New ways of connecting airports, such as a high-speed rail link
between Heathrow and Gatwick, are to be considered in the coming
months as the government reviews its aviation policy.

A 180mph (288km/h) train service between the two locations has been
proposed, The Times reported.


Makes sense, the Tories (sorry coalition's) secret agenda is to turn
Birmingham Airport into another London Airport, using HS2 as the
mechanism, presumably the new link would plug into HS2.

The runway extension at Birmingham to accommodate the largest jets
(fully laden) has already begun.

In message
, at
08:55:32 on Sat, 8 Oct 2011, allantracy
remarked:
the Tories (sorry coalition's) secret agenda is to turn Birmingham
Airport into another London Airport, using HS2 as the mechanism,

Why a secret, it's a pretty obvious way to increase (air) capacity at
much lower low cost/impact than a third runway at Heathrow. And
Birmingham Airport's much easier to get to. People also forget that even
today's WCML does Birningham Airport-Euston in 74mins, compared to 1hr
by tube from Heathrow.

presumably the new link would plug into HS2.

Not if HS2 fails to have a station at Heathrow.

The runway extension at Birmingham to accommodate the largest jets
(fully laden) has already begun.

A plan hatched under NuLab.
--
Roland Perry

Why a secret, it's a pretty obvious way to increase (air) capacity at
much lower low cost/impact than a third runway at Heathrow.

It's the increased airline capacity bit they're trying their hardest
to be dishonest about.

Scrapping a third Heathrow runway and building HS2 instead was
supposed to be a way of reducing internal flights.

In fact, HS2 will actually allow for the additional airline capacity
the third Heathrow runway would have provided, it's just that the
third runway will now be in Birmingham.

In message
, at
12:13:04 on Sat, 8 Oct 2011, allantracy
remarked:
Why a secret, it's a pretty obvious way to increase (air) capacity at
much lower low cost/impact than a third runway at Heathrow.

It's the increased airline capacity bit they're trying their hardest
to be dishonest about.

Scrapping a third Heathrow runway and building HS2 instead was
supposed to be a way of reducing internal flights.

I don't recall the objectives being black and white like that. It'll
obviously be a bit of both

In fact, HS2 will actually allow for the additional airline capacity
the third Heathrow runway would have provided, it's just that the
third runway will now be in Birmingham.

It won't allow all the capacity of a third Heathrow runway, because
Birmingham already has quite a few flights. Ditto if they displace some
Heathrow traffic back to Gatwick (from where it's been fleeing to
Heathrow years).
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote on 08 October 2011 17:20:16 ...
In message
, at
08:55:32 on Sat, 8 Oct 2011,
remarked:
the Tories (sorry coalition's) secret agenda is to turn Birmingham
Airport into another London Airport, using HS2 as the mechanism,

Why a secret, it's a pretty obvious way to increase (air) capacity at
much lower low cost/impact than a third runway at Heathrow.

How exactly does a rail link between LHR and LGW increase *air*
capacity? The problem at Heathrow is said to be that the runways are
98% fully used. Gatwick is already the world's busiest single-runway
airport. So how is this capacity increase achieved?
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

In message , at 00:18:09 on Sun, 9 Oct
2011, Richard J. remarked:
How exactly does a rail link between LHR and LGW increase *air*
capacity? The problem at Heathrow is said to be that the runways are
98% fully used. Gatwick is already the world's busiest single-runway
airport. So how is this capacity increase achieved?

Bigger planes at Gatwick (they see this as a way to increase from
roughly 32m to 40m pax a year). And their "single runway agreement"
expires in 2019.
--
Roland Perry

"Richard J." wrote in message

Roland Perry wrote on 08 October 2011 17:20:16
...
In message
,
at 08:55:32 on Sat, 8 Oct 2011,
remarked:
the Tories (sorry coalition's) secret agenda is to turn Birmingham
Airport into another London Airport, using HS2 as the mechanism,

Why a secret, it's a pretty obvious way to increase (air) capacity at
much lower low cost/impact than a third runway at Heathrow.

How exactly does a rail link between LHR and LGW increase *air*
capacity? The problem at Heathrow is said to be that the runways are
98% fully used. Gatwick is already the world's busiest single-runway
airport. So how is this capacity increase achieved?

Indeed, this link only makes sense if Gatwick gets its second runway.
Equally, it would greatly strengthen the business case for that second
runway. It's not allowed until after 2019, but of course, even if they
started planning for it today, it wouldn't open this side of 2020.

In message , at 11:23:29 on
Sun, 9 Oct 2011, Recliner remarked:
How exactly does a rail link between LHR and LGW increase *air*
capacity? The problem at Heathrow is said to be that the runways are
98% fully used. Gatwick is already the world's busiest single-runway
airport. So how is this capacity increase achieved?

Indeed, this link only makes sense if Gatwick gets its second runway.
Equally, it would greatly strengthen the business case for that second
runway. It's not allowed until after 2019, but of course, even if they
started planning for it today, it wouldn't open this side of 2020.

As far as I can see, 2019 is the earliest they can start building.
Otherwise the point holds, and they'd need to rely on bigger planes to
increase the passenger throughput - which Gatwick is already expecting.

Of course, they aren't exactly breaking ground on this airport link in
the foreseeable future, and it would probably take 8-10 years to
complete.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message

In message , at 11:23:29 on
Sun, 9 Oct 2011, Recliner remarked:
How exactly does a rail link between LHR and LGW increase *air*
capacity? The problem at Heathrow is said to be that the runways
are 98% fully used. Gatwick is already the world's busiest
single-runway airport. So how is this capacity increase achieved?

Indeed, this link only makes sense if Gatwick gets its second runway.
Equally, it would greatly strengthen the business case for that
second runway. It's not allowed until after 2019, but of course,
even if they started planning for it today, it wouldn't open this
side of 2020.

As far as I can see, 2019 is the earliest they can start building.
Otherwise the point holds, and they'd need to rely on bigger planes to
increase the passenger throughput - which Gatwick is already
expecting.
Of course, they aren't exactly breaking ground on this airport link in
the foreseeable future, and it would probably take 8-10 years to
complete.

Yes, both the link and the airport expansion would have to be planned
together.

For example, would the new LGW runway be to the south or north of the
existing runway? Would a new terminal be needed (I assume so)? Would
the link carry both land-side and in-transit pax (in separate, secure
compartments)? If the latter, its stations would have to be closely
integrated into the terminals, with separate, segregated areas for both
types of pax. I wouldn't expect it to open until well after 2020, even
if the plans were well advanced already.

In message , at 12:25:46 on
Sun, 9 Oct 2011, Recliner remarked:
As far as I can see, 2019 is the earliest they can start building.
Otherwise the point holds, and they'd need to rely on bigger planes to
increase the passenger throughput - which Gatwick is already
expecting.
Of course, they aren't exactly breaking ground on this airport link in
the foreseeable future, and it would probably take 8-10 years to
complete.

Yes, both the link and the airport expansion would have to be planned
together.

For example, would the new LGW runway be to the south or north of the
existing runway?

Just over 1km to the South. Opening maybe 10yrs after getting PP.

Would a new terminal be needed (I assume so)?

Yes, in between the runways. But overall it doubles the area of the
airport, including some facilities east of the railway.

Would the link carry both land-side and in-transit pax (in separate,
secure compartments)?

Land-side, like Heathrow, is by far the most likely.

If the latter, its stations would have to be closely
integrated into the terminals, with separate, segregated areas for both
types of pax. I wouldn't expect it to open until well after 2020, even
if the plans were well advanced already.

--
Roland Perry