Airport News
Below are news items relating to specific airports
Heathrow display 2 versions of their “economic benefit” poster – one saying £100 billion, the other “up to £211 billion” … (Over 60 years)
Heathrow airport has two different versions of its massive poster near Terminal 5. They have the same text, with claims of the alleged economic benefits to the UK of a new runway. One poster says "Expand Heathrow and you grow the economy by £100 billion." And other nearby says "Expand Heathrow and you grow the economy by up to £211 billion." They cannot both be right. Is this merely a matter of picking wildly different figures out of the air? Heathrow airport responded that: "£100bn was our conservative estimate. When the Airports Commission analysed it they estimated up to £211bn across UK." What the massive posters fail to say it these purported benefit are not for one year. They are over a 60 year period, 2026 to 2086. ie. not a huge amount per year, (£2 - 3 billion maximum, on a generous estimate) bearing in mind the huge tourism deficit (perhaps £10 - £13 billion per year); or the loss to the Treasury as air travel pays no VAT and no fuel duty, (amounting to perhaps £10 billion per year). But the Airports Commission estimate of £211 billion economic benefit from a new NW Heathrow runway comes with many caveats - by the Commission itself. They say the "results should be interpreted with caution, given the innovative methodology used..." So more that are difficult to substantiate.
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow funded report suggests using RAF Northolt as an interim 3rd runway for domestic flights
Heathrow airport set up and funds a body called the "National Connectivity Task Force" (NCTF). This produced a report in March, looking at regional connectivity - and putting arguments that suit Heathrow. (Gatwick airport, unsurprisingly strongly disagrees with it). As well as saying how important links to regional airports are from Heathrow, though these have progressively been cut as long haul flights are more profitable, the NCTF report says RAF Northolt airport, just a few miles north of Heathrow, should be used as an extension to Heathrow, for smaller planes to regional airports. As this news broke about the same time as the Germanwings plane tragedy, it did not get press attention. What Heathrow wants is to have Northolt brought into service, as an interim measure, before it can get a new runway. If Gatwick was chosen for a runway, Heathrow could use Northolt for domestic flights it has been promising regional airports, in order to get their backing for a Heathrow runway. Heathrow says the Northolt runway could not be used at the same time as a Heathrow north-west runway. RAF Northolt does not comply with the safety standards required for a civilian airport. Its runway ends just short of the busy A40.
Click here to view full story...
Let Britain Fly and pro-runway lobbies want MPs to commit to rapid runway decision, post election
The election campaign starts in earnest on 30th March, and voters are not to be given proper information on what their MPs and parliamentary candidates think about a new runway, or whether they back one at Heathrow or Gatwick. Or neither. The government deliberately told the Airports Commission it should not report till after this general election. The Lib Dems have confirmed they do not back either runway (though individual MPs appear to back a Gatwick runway). The official line by Conservatives is that they will be waiting for the Commission's recommendation (expected by the end of June). Labour has also said this and Ed Balls announced that Labour would quickly set up an Infrastructure Commission, to get things like a new runway approved quickly. Now an article in the Independent, sourced largely from the lobby group "Let Britain Fly" and the right wing Conservative 1922 committee, wants a rapid decision after the election, for at least one more runway. This ignores the fact that the Airports Commission's own work shows this cannot be built, without threatening the UK's carbon target. The Commission's analysis has left much to still be considered. It would not be possible to agree on a runway, till a great deal more work has been done by government, on carbon, noise, air quality, cost to the taxpayer, extent of economic benefit and local social and health impacts. Among other things.
Click here to view full story...
Boris turns down London City Airport expansion plans on noise grounds
Boris Johnson, the Mayor of London, has refused London City Airport's plan to expand on noise grounds. In a letter he has instructed Newham Council, who had approved the application, to refuse it. The Mayor says the application does not "adequately mitigate and manage its adverse noise impacts." Newham's decision was always dependent on the Mayor's approval. London City Airport wanted permission to build new taxiways to permit larger planes to use the airport. It also wanted more car parking spaces. The decision will be a bitter blow to the airport as it will now no longer be able to bring in the larger planes it wanted to serve new destinations. John Stewart, chair of HACAN East, which campaigned against the expansion plans, said "The airport is paying the price for being so cavalier about noise. Quite simply, Boris did not believe its claims that it was dealing adequately with noise. We salute his decision". The decision appears to be final, and it is unclear whether London City Airport can appeal to the Secretary of State. They may do so.
Click here to view full story...
Speculation on whether Heathrow Hub will be able to sell its ideas to Heathrow Airport for a huge sum
Sky News reports that the Board of Heathrow Airport Holdings (HAH) has been in discussions recently about buying the intellectual property rights held by the company putting forward the "Heathrow Hub" runway proposal. While Heathrow airport wants to build a north west runway, the Heathrow Hub idea is to extend the northern runway to the west, making it double length. The company behind the Heathrow Hub idea is "Runway Innovations"and in the past Heathrow has been moderately dismissive of their proposals. However, it is understood that though Heathrow's Board would not yet pursue a deal with Runway Innovations, it could reconsider its position if the Airports Commission recommended Heathrow Hub's proposal - rather than their own. A source believed Runway Innovations had been seeking at least £50m, though the figure may be lower. It was unclear if this included land options that could be developed to provide new rail facilities if the Heathrow Hub option is selected. The company's land options are north west of Heathrow, where a rail intersection forms part of the Hub's plan. Work on the Heathrow Hub proposal has been funded by 4 rich individuals with links to London's financial sector. It has always been their plan to sell the intellectual property of their plans, for a substantial sum.
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow would spend £10 million to increase some domestic flights, only if granted a 3rd runway, to get backing from regions
Heathrow has increasingly cut the number of flights to UK regional airports, as it has become more uneconomic for the airlines to run them - and long haul international routes are more profitable. But Heathrow is aware that it needs to get the backing of regional airports, in order to lobby to be allowed a 3rd runway. Heathrow therefore suggested the setting up of a National Connectivity Task Force. In order to boost flights to the regions, Heathrow now says that - only IF it gets a new runway - it will spend £10 million on for the development of 5 new domestic routes, for 3 years. These would include Newquay, Humberside and Liverpool. That would be in addition to the 4 extra routes that easyJet has said it wants to operate if there is a Heathrow runway, to Inverness, Belfast International, the Isle of Man and Jersey. There are currently 6 domestic routes from Heathrow (Leeds Bradford, Belfast City, Manchester, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Newcastle). Heathrow also said it would launch a review of its airport charges in the coming weeks to focus on making domestic flights more commercially attractive (cheaper) to airlines. The results of this consultation, which is not dependent upon getting a new runway, will be effective from January 2016.
Click here to view full story...
Dr Phillip Lee, MP for Bracknell, says Heathrow and NATS claims on flight paths “outrageous and unacceptable”
The MP for Bracknell, Dr Phillip Lee called staff from NATS and the airport to a meeting at the House of Commons on Wednesday 18th March, to answer questions about flight path changes affecting his constituency. He asked Jane Johnston, head of corporate affairs at NATS, and Heathrow senior staff to explain the situation of increased aircraft noise, and Heathrow's claim that they did not know there had been a change. Since the start of the "procedural change" to flights on the Compton route, there has been a huge degree of protest by affected residents, with thousands of complaints made. Heathrow repeatedly told people who complained about noise that "trials" ended on 12th November. Only now, four months later, has it emerged that these procedural changes continued, and NATS has no intention of reverting to the previous system, before June 2014. Dr Lee was told that NATS "didn’t make the connection" between the changes, and the increased complaints. The staff told Dr Lee they were simply following procedure. Dr Lee said: “This is a wholly outrageous and unacceptable situation. Given all the publicity that surrounded the additional noise caused by the flight path trials, I find it completely unbelievable that these changes in the procedures were simply overlooked by NATS as a possible cause for increased activity over residents’ homes."
Click here to view full story...
Candidates in Uxbridge & South Ruislip pledge to oppose Heathrow runway, though Labour candidate doubtful
Prospective parliamentary candidates for Uxbridge and South Ruislip made promises - if they got in to parliament - about how they would vote on HS2 and Heathrow Airport at a hustings debate. Candidates from 4 of the 5 main political parties took part - but not the Conservative candidate, Boris Johnson. All four candidates said they would vote against any bill seeking to approve a Heathrow runway. However, there were doubts about the position of the Labour candidate, Chris Summers (a councillor in Ealing). Mr Summers suggested that any future government should follow whatever recommendation is published in June by the Airports Commission. He said: “I think it is right we have this Davies Commission that's looking into the issue, and I think there is something to be argued that they are the experts, and if they recommend a certain way, then it does seem that it will be a basic political decision if whichever government rejects that...” The constituency contains much of Hillingdon, which is one of the councils most deeply opposed to a new runway. In a Hillingdon borough referendum in May 2013 66% were against a third runway. The ballot also showed the same number (66.3 per cent) do not want see any more flights in and out of the airport. The extent to which Mr Summers is listening to his residents, or just following Labour party policy, is questioned.
Click here to view full story...
Gatwick claims support for 2nd runway – but does not reveal necessary methodological detail about its polls
Gatwick Airport has had two surveys done, to try to show there is support for their runway. One is of councils in London. Gatwick knows almost every council, except East Sussex, in its area has voted to oppose a 2nd runway. So Gatwick has been asking London councils instead, in the hope of better results. Many London councils know the highly negative impacts Heathrow, and its flight noise, cause for their residents, and therefore are opposed to any more. Some have said they back a Gatwick runway (believing, questionably, that there must be a new runway somewhere) in order to save their residents more problems. Some London councils hope Gatwick could provide jobs for their workers. The second survey is of residents in Kent and in West Sussex, and again, Gatwick claims significant support for their runway, compared to Heathrow. However,Gatwick does not publicise any of the actual data of their surveys. That is very significant, because without knowing the questions asked, the script leading up to the questions, and the options given, the results are almost meaningless. Their earlier consultation, in spring 2014, contained (till forced to add another option) no means of saying "No" to either options, but just various shades of "Yes." Who knows whether these surveys contained the appropriate alternative response options?
Click here to view full story...
Windsor MP, Adam Afriye, says on NATS/flightpath fiasco, Heathrow has either been wilfully misleading or incompetent
Following sustained pressure from Adam Afriyie, MP for Windsor, Heathrow finally admitted changes to flight paths that have inflicted more flights and greater noise on residents in Ascot, Binfield, Bracknell Forest, Cheapside, Sunninghill, Warfield and other nearby areas. John Holland-Kaye, CEO of Heathrow, wrote in a letter to Mr Afriyie: “I recognise that as an airport community we have let you down in this instance. We need to do better to be a good neighbour and I would like to unequivocally apologise to you and your constituents.” Commenting on the letter, Mr Afriyie said: “I am deeply concerned on behalf of the residents who have suffered from extra aircraft noise without so much as a warning...What beggars belief is Heathrow’s insulting accusation that residents were imagining the extra noise! ... Heathrow must take the blame for misleading residents and being dismissive of their concerns. And I now call on Heathrow and NATS to release all flightpath data on arrivals, which Heathrow is yet to disclose to me....Heathrow has either been wilfully misleading or rather incompetent. Heathrow and NATS have serious questions to answer and must be held to account in Parliament.