https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/heathrow-congestion-charge-is-expected-to-raise-1-2bn-a-year-wv9qn2c36?shareToken=2e1812617e77460e9d40ce4f851b4 ca3

In message , at 10:37:29 on Mon, 23 Sep
2019, Recliner remarked:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...arge-is-expect
ed-to-raise-1-2bn-a-year-wv9qn2c36?shareToken=2e1812617e77460e9d40ce4f85
1b4ca3

If it isn't introduced until the third runway opens, I think we can all
relax for the foreseeable future.

Meanwhile, I dropped someone off at Hayes and Harlington Station last
year, and presuming that's outside the zone, could be a viable
alternative for accompanied pax.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:37:29 on Mon, 23 Sep
2019, Recliner remarked:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...arge-is-expect
ed-to-raise-1-2bn-a-year-wv9qn2c36?shareToken=2e1812617e77460e9d40ce4f85
1b4ca3

If it isn't introduced until the third runway opens, I think we can all
relax for the foreseeable future.

I won't be in the least surprised if they try to introduce it when
construction starts, rather than only when the runway opens.


Meanwhile, I dropped someone off at Hayes and Harlington Station last
year, and presuming that's outside the zone, could be a viable
alternative for accompanied pax.

Yes, the Tube and rail stations around LHR could become popular drop-off
points.

On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 10:37:29 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...-expected-to-r
aise-1-2bn-a-year-wv9qn2c36?shareToken=2e1812617e77460e9d40ce4f851b4 ca3


Ah, greenwash at its finest. I'm sure reducing the number of vehicles going
to and from the airport will really make up for the extra emissions from the
aircraft using the new runway such as the A380 which burns half a ton of fuel
just to get from the gate to take off position.

In message , at 11:15:51 on Mon, 23 Sep
2019, remarked:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 10:37:29 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...harge-is-expec
ted-to-r
aise-1-2bn-a-year-wv9qn2c36?shareToken=2e1812617e77460e9d40ce4f851b4 ca3

Ah, greenwash at its finest. I'm sure reducing the number of vehicles going
to and from the airport will really make up for the extra emissions from the
aircraft using the new runway such as the A380 which burns half a ton of fuel
just to get from the gate to take off position.

If 300 of the passengers arrived by car, the extra congestion, let alone
emissions, would be noticeable.
--
Roland Perry

On 23/09/2019 12:15, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 10:37:29 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...-expected-to-r
aise-1-2bn-a-year-wv9qn2c36?shareToken=2e1812617e77460e9d40ce4f851b4 ca3


Ah, greenwash at its finest. I'm sure reducing the number of vehicles going
to and from the airport will really make up for the extra emissions from the
aircraft using the new runway such as the A380 which burns half a ton of fuel
just to get from the gate to take off position.


Isn't that what those yellow drones someone linked to last week are for?

--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Pulp - Countdown

On 23/09/2019 14:58, Basil Jet wrote:
On 23/09/2019 12:15, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 10:37:29 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...-expected-to-r

aise-1-2bn-a-year-wv9qn2c36?shareToken=2e1812617e77460e9d40ce4f851b4 ca3


Ah, greenwash at its finest. I'm sure reducing the number of vehicles
going
to and from the airport will really make up for the extra emissions
from the
aircraft using the new runway such as the A380 which burns half a ton
of fuel
just to get from the gate to take off position.


Isn't that what those yellow drones someone linked to last week are for?


Weren't those just for pushback?

It would, of course, clearly be better if the took the planes to their
start points on the runway, but I'm assuming that if they're on their
own power from the point of no return on the taxiways you can get a
better throughput as you don't have to wait for the drones to decouple
and get (provably) out of the way.

In message , at 15:06:09 on Mon, 23 Sep
2019, Someone Somewhere remarked:
On 23/09/2019 14:58, Basil Jet wrote:
On 23/09/2019 12:15, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 10:37:29 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...-charge-is-exp
ected-to-r
aise-1-2bn-a-year-wv9qn2c36?shareToken=2e1812617e77460e9d40ce4f851b4 ca3


Ah, greenwash at its finest. I'm sure reducing the number of
vehicles going to and from the airport will really make up for the
extra emissions from the aircraft using the new runway such as the
A380 which burns half a ton of fuel just to get from the gate to
take off position.

What we really need here is fuel per passenger.

Isn't that what those yellow drones someone linked to last week are
for?

Weren't those just for pushback?

It would, of course, clearly be better if the took the planes to their
start points on the runway,

FSVO "better", I think the extra time taken would clog the taxiways up a
bit, as well as adding time to the flights.

but I'm assuming that if they're on their own power from the point of
no return on the taxiways you can get a better throughput as you don't
have to wait for the drones to decouple and get (provably) out of the
way.

--
Roland Perry

On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 15:27:05 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 15:06:09 on Mon, 23 Sep
2019, Someone Somewhere remarked:
On 23/09/2019 14:58, Basil Jet wrote:
On 23/09/2019 12:15, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 10:37:29 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...-charge-is-exp
ected-to-r
aise-1-2bn-a-year-wv9qn2c36?shareToken=2e1812617e77460e9d40ce4f851b4 ca3


Ah, greenwash at its finest. I'm sure reducing the number of
vehicles going to and from the airport will really make up for the
extra emissions from the aircraft using the new runway such as the
A380 which burns half a ton of fuel just to get from the gate to
take off position.

What we really need here is fuel per passenger.

I believe the fuel costs about £1 per passenger.

On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 14:58:53 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:

On 23/09/2019 12:15, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 10:37:29 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...-expected-to-r
aise-1-2bn-a-year-wv9qn2c36?shareToken=2e1812617e77460e9d40ce4f851b4 ca3


Ah, greenwash at its finest. I'm sure reducing the number of vehicles going
to and from the airport will really make up for the extra emissions from the
aircraft using the new runway such as the A380 which burns half a ton of fuel
just to get from the gate to take off position.


Isn't that what those yellow drones someone linked to last week are for?

They don't fly, so they're not drones.

They're robotugs called Mototok Spacer 8600s. They aren't powerful
enough to push back wide-bodied jets, though a larger model might. In
any case, they don't replace any jet fuel, as pushback would otherwise
be done by hefty diesel tugs. So they save some diesel fuel and fumes,
but not aviation fuel.