1.2016   Link


 

“In this century, it’s our turn”

8.10.2015

An interview with Dr Temel Kotil, General Manager and CEO, Turkish Airlines, President, Association of European Airlines.

An extract from a longer article:

Istanbul: Overtaking Heathrow’s hub

If Istanbul Atatürk were to continue to grow at 9% (as it has in 2015) and for London Heathrow to grow by the same 2% it is achieving (bearing in mind that the earliest a third runway will be built will be 2025), then Istanbul will overtake Heathrow in just three years, or exactly about the time Istanbul New Airport, the €10.2 billion mega-hub, is set to open. However, because of constraint at Istanbul Atatürk, it is possible that Turkish Airlines’ growth could be squeezed, reducing this growth pace. But even then, it does not seem that the assumption of Istanbul having ‘Europe’s largest airport’ will be delayed much beyond 2020.

Of course Turkish Airlines’ ambitions are expected to be entirely served by being the primary customer of Istanbul New Airport when it opens in 2018, and which unsurprisingly Dr Kotil puts in the same “largest on Earth” category as he does his own airline: “The world used to be focused on Northern Europe and America. In this century, it’s our turn.”

Indeed İGA Havalimanı İşletmesi A.Ş (İGA), the five-member consortium building the airport, maintains the same position, claiming that they are building a brand to rival Changi: “The most important hub between New York and Shanghai,” a statement which clearly overlooks the hubs of the Middle East Big Three (MEB3 = Emirates at Dubai, Etihad at Abu Dhabi, and Qatar Airways at Doha).

Kotil agrees that there are some competitive parallels with the MEB3 – notably the clear government support for the role of air transport in both the Turkish and Gulf economies, and how this translates into active support of the objectives of the airline(s), the airport(s), and the fundamental importance of tourism.

But the comparisons end there: Istanbul has a radically different place on the Southern tip of Europe making it much closer to its most important sources of feed. This famously allows Turkish Airlines services to use widebodies to steal feed from European hubs, and larger airports, but crucially to deploy its army of 737-800 single-aisle aircraft to a plethora of potentially hundreds of smaller airports of the size of Gothenburg and Friedrichshafen – airports which cannot viably be exploited for feed by Emirates widebodies.

The genuine success of this hub means that well over 50% of Turkish Airlines’ traffic at Istanbul Atatürk Airport is now transfer. However, Kotil also stresses that Istanbul – and Turkey – also have a much bigger O&D market than Middle East and other hub cities. He points out that Istanbul (pop. 14 million) and Moscow (12 million) are Europe’s “only true mega cities with populations rivalling those in Asia.” Kotil says this means the potential volume for O&D is “sky-high” compared to super-luxurious Dubai (pop. 2.1 million), and certainly just-overtaken Frankfurt (0.7 million), and even Europe’s great visitor magnets of London (8.5 million), and Paris (2.3 million).

Kotil enthuses: “Istanbul is an excellent mega city. It is not an eastern city, nor a western city, it is multi-cultural.” The number of tourist visits to Istanbul has trebled this century from four million to 12 million. With the Turkish economy four times bigger than it was in 2000, business and leisure passengers have plenty of reason to visit Istanbul and Turkey (pop. 75 million). Turkish Airlines is assisting this effect, even with the transfer passengers – those with a wait of six hours or more can now make the most of a free tour of Istanbul, turning those using its hub from people changing planes into real tourist dollar visitors to Turkey.

http://www.airport-business.com/2015/10/in-this-century-its-our-turn/


 

NEW ISTANBUL AIRPORT ON TARGET TO OPEN IN 2017 – TURKISH AIRLINES BOSS

12.1.2016  (Airport World)

An international team of architects is working on the design of Istanbul’s planned new €10.2 billion airport, which is expected to boast the world’s biggest terminal complex.

The gateway is set to boast three runways and a super size terminal capable of handling 90 million passengers per annum when it opens on October 29, 2017.

Its capacity will eventually rise to 150mppa, the first of two planned development phases being activated when it handles 80 million passengers per annum.

Located 35 kilometres from the centre of Istanbul on a 7,650 hectare site close to the Black Sea, the gateway will replace Atatürk Airport and provide the capacity needed to support the continued rapid growth of air traffic and the hub operations of Turkish Airlines.

Turkish Airlines’ president and CEO, Temil Kotil, for one, has no doubt that the 2017 opening date is feasible, despite alleged funding issues the huge construction programme necessary to make it become a reality.

“A total of 25 new airports have opened in Turkey in the last 10 years, some built in less than one year. We are good at building things in Turkey,” he says.

“The new airport will be good for Turkish Airlines and Istanbul as although Atatürk is a very good airport, we have outgrown it, and need more capacity to meet future demand.”

The Turkish government awarded the concession to build and operate Istanbul’s new €10.2 billion gateway to the İGA Havalimanı İşletmesi AS consortium after it agreed to pay it a sizeable fee of €22.2 billion plus VAT over the course of the 25 year operating lease.

It promises that Istanbul’s new gateway to the world will offer “outstanding aesthetic features and a simple and user-friendly layout”.

Arup has developed the master plan for the new airport, which will become one of the world’s new mega-hubs, while UK-based Grimshaw – in partnership with the Nordic Office of Architecture – will design the gateway’s one million square metre terminal.

İGA Havalimanı İşletmesi AS comprises the Turkish companies of Cengiz, Mapa, Limak, Kolin and Kalyon, all of which have a 20% stake in the Build-operate-transfer (BOT) project.

Others working on the huge project include Haptic Architects and local Turkish partners, GMW Mimarlik and Tekeli Sisa.

http://www.airport-world.com/news/general-news/4811-new-istanbul-airport-on-target-to-open-in-2017-turkish-airlines-boss.html

.


Istanbul New Airport shaping up as a hub for the 21st century

The latest designs for Istanbul’s newest airport – aptly called Istanbul New Airport – have been released, this time for its air traffic control tower. Designed by the US firm Aecom and the leading Italian automotive design company Pininfarina, the 95-metre structure is an elliptical tower designed to resemble the tulip, a Turkish symbol.

The new design – which beat away competition from global architects such as Zaha Hadid – will act as a crowning glory to the passenger terminal design from the architects Grimshaw and Nordic.

“We were looking for a striking design fit for a 21st-century airport while remaining sensitive to Istanbul’s unique heritage,” says Yusuf Akçayoglu, the chief executive of Istanbul Grand Airport, the company responsible for the development.

As one of the world’s largest aviation projects, Istanbul New Airport has ambitious passenger numbers in mind. The first phase of the project aims to serve 90 million passengers per year, rising to 150 million passengers per annum when the development is complete.

These figures will dwarf Dubai International Airport’s passenger numbers, currently standing at about 70 million passengers per year, according to the Airports Council International. According its operator, the figures until the end of November stood at 70.96 million.

While Istanbul New Airport is 35 kilometres from Istanbul, much farther than the current airport, it has the land needed to fulfil its grand plans. Six runways will be developed and delivered in four phases.

To help business travellers connect to the city, a large plaza and transport hub will be built at the entrance, allowing the airport to integrate with existing rail, metro and bus routes.

Travellers connecting through the hub should also expect a market-leading lounge from Turkish Airlines, which recently added a further 2,400 square metres to its 3,500 square metres lounge in Ataturk airport.

Estimated to be open in late next year, the first phase of the new airport will feature three runways, one main terminal with two satellite terminal buildings, 88 aircraft passenger bridges, hospitals, hotels and even convention centres.

 

Why has Istanbul decided to build a third airport?

Turkish Airlines is growing fast, similar to the Middle East’s three airlines, thanks to its strategic position. However, Atatruk International Aiport, built in 1924 and currently the world’s 13th largest by passenger figures, is restricted by the city that surrounds the perimeter, meaning it cannot build an extra runway required to support growth.

How can Turkish Airlines grow so rapidly?

Over the past 12 years, Turkish Airlines has increased its fleet size nearly six times from 55 aircraft to almost 300. The airline still has more than 180 aircraft on order, including both short-haul and long-haul aircraft; these will help the airline to expand its growth further. The carrier already flies to over 110 countries, more than any other airline in the world. The current airport restrictions are slowing the airline’s growth, but these will be removed with the new airport’s capacity.

How much will this new airport cost?

The Turkish government awarded the concession to build and operate Istanbul’s new €10.2 billion (Dh40.45bn) gateway to the IGA Havalimaniletmesi consortium after it agreed to pay it a fee of €22.2bn over the course of the 25-year operating lease.

 

http://www.thenational.ae/business/the-life/istanbul-new-airport-shaping-up-as-a-hub-for-the-21st-century

.


 

Earlier:

Forests and lakes destroyed to build Istanbul’s vast 3rd airport aerotropolis covering 76 square kilometers of land

Istanbul is building a third airport, north of the city close to the Terkos lake area.  Istanbul already has Atatürk Airport on the European side and Sabiha Gökçen airport on the Asian side (these handle around 45 million and 15 million passengers respectively per year), but both claim to be struggling with increased demand – being well located as a hub between Europe, the Middle East and the East.  Their national airline, Turkish Airlines, is growing fast. The site for the 3rd airport, which is to be an Aerotropolis, not merely an airport, is about 76 square kilometres. The third airport is linked with other forest destroying megaprojects – a third bridge over the Bosphorus, a motorway and a canal linking the Black Sea with the Sea of Marmara. All three are linked and feed into each other.  The vast construction works destroy areas of forest, lakes and ponds – causing serious local concern about biodiversity loss, loss of natural habitat and possible future heat island and water supply problems.  Turkey wants another vast airport, perhaps able to take up to 150 million passengers per year, partly to boost its chances of getting the Olympics in 2024. The busiest airport in the world now, Atlanta, handles about 95 million passengers per year.  A short video shows the ongoing environmental destruction, during the building of the airport. https://vimeo.com/123657571

http://www.airportwatch.org.uk/2015/04/forests-and-lakes-destroyed-to-build-istanbuls-vast-3rd-airport-aerotropolis-covering-76-square-kilometers-of-land/

.


Turkey plans to build a 6-runway mega airport near Istanbul to be one of the world’s largest

Turkey is planning to build one of the world’s biggest airports, and one larger than anything in Europe, costing some $5bn.  It wants to make Istanbul a global hub and boost its chances of getting the Olympics in 2020. Turkey is well situated geographically for traffic between the USA and Europe, and the Far East. It is therefore in competition with other Middle East and Gulf countries, which are also building mega-sized airports, such as Dubai and Doha (capital of Qatar). A tender will be held in may for the Turkish airport.  This would be the third airport for Istanbul, which already has Ataturk airport, and Sabiha airport – which handle around 45 million and 15 million passengers respectively per year. The new airport will be near the Black Sea, and is anticipated to be able to cope with 150 million passengers per year. By contrast, Heathrow deals with some 69 million, and Atlanta – the world’s busiest airport – handles some 90 million per year. The plans are for the new 6 runway airport to be open by 2017.

http://www.airportwatch.org.uk/?p=657

.

.

.

 

 

 


 

 

 

Read more »