Londoners fear misery at Heathrow with drive away visitors
Aug 2nd 2007 | 3:19 am
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
Londoners fear misery at Heathrow with drive away visitors
Londoners fear misery at Heathrow with drive away visitors
The Associated Press
Wednesday, August 1, 2007
LONDON: London's ambition to overtake New York as the world's pre-eminent
city faces a big obstacle: its gateway, Heathrow Airport, is enough to make
visitors feel like flying home before they even see Big Ben, Buckingham
Palace, or the financial superhub known as the City.
Notorious security checks, a labyrinthine layout, and shoddy service combine
to form the "Heathrow Hassle."
With fears mounting of chaos when the city hosts the Olympics in 2012,
government officials and business figures are calling for urgent
improvements at the world's third-busiest airport.
In the past week, Heathrow has come under a barrage of criticism.
London Mayor Ken Livingstone called it a "shame" on London. A junior
government minister claims the airport is so infuriating that it could hurt
London's business prospects. And a business executive remarked that some
people will do anything to avoid flying through Heathrow.
The airport once was a name that evoked the jet-set allure of international
travel. In recent years, however, it's become associated more with
complaints about crowded terminals, long shuffles through security and
passport lines, lost luggage and a depressing decor.
The hammering began with news that Heathrow would seek a broad injunction
against protests planned at the airport for mid-August by groups opposed to
plans to build a third runway, which opponents say would severely increase
noise and air pollution.
Green groups said the injunction was so broad that it would allow police to
detain potential protesters not just at the airport but on parts of the
London Underground and railway network and sections of highways near
Heathrow.
"This is the mother of all injunctions. We've long known the airport
operators to be arrogant, but trying to ban 5 million people from coming
near them is conceited even by their standards," said John Stewart, the
chairman of the Hacan group that opposes the new runway.
Livingstone was livid.
"Someone there must be out their skull," the outspoken mayor said Tuesday,
referring to officials at the British Airports Authority, which runs
Heathrow and London's other two airports, Gatwick and Stansted.
"What BAA has done is guarantee massive coverage of what was going to be a
minor encampment."
Livingstone didn't limit his criticism to the protest row.
"Certainly Heathrow does shame London. It is typical of the English
short-termism, lack of planning, lack of investment," he said.
"Its quite clear the current management, and management before them, thought
they could keep people almost as prisoner in this ghastly shopping mall so
they can extract vast sums of money from them while they wait in appalling
conditions."
A spokeswoman for BAA said the airport has been plagued by the lengthy legal
and planning process required for improvements. For example, the airport's
nearly completed fifth terminal was held up for 20 years by red tape.
Terminal 5 is to open in March and will allow the airport to raise its
annual passenger capacity by 30 million, said the spokeswoman, who spoke on
customary condition of anonymity.
Heathrow was designed to serve about 45 million passengers a year but now
sees around 68 million.
BAA also plans refurbishments, new inter-terminal transports and other
projects it says will make Heathrow a new airport by the 2012 Summer Games.
But Economics Secretary Kitty Ussher warned this week that the airport's
hassles could discourage business.
"I don't want New York or Dubai executives saying 'Oh God, I don't want to
go through Heathrow,'" she was quoted as saying in The Financial Times.
Sir Thomas Harris, vice chairman of Standard Chartered capital Markets, told
the newspaper that Heathrow faces stiff competition from rival transport
hubs.
"There are lots of people who will fly through Amsterdam, Paris or Frankfurt
or do almost anything to avoid a Heathrow connection if they can," he said.
The Associated Press
Wednesday, August 1, 2007
LONDON: London's ambition to overtake New York as the world's pre-eminent
city faces a big obstacle: its gateway, Heathrow Airport, is enough to make
visitors feel like flying home before they even see Big Ben, Buckingham
Palace, or the financial superhub known as the City.
Notorious security checks, a labyrinthine layout, and shoddy service combine
to form the "Heathrow Hassle."
With fears mounting of chaos when the city hosts the Olympics in 2012,
government officials and business figures are calling for urgent
improvements at the world's third-busiest airport.
In the past week, Heathrow has come under a barrage of criticism.
London Mayor Ken Livingstone called it a "shame" on London. A junior
government minister claims the airport is so infuriating that it could hurt
London's business prospects. And a business executive remarked that some
people will do anything to avoid flying through Heathrow.
The airport once was a name that evoked the jet-set allure of international
travel. In recent years, however, it's become associated more with
complaints about crowded terminals, long shuffles through security and
passport lines, lost luggage and a depressing decor.
The hammering began with news that Heathrow would seek a broad injunction
against protests planned at the airport for mid-August by groups opposed to
plans to build a third runway, which opponents say would severely increase
noise and air pollution.
Green groups said the injunction was so broad that it would allow police to
detain potential protesters not just at the airport but on parts of the
London Underground and railway network and sections of highways near
Heathrow.
"This is the mother of all injunctions. We've long known the airport
operators to be arrogant, but trying to ban 5 million people from coming
near them is conceited even by their standards," said John Stewart, the
chairman of the Hacan group that opposes the new runway.
Livingstone was livid.
"Someone there must be out their skull," the outspoken mayor said Tuesday,
referring to officials at the British Airports Authority, which runs
Heathrow and London's other two airports, Gatwick and Stansted.
"What BAA has done is guarantee massive coverage of what was going to be a
minor encampment."
Livingstone didn't limit his criticism to the protest row.
"Certainly Heathrow does shame London. It is typical of the English
short-termism, lack of planning, lack of investment," he said.
"Its quite clear the current management, and management before them, thought
they could keep people almost as prisoner in this ghastly shopping mall so
they can extract vast sums of money from them while they wait in appalling
conditions."
A spokeswoman for BAA said the airport has been plagued by the lengthy legal
and planning process required for improvements. For example, the airport's
nearly completed fifth terminal was held up for 20 years by red tape.
Terminal 5 is to open in March and will allow the airport to raise its
annual passenger capacity by 30 million, said the spokeswoman, who spoke on
customary condition of anonymity.
Heathrow was designed to serve about 45 million passengers a year but now
sees around 68 million.
BAA also plans refurbishments, new inter-terminal transports and other
projects it says will make Heathrow a new airport by the 2012 Summer Games.
But Economics Secretary Kitty Ussher warned this week that the airport's
hassles could discourage business.
"I don't want New York or Dubai executives saying 'Oh God, I don't want to
go through Heathrow,'" she was quoted as saying in The Financial Times.
Sir Thomas Harris, vice chairman of Standard Chartered capital Markets, told
the newspaper that Heathrow faces stiff competition from rival transport
hubs.
"There are lots of people who will fly through Amsterdam, Paris or Frankfurt
or do almost anything to avoid a Heathrow connection if they can," he said.
Aug 2nd 2007 | 5:28 am
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Londoners fear misery at Heathrow will drive away visitors - Time to BOYCOTT Heat
Media worldwide have been reporting on the many THOUSANDS of
pieces of luggage now being lost daily at Heathrow!!
How do the airport authority plan on improving service?
Or, do they still get their exorbitant pay even though they are
obviously incompetent?
With all this bad publicity, passengers will sooner go to Manchester, or even
Schiphol/Amsterdam, and then take a train, if they must go to London!!
Forget about people coming for the Olympics - it won't be happening.
On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 17:19:01 +0200, Earl Evleth <[email protected]> wrote:
>Londoners fear misery at Heathrow with drive away visitors
> The Associated Press
>Wednesday, August 1, 2007
>LONDON: London's ambition to overtake New York as the world's pre-eminent
>city faces a big obstacle: its gateway, Heathrow Airport, is enough to make
>visitors feel like flying home before they even see Big Ben, Buckingham
>Palace, or the financial superhub known as the City.
>Notorious security checks, a labyrinthine layout, and shoddy service combine
>to form the "Heathrow Hassle."
>With fears mounting of chaos when the city hosts the Olympics in 2012,
>government officials and business figures are calling for urgent
>improvements at the world's third-busiest airport.
>In the past week, Heathrow has come under a barrage of criticism.
>London Mayor Ken Livingstone called it a "shame" on London. A junior
>government minister claims the airport is so infuriating that it could hurt
>London's business prospects. And a business executive remarked that some
>people will do anything to avoid flying through Heathrow.
>The airport once was a name that evoked the jet-set allure of international
>travel. In recent years, however, it's become associated more with
>complaints about crowded terminals, long shuffles through security and
>passport lines, lost luggage and a depressing decor.
>The hammering began with news that Heathrow would seek a broad injunction
>against protests planned at the airport for mid-August by groups opposed to
>plans to build a third runway, which opponents say would severely increase
>noise and air pollution.
>Green groups said the injunction was so broad that it would allow police to
>detain potential protesters not just at the airport but on parts of the
>London Underground and railway network and sections of highways near
>Heathrow.
>"This is the mother of all injunctions. We've long known the airport
>operators to be arrogant, but trying to ban 5 million people from coming
>near them is conceited even by their standards," said John Stewart, the
>chairman of the Hacan group that opposes the new runway.
>Livingstone was livid.
>"Someone there must be out their skull," the outspoken mayor said Tuesday,
>referring to officials at the British Airports Authority, which runs
>Heathrow and London's other two airports, Gatwick and Stansted.
>"What BAA has done is guarantee massive coverage of what was going to be a
>minor encampment."
Now all the world, not just the Brits know all about the serious problems at
Heathrow.
>Livingstone didn't limit his criticism to the protest row.
>"Certainly Heathrow does shame London. It is typical of the English
>short-termism, lack of planning, lack of investment," he said.
>"Its quite clear the current management, and management before them, thought
>they could keep people almost as prisoner in this ghastly shopping mall so
>they can extract vast sums of money from them while they wait in appalling
>conditions."
And you though airports in Canada and the US are awful.
When even the mayor must criticise the management, then you know conditions
are woefully substandard.
This is supposed to be Britain, not Russia.
>A spokeswoman for BAA said the airport has been plagued by the lengthy legal
>and planning process required for improvements. For example, the airport's
>nearly completed fifth terminal was held up for 20 years by red tape.
>Terminal 5 is to open in March and will allow the airport to raise its
>annual passenger capacity by 30 million, said the spokeswoman, who spoke on
>customary condition of anonymity.
>Heathrow was designed to serve about 45 million passengers a year but now
>sees around 68 million.
>BAA also plans refurbishments, new inter-terminal transports and other
>projects it says will make Heathrow a new airport by the 2012 Summer Games.
>But Economics Secretary Kitty Ussher warned this week that the airport's
>hassles could discourage business.
No doubt about it - customers will soon be BOYCOTTING Heathrow!!
>"I don't want New York or Dubai executives saying 'Oh God, I don't want to
>go through Heathrow,'" she was quoted as saying in The Financial Times.
Already people are saying this, and passing on this advice to others.
>Sir Thomas Harris, vice chairman of Standard Chartered Capital Markets, told
>the newspaper that Heathrow faces stiff competition from rival transport
>hubs.
>"There are lots of people who will fly through Amsterdam, Paris or Frankfurt
>or do almost anything to avoid a Heathrow connection if they can," he said.
Right on - time to teach those stupid managers of Heathrow a lesson.
Why are they not being fired, and even prosecuted for their negligence?
pieces of luggage now being lost daily at Heathrow!!
How do the airport authority plan on improving service?
Or, do they still get their exorbitant pay even though they are
obviously incompetent?
With all this bad publicity, passengers will sooner go to Manchester, or even
Schiphol/Amsterdam, and then take a train, if they must go to London!!
Forget about people coming for the Olympics - it won't be happening.
On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 17:19:01 +0200, Earl Evleth <[email protected]> wrote:
>Londoners fear misery at Heathrow with drive away visitors
> The Associated Press
>Wednesday, August 1, 2007
>LONDON: London's ambition to overtake New York as the world's pre-eminent
>city faces a big obstacle: its gateway, Heathrow Airport, is enough to make
>visitors feel like flying home before they even see Big Ben, Buckingham
>Palace, or the financial superhub known as the City.
>Notorious security checks, a labyrinthine layout, and shoddy service combine
>to form the "Heathrow Hassle."
>With fears mounting of chaos when the city hosts the Olympics in 2012,
>government officials and business figures are calling for urgent
>improvements at the world's third-busiest airport.
>In the past week, Heathrow has come under a barrage of criticism.
>London Mayor Ken Livingstone called it a "shame" on London. A junior
>government minister claims the airport is so infuriating that it could hurt
>London's business prospects. And a business executive remarked that some
>people will do anything to avoid flying through Heathrow.
>The airport once was a name that evoked the jet-set allure of international
>travel. In recent years, however, it's become associated more with
>complaints about crowded terminals, long shuffles through security and
>passport lines, lost luggage and a depressing decor.
>The hammering began with news that Heathrow would seek a broad injunction
>against protests planned at the airport for mid-August by groups opposed to
>plans to build a third runway, which opponents say would severely increase
>noise and air pollution.
>Green groups said the injunction was so broad that it would allow police to
>detain potential protesters not just at the airport but on parts of the
>London Underground and railway network and sections of highways near
>Heathrow.
>"This is the mother of all injunctions. We've long known the airport
>operators to be arrogant, but trying to ban 5 million people from coming
>near them is conceited even by their standards," said John Stewart, the
>chairman of the Hacan group that opposes the new runway.
>Livingstone was livid.
>"Someone there must be out their skull," the outspoken mayor said Tuesday,
>referring to officials at the British Airports Authority, which runs
>Heathrow and London's other two airports, Gatwick and Stansted.
>"What BAA has done is guarantee massive coverage of what was going to be a
>minor encampment."
Now all the world, not just the Brits know all about the serious problems at
Heathrow.
>Livingstone didn't limit his criticism to the protest row.
>"Certainly Heathrow does shame London. It is typical of the English
>short-termism, lack of planning, lack of investment," he said.
>"Its quite clear the current management, and management before them, thought
>they could keep people almost as prisoner in this ghastly shopping mall so
>they can extract vast sums of money from them while they wait in appalling
>conditions."
And you though airports in Canada and the US are awful.
When even the mayor must criticise the management, then you know conditions
are woefully substandard.
This is supposed to be Britain, not Russia.
>A spokeswoman for BAA said the airport has been plagued by the lengthy legal
>and planning process required for improvements. For example, the airport's
>nearly completed fifth terminal was held up for 20 years by red tape.
>Terminal 5 is to open in March and will allow the airport to raise its
>annual passenger capacity by 30 million, said the spokeswoman, who spoke on
>customary condition of anonymity.
>Heathrow was designed to serve about 45 million passengers a year but now
>sees around 68 million.
>BAA also plans refurbishments, new inter-terminal transports and other
>projects it says will make Heathrow a new airport by the 2012 Summer Games.
>But Economics Secretary Kitty Ussher warned this week that the airport's
>hassles could discourage business.
No doubt about it - customers will soon be BOYCOTTING Heathrow!!
>"I don't want New York or Dubai executives saying 'Oh God, I don't want to
>go through Heathrow,'" she was quoted as saying in The Financial Times.
Already people are saying this, and passing on this advice to others.
>Sir Thomas Harris, vice chairman of Standard Chartered Capital Markets, told
>the newspaper that Heathrow faces stiff competition from rival transport
>hubs.
>"There are lots of people who will fly through Amsterdam, Paris or Frankfurt
>or do almost anything to avoid a Heathrow connection if they can," he said.
Right on - time to teach those stupid managers of Heathrow a lesson.
Why are they not being fired, and even prosecuted for their negligence?
Aug 2nd 2007 | 6:29 am
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Londoners fear misery at Heathrow will drive away visitors - Time to BOYCOTT Heat
"Jean Valjean" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Forget about people coming for the Olympics - it won't be happening.
Yes it will.
You don't think the chance of an airport cock-up will put off someone who
wants the 'holiday of a lifetime' do you?
Most of the charter flights don't come into Heathrow anyway, they turn up
at Stanstead and Gatwick. The people on package tours won't even see
Heathrow if they're lucky
But the reality is that people who fly once a year when they go away on
holiday don't even consider the chance of a cock-up at the airport, that's
not what they're thinking about...
--
William Black
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.
news:[email protected]...
> Forget about people coming for the Olympics - it won't be happening.
Yes it will.
You don't think the chance of an airport cock-up will put off someone who
wants the 'holiday of a lifetime' do you?
Most of the charter flights don't come into Heathrow anyway, they turn up
at Stanstead and Gatwick. The people on package tours won't even see
Heathrow if they're lucky
But the reality is that people who fly once a year when they go away on
holiday don't even consider the chance of a cock-up at the airport, that's
not what they're thinking about...
--
William Black
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.
Aug 2nd 2007 | 8:41 am
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: evleth has nothing to say, but he posts !
"Earl Evleth" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de
news:C2D7C285.EB606%[email protected]...
>
> Londoners fear misery at Heathrow with drive away visitors
>
> The Associated Press
> Wednesday, August 1, 2007
>
>
> LONDON: London's ambition to overtake New York as the world's pre-eminent
> city faces a big obstacle: its gateway, Heathrow Airport, is enough to
> make
> visitors feel like flying home before they even see Big Ben, Buckingham
> Palace, or the financial superhub known as the City.
>
> Notorious security checks, a labyrinthine layout, and shoddy service
> combine
> to form the "Heathrow Hassle."
>
> With fears mounting of chaos when the city hosts the Olympics in 2012,
> government officials and business figures are calling for urgent
> improvements at the world's third-busiest airport.
>
> In the past week, Heathrow has come under a barrage of criticism.
>
> London Mayor Ken Livingstone called it a "shame" on London. A junior
> government minister claims the airport is so infuriating that it could
> hurt
> London's business prospects. And a business executive remarked that some
> people will do anything to avoid flying through Heathrow.
>
> The airport once was a name that evoked the jet-set allure of
> international
> travel. In recent years, however, it's become associated more with
> complaints about crowded terminals, long shuffles through security and
> passport lines, lost luggage and a depressing decor.
>
> The hammering began with news that Heathrow would seek a broad injunction
> against protests planned at the airport for mid-August by groups opposed
> to
> plans to build a third runway, which opponents say would severely increase
> noise and air pollution.
>
> Green groups said the injunction was so broad that it would allow police
> to
> detain potential protesters not just at the airport but on parts of the
> London Underground and railway network and sections of highways near
> Heathrow.
>
> "This is the mother of all injunctions. We've long known the airport
> operators to be arrogant, but trying to ban 5 million people from coming
> near them is conceited even by their standards," said John Stewart, the
> chairman of the Hacan group that opposes the new runway.
>
> Livingstone was livid.
>
> "Someone there must be out their skull," the outspoken mayor said Tuesday,
> referring to officials at the British Airports Authority, which runs
> Heathrow and London's other two airports, Gatwick and Stansted.
>
> "What BAA has done is guarantee massive coverage of what was going to be a
> minor encampment."
>
> Livingstone didn't limit his criticism to the protest row.
>
> "Certainly Heathrow does shame London. It is typical of the English
> short-termism, lack of planning, lack of investment," he said.
>
> "Its quite clear the current management, and management before them,
> thought
> they could keep people almost as prisoner in this ghastly shopping mall so
> they can extract vast sums of money from them while they wait in appalling
> conditions."
>
> A spokeswoman for BAA said the airport has been plagued by the lengthy
> legal
> and planning process required for improvements. For example, the airport's
> nearly completed fifth terminal was held up for 20 years by red tape.
>
> Terminal 5 is to open in March and will allow the airport to raise its
> annual passenger capacity by 30 million, said the spokeswoman, who spoke
> on
> customary condition of anonymity.
>
> Heathrow was designed to serve about 45 million passengers a year but now
> sees around 68 million.
>
> BAA also plans refurbishments, new inter-terminal transports and other
> projects it says will make Heathrow a new airport by the 2012 Summer
> Games.
>
> But Economics Secretary Kitty Ussher warned this week that the airport's
> hassles could discourage business.
>
> "I don't want New York or Dubai executives saying 'Oh God, I don't want to
> go through Heathrow,'" she was quoted as saying in The Financial Times.
>
> Sir Thomas Harris, vice chairman of Standard Chartered capital Markets,
> told
> the newspaper that Heathrow faces stiff competition from rival transport
> hubs.
>
> "There are lots of people who will fly through Amsterdam, Paris or
> Frankfurt
> or do almost anything to avoid a Heathrow connection if they can," he
> said.
>
news:C2D7C285.EB606%[email protected]...
>
> Londoners fear misery at Heathrow with drive away visitors
>
> The Associated Press
> Wednesday, August 1, 2007
>
>
> LONDON: London's ambition to overtake New York as the world's pre-eminent
> city faces a big obstacle: its gateway, Heathrow Airport, is enough to
> make
> visitors feel like flying home before they even see Big Ben, Buckingham
> Palace, or the financial superhub known as the City.
>
> Notorious security checks, a labyrinthine layout, and shoddy service
> combine
> to form the "Heathrow Hassle."
>
> With fears mounting of chaos when the city hosts the Olympics in 2012,
> government officials and business figures are calling for urgent
> improvements at the world's third-busiest airport.
>
> In the past week, Heathrow has come under a barrage of criticism.
>
> London Mayor Ken Livingstone called it a "shame" on London. A junior
> government minister claims the airport is so infuriating that it could
> hurt
> London's business prospects. And a business executive remarked that some
> people will do anything to avoid flying through Heathrow.
>
> The airport once was a name that evoked the jet-set allure of
> international
> travel. In recent years, however, it's become associated more with
> complaints about crowded terminals, long shuffles through security and
> passport lines, lost luggage and a depressing decor.
>
> The hammering began with news that Heathrow would seek a broad injunction
> against protests planned at the airport for mid-August by groups opposed
> to
> plans to build a third runway, which opponents say would severely increase
> noise and air pollution.
>
> Green groups said the injunction was so broad that it would allow police
> to
> detain potential protesters not just at the airport but on parts of the
> London Underground and railway network and sections of highways near
> Heathrow.
>
> "This is the mother of all injunctions. We've long known the airport
> operators to be arrogant, but trying to ban 5 million people from coming
> near them is conceited even by their standards," said John Stewart, the
> chairman of the Hacan group that opposes the new runway.
>
> Livingstone was livid.
>
> "Someone there must be out their skull," the outspoken mayor said Tuesday,
> referring to officials at the British Airports Authority, which runs
> Heathrow and London's other two airports, Gatwick and Stansted.
>
> "What BAA has done is guarantee massive coverage of what was going to be a
> minor encampment."
>
> Livingstone didn't limit his criticism to the protest row.
>
> "Certainly Heathrow does shame London. It is typical of the English
> short-termism, lack of planning, lack of investment," he said.
>
> "Its quite clear the current management, and management before them,
> thought
> they could keep people almost as prisoner in this ghastly shopping mall so
> they can extract vast sums of money from them while they wait in appalling
> conditions."
>
> A spokeswoman for BAA said the airport has been plagued by the lengthy
> legal
> and planning process required for improvements. For example, the airport's
> nearly completed fifth terminal was held up for 20 years by red tape.
>
> Terminal 5 is to open in March and will allow the airport to raise its
> annual passenger capacity by 30 million, said the spokeswoman, who spoke
> on
> customary condition of anonymity.
>
> Heathrow was designed to serve about 45 million passengers a year but now
> sees around 68 million.
>
> BAA also plans refurbishments, new inter-terminal transports and other
> projects it says will make Heathrow a new airport by the 2012 Summer
> Games.
>
> But Economics Secretary Kitty Ussher warned this week that the airport's
> hassles could discourage business.
>
> "I don't want New York or Dubai executives saying 'Oh God, I don't want to
> go through Heathrow,'" she was quoted as saying in The Financial Times.
>
> Sir Thomas Harris, vice chairman of Standard Chartered capital Markets,
> told
> the newspaper that Heathrow faces stiff competition from rival transport
> hubs.
>
> "There are lots of people who will fly through Amsterdam, Paris or
> Frankfurt
> or do almost anything to avoid a Heathrow connection if they can," he
> said.
>
Aug 2nd 2007 | 8:46 am
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Londoners fear misery at Heathrow will drive away visitors - Time to BOYCOTT Heat
On Aug 2, 2:29 pm, "William Black" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> "Jean Valjean" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > Forget about people coming for the Olympics - it won't be happening.
>
> Yes it will.
The Olympics is a separate issue from the airport. Interest in the
Olympics in a sport-saturated world has been steadily declining - both
in terms of visitors and TV ratings. The Olympics isn't special
anymore, when there are so many TV or cable or satellite channels that
show sport 24-7, and when you can watch almost any conceivable sport
frequently, not only once every four years.
> You don't think the chance of an airport cock-up will put off someone who
> wants the 'holiday of a lifetime' do you?
Of course it's ridiculous. As has been pointed out in other threads,
Heathrow is really not that bad when compared to many Third World
airports, or even many of the other large hub airports in the US and
Europe - New York-Kennedy, Chicago-O'Hare, Los Angeles-LAX, Athens,
Amsterdam-Schipol, Paris-CDG. There is heavy security and frequent
(but rarely long) delays, but it has a subway connection into central
London, and has plenty of shops to pass the time - what more do you
need from an airport really? Being inconvenienced for an extra half
hour in the airport is not a reason to avoid visiting one of the
world's most cultural, historic, and important cities.
> Most of the charter flights don't come into Heathrow anyway, they turn up
> at Stanstead and Gatwick. The people on package tours won't even see
> Heathrow if they're lucky
Almost all visitors from the US take regular flights, not charters.
Most tours have people get to London on their own, and then start the
tour from there, once the Americans, Aussies, Japanese, etc. all get
to London.
wrote:
> "Jean Valjean" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > Forget about people coming for the Olympics - it won't be happening.
>
> Yes it will.
The Olympics is a separate issue from the airport. Interest in the
Olympics in a sport-saturated world has been steadily declining - both
in terms of visitors and TV ratings. The Olympics isn't special
anymore, when there are so many TV or cable or satellite channels that
show sport 24-7, and when you can watch almost any conceivable sport
frequently, not only once every four years.
> You don't think the chance of an airport cock-up will put off someone who
> wants the 'holiday of a lifetime' do you?
Of course it's ridiculous. As has been pointed out in other threads,
Heathrow is really not that bad when compared to many Third World
airports, or even many of the other large hub airports in the US and
Europe - New York-Kennedy, Chicago-O'Hare, Los Angeles-LAX, Athens,
Amsterdam-Schipol, Paris-CDG. There is heavy security and frequent
(but rarely long) delays, but it has a subway connection into central
London, and has plenty of shops to pass the time - what more do you
need from an airport really? Being inconvenienced for an extra half
hour in the airport is not a reason to avoid visiting one of the
world's most cultural, historic, and important cities.
> Most of the charter flights don't come into Heathrow anyway, they turn up
> at Stanstead and Gatwick. The people on package tours won't even see
> Heathrow if they're lucky
Almost all visitors from the US take regular flights, not charters.
Most tours have people get to London on their own, and then start the
tour from there, once the Americans, Aussies, Japanese, etc. all get
to London.
Aug 2nd 2007 | 5:48 pm
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Londoners fear misery at Heathrow will drive away visitors - Time to BOYCOTT Heat
"Iceman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] ups.com...
> On Aug 2, 2:29 pm, "William Black" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> "Jean Valjean" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> > Forget about people coming for the Olympics - it won't be happening.
>>
>> Yes it will.
>
>
> The Olympics is a separate issue from the airport. Interest in the
> Olympics in a sport-saturated world has been steadily declining - both
> in terms of visitors and TV ratings. The Olympics isn't special
> anymore, when there are so many TV or cable or satellite channels that
> show sport 24-7, and when you can watch almost any conceivable sport
> frequently, not only once every four years.
>
>> You don't think the chance of an airport cock-up will put off someone who
>> wants the 'holiday of a lifetime' do you?
>
>
> Of course it's ridiculous. As has been pointed out in other threads,
> Heathrow is really not that bad when compared to many Third World
> airports, or even many of the other large hub airports in the US and
> Europe - New York-Kennedy, Chicago-O'Hare, Los Angeles-LAX, Athens,
> Amsterdam-Schipol, Paris-CDG. There is heavy security and frequent
> (but rarely long) delays, but it has a subway connection into central
> London, and has plenty of shops to pass the time - what more do you
> need from an airport really? Being inconvenienced for an extra half
> hour in the airport is not a reason to avoid visiting one of the
> world's most cultural, historic, and important cities.
>
>> Most of the charter flights don't come into Heathrow anyway, they turn
>> up
>> at Stanstead and Gatwick. The people on package tours won't even see
>> Heathrow if they're lucky
>
>
> Almost all visitors from the US take regular flights, not charters.
> Most tours have people get to London on their own, and then start the
> tour from there, once the Americans, Aussies, Japanese, etc. all get
> to London.
>
I consider the Olympics, both the winter and the summer games, to beBORING,
BORING, BORING. I wouldn' cross the street to see an event even if I had
free tickets.
news:[email protected] ups.com...
> On Aug 2, 2:29 pm, "William Black" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> "Jean Valjean" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> > Forget about people coming for the Olympics - it won't be happening.
>>
>> Yes it will.
>
>
> The Olympics is a separate issue from the airport. Interest in the
> Olympics in a sport-saturated world has been steadily declining - both
> in terms of visitors and TV ratings. The Olympics isn't special
> anymore, when there are so many TV or cable or satellite channels that
> show sport 24-7, and when you can watch almost any conceivable sport
> frequently, not only once every four years.
>
>> You don't think the chance of an airport cock-up will put off someone who
>> wants the 'holiday of a lifetime' do you?
>
>
> Of course it's ridiculous. As has been pointed out in other threads,
> Heathrow is really not that bad when compared to many Third World
> airports, or even many of the other large hub airports in the US and
> Europe - New York-Kennedy, Chicago-O'Hare, Los Angeles-LAX, Athens,
> Amsterdam-Schipol, Paris-CDG. There is heavy security and frequent
> (but rarely long) delays, but it has a subway connection into central
> London, and has plenty of shops to pass the time - what more do you
> need from an airport really? Being inconvenienced for an extra half
> hour in the airport is not a reason to avoid visiting one of the
> world's most cultural, historic, and important cities.
>
>> Most of the charter flights don't come into Heathrow anyway, they turn
>> up
>> at Stanstead and Gatwick. The people on package tours won't even see
>> Heathrow if they're lucky
>
>
> Almost all visitors from the US take regular flights, not charters.
> Most tours have people get to London on their own, and then start the
> tour from there, once the Americans, Aussies, Japanese, etc. all get
> to London.
>
I consider the Olympics, both the winter and the summer games, to beBORING,
BORING, BORING. I wouldn' cross the street to see an event even if I had
free tickets.
Aug 2nd 2007 | 6:54 pm
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Londoners fear misery at Heathrow will drive away visitors - Time to BOYCOTT Heat
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 05:48:10 GMT, "sharx35"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>I consider the Olympics, both the winter and the summer games, to beBORING,
>BORING, BORING. I wouldn' cross the street to see an event even if I had
>free tickets.
>
*yawn*
So pleased to hear that - we'll be likely to never meet.
There are few things more boring than people who list the
things that bore them.
Cheers, Alan, Australia
--
http://loraltraveloz.blogspot.com/
<[email protected]> wrote:
>I consider the Olympics, both the winter and the summer games, to beBORING,
>BORING, BORING. I wouldn' cross the street to see an event even if I had
>free tickets.
>
*yawn*
So pleased to hear that - we'll be likely to never meet.
There are few things more boring than people who list the
things that bore them.
Cheers, Alan, Australia
--
http://loraltraveloz.blogspot.com/
Aug 3rd 2007 | 9:14 pm
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Londoners fear misery at Heathrow will drive away visitors - Time to BOYCOTT evle
"Jean Valjean" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message
de news:[email protected]...
> Media worldwide have been reporting on the many THOUSANDS of
> pieces of luggage now being lost daily at Heathrow!!
>
> How do the airport authority plan on improving service?
>
> Or, do they still get their exorbitant pay even though they are
> obviously incompetent?
>
> With all this bad publicity, passengers will sooner go to Manchester, or
> even
> Schiphol/Amsterdam, and then take a train, if they must go to London!!
>
> Forget about people coming for the Olympics - it won't be happening.
>
>
> On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 17:19:01 +0200, Earl Evleth <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Londoners fear misery at Heathrow with drive away visitors
>
>> The Associated Press
>>Wednesday, August 1, 2007
>
>>LONDON: London's ambition to overtake New York as the world's pre-eminent
>>city faces a big obstacle: its gateway, Heathrow Airport, is enough to
>>make
>>visitors feel like flying home before they even see Big Ben, Buckingham
>>Palace, or the financial superhub known as the City.
>
>>Notorious security checks, a labyrinthine layout, and shoddy service
>>combine
>>to form the "Heathrow Hassle."
>
>>With fears mounting of chaos when the city hosts the Olympics in 2012,
>>government officials and business figures are calling for urgent
>>improvements at the world's third-busiest airport.
>
>>In the past week, Heathrow has come under a barrage of criticism.
>
>>London Mayor Ken Livingstone called it a "shame" on London. A junior
>>government minister claims the airport is so infuriating that it could
>>hurt
>>London's business prospects. And a business executive remarked that some
>>people will do anything to avoid flying through Heathrow.
>
>>The airport once was a name that evoked the jet-set allure of
>>international
>>travel. In recent years, however, it's become associated more with
>>complaints about crowded terminals, long shuffles through security and
>>passport lines, lost luggage and a depressing decor.
>
>>The hammering began with news that Heathrow would seek a broad injunction
>>against protests planned at the airport for mid-August by groups opposed
>>to
>>plans to build a third runway, which opponents say would severely increase
>>noise and air pollution.
>
>>Green groups said the injunction was so broad that it would allow police
>>to
>>detain potential protesters not just at the airport but on parts of the
>>London Underground and railway network and sections of highways near
>>Heathrow.
>
>>"This is the mother of all injunctions. We've long known the airport
>>operators to be arrogant, but trying to ban 5 million people from coming
>>near them is conceited even by their standards," said John Stewart, the
>>chairman of the Hacan group that opposes the new runway.
>
>>Livingstone was livid.
>
>>"Someone there must be out their skull," the outspoken mayor said Tuesday,
>>referring to officials at the British Airports Authority, which runs
>>Heathrow and London's other two airports, Gatwick and Stansted.
>
>>"What BAA has done is guarantee massive coverage of what was going to be a
>>minor encampment."
>
>
> Now all the world, not just the Brits know all about the serious problems
> at
> Heathrow.
>
>>Livingstone didn't limit his criticism to the protest row.
>
>>"Certainly Heathrow does shame London. It is typical of the English
>>short-termism, lack of planning, lack of investment," he said.
>
>>"Its quite clear the current management, and management before them,
>>thought
>>they could keep people almost as prisoner in this ghastly shopping mall so
>>they can extract vast sums of money from them while they wait in appalling
>>conditions."
>
> And you though airports in Canada and the US are awful.
> When even the mayor must criticise the management, then you know
> conditions
> are woefully substandard.
>
> This is supposed to be Britain, not Russia.
>
>>A spokeswoman for BAA said the airport has been plagued by the lengthy
>>legal
>>and planning process required for improvements. For example, the airport's
>>nearly completed fifth terminal was held up for 20 years by red tape.
>
>>Terminal 5 is to open in March and will allow the airport to raise its
>>annual passenger capacity by 30 million, said the spokeswoman, who spoke
>>on
>>customary condition of anonymity.
>
>>Heathrow was designed to serve about 45 million passengers a year but now
>>sees around 68 million.
>
>>BAA also plans refurbishments, new inter-terminal transports and other
>>projects it says will make Heathrow a new airport by the 2012 Summer
>>Games.
>
>>But Economics Secretary Kitty Ussher warned this week that the airport's
>>hassles could discourage business.
>
> No doubt about it - customers will soon be BOYCOTTING Heathrow!!
>
>>"I don't want New York or Dubai executives saying 'Oh God, I don't want to
>>go through Heathrow,'" she was quoted as saying in The Financial Times.
>
> Already people are saying this, and passing on this advice to others.
>
>>Sir Thomas Harris, vice chairman of Standard Chartered Capital Markets,
>>told
>>the newspaper that Heathrow faces stiff competition from rival transport
>>hubs.
>
>>"There are lots of people who will fly through Amsterdam, Paris or
>>Frankfurt
>>or do almost anything to avoid a Heathrow connection if they can," he
>>said.
>
> Right on - time to teach those stupid managers of Heathrow a lesson.
>
> Why are they not being fired, and even prosecuted for their negligence?
>
de news:[email protected]...
> Media worldwide have been reporting on the many THOUSANDS of
> pieces of luggage now being lost daily at Heathrow!!
>
> How do the airport authority plan on improving service?
>
> Or, do they still get their exorbitant pay even though they are
> obviously incompetent?
>
> With all this bad publicity, passengers will sooner go to Manchester, or
> even
> Schiphol/Amsterdam, and then take a train, if they must go to London!!
>
> Forget about people coming for the Olympics - it won't be happening.
>
>
> On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 17:19:01 +0200, Earl Evleth <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Londoners fear misery at Heathrow with drive away visitors
>
>> The Associated Press
>>Wednesday, August 1, 2007
>
>>LONDON: London's ambition to overtake New York as the world's pre-eminent
>>city faces a big obstacle: its gateway, Heathrow Airport, is enough to
>>make
>>visitors feel like flying home before they even see Big Ben, Buckingham
>>Palace, or the financial superhub known as the City.
>
>>Notorious security checks, a labyrinthine layout, and shoddy service
>>combine
>>to form the "Heathrow Hassle."
>
>>With fears mounting of chaos when the city hosts the Olympics in 2012,
>>government officials and business figures are calling for urgent
>>improvements at the world's third-busiest airport.
>
>>In the past week, Heathrow has come under a barrage of criticism.
>
>>London Mayor Ken Livingstone called it a "shame" on London. A junior
>>government minister claims the airport is so infuriating that it could
>>hurt
>>London's business prospects. And a business executive remarked that some
>>people will do anything to avoid flying through Heathrow.
>
>>The airport once was a name that evoked the jet-set allure of
>>international
>>travel. In recent years, however, it's become associated more with
>>complaints about crowded terminals, long shuffles through security and
>>passport lines, lost luggage and a depressing decor.
>
>>The hammering began with news that Heathrow would seek a broad injunction
>>against protests planned at the airport for mid-August by groups opposed
>>to
>>plans to build a third runway, which opponents say would severely increase
>>noise and air pollution.
>
>>Green groups said the injunction was so broad that it would allow police
>>to
>>detain potential protesters not just at the airport but on parts of the
>>London Underground and railway network and sections of highways near
>>Heathrow.
>
>>"This is the mother of all injunctions. We've long known the airport
>>operators to be arrogant, but trying to ban 5 million people from coming
>>near them is conceited even by their standards," said John Stewart, the
>>chairman of the Hacan group that opposes the new runway.
>
>>Livingstone was livid.
>
>>"Someone there must be out their skull," the outspoken mayor said Tuesday,
>>referring to officials at the British Airports Authority, which runs
>>Heathrow and London's other two airports, Gatwick and Stansted.
>
>>"What BAA has done is guarantee massive coverage of what was going to be a
>>minor encampment."
>
>
> Now all the world, not just the Brits know all about the serious problems
> at
> Heathrow.
>
>>Livingstone didn't limit his criticism to the protest row.
>
>>"Certainly Heathrow does shame London. It is typical of the English
>>short-termism, lack of planning, lack of investment," he said.
>
>>"Its quite clear the current management, and management before them,
>>thought
>>they could keep people almost as prisoner in this ghastly shopping mall so
>>they can extract vast sums of money from them while they wait in appalling
>>conditions."
>
> And you though airports in Canada and the US are awful.
> When even the mayor must criticise the management, then you know
> conditions
> are woefully substandard.
>
> This is supposed to be Britain, not Russia.
>
>>A spokeswoman for BAA said the airport has been plagued by the lengthy
>>legal
>>and planning process required for improvements. For example, the airport's
>>nearly completed fifth terminal was held up for 20 years by red tape.
>
>>Terminal 5 is to open in March and will allow the airport to raise its
>>annual passenger capacity by 30 million, said the spokeswoman, who spoke
>>on
>>customary condition of anonymity.
>
>>Heathrow was designed to serve about 45 million passengers a year but now
>>sees around 68 million.
>
>>BAA also plans refurbishments, new inter-terminal transports and other
>>projects it says will make Heathrow a new airport by the 2012 Summer
>>Games.
>
>>But Economics Secretary Kitty Ussher warned this week that the airport's
>>hassles could discourage business.
>
> No doubt about it - customers will soon be BOYCOTTING Heathrow!!
>
>>"I don't want New York or Dubai executives saying 'Oh God, I don't want to
>>go through Heathrow,'" she was quoted as saying in The Financial Times.
>
> Already people are saying this, and passing on this advice to others.
>
>>Sir Thomas Harris, vice chairman of Standard Chartered Capital Markets,
>>told
>>the newspaper that Heathrow faces stiff competition from rival transport
>>hubs.
>
>>"There are lots of people who will fly through Amsterdam, Paris or
>>Frankfurt
>>or do almost anything to avoid a Heathrow connection if they can," he
>>said.
>
> Right on - time to teach those stupid managers of Heathrow a lesson.
>
> Why are they not being fired, and even prosecuted for their negligence?
>
Aug 5th 2007 | 11:47 am
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: scRunge is a waste of air, but yammers on!
On 8/2/2007 1:41 PM Runge3 jumped down, turned around, and wrote:
>
You need to be dipped in oil and deep-fried.
>
You need to be dipped in oil and deep-fried.
Aug 17th 2007 | 11:15 pm
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Londoners fear misery at Heathrow will drive away visitors - Time to BOYCOTT Heat
On Aug 17, 3:43 pm, Jim McCarthy <[email protected]>
wrote:
> You must be a braindead cretin, that you fail to realise that many. many
> readers of the ng are travellers to Europe, many through Heathrow!!
>
> Of course they are interested in all the problems with Heathrow.
>
Not really. Flights through Heathrow are generally a bit cheaper than
those using other airports. And that is all that matters, isn't it?
wrote:
> You must be a braindead cretin, that you fail to realise that many. many
> readers of the ng are travellers to Europe, many through Heathrow!!
>
> Of course they are interested in all the problems with Heathrow.
>
Not really. Flights through Heathrow are generally a bit cheaper than
those using other airports. And that is all that matters, isn't it?
Aug 18th 2007 | 1:34 pm
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Londoners fear misery at Heathrow will drive away visitors -
On 8/18/2007 4:15 AM [email protected] jumped down, turned around,
and wrote:
> On Aug 17, 3:43 pm, Jim McCarthy <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> You must be a braindead cretin, that you fail to realise that many. many
>> readers of the ng are travellers to Europe, many through Heathrow!!
>>
>> Of course they are interested in all the problems with Heathrow.
>>
> Not really. Flights through Heathrow are generally a bit cheaper than
> those using other airports. And that is all that matters, isn't it?
Eh? Given that the likes of Ryanair and easyJet don't even operate out
of Heathrow, that's not generally true. Heathrow is the biggest of
London's five metro-area airports, and has (well, had) the capacity to
handle the big jets, as can be seen by all the 747s parked at the
terminals. But flights to Gatwick can be, and often are, cheaper, and
for flights to the Continent, Luton, Stansted, and Gatwick are often
much cheaper alternatives than Heathrow.
--
dgs
and wrote:
> On Aug 17, 3:43 pm, Jim McCarthy <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> You must be a braindead cretin, that you fail to realise that many. many
>> readers of the ng are travellers to Europe, many through Heathrow!!
>>
>> Of course they are interested in all the problems with Heathrow.
>>
> Not really. Flights through Heathrow are generally a bit cheaper than
> those using other airports. And that is all that matters, isn't it?
Eh? Given that the likes of Ryanair and easyJet don't even operate out
of Heathrow, that's not generally true. Heathrow is the biggest of
London's five metro-area airports, and has (well, had) the capacity to
handle the big jets, as can be seen by all the 747s parked at the
terminals. But flights to Gatwick can be, and often are, cheaper, and
for flights to the Continent, Luton, Stansted, and Gatwick are often
much cheaper alternatives than Heathrow.
--
dgs
Aug 18th 2007 | 11:16 pm
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Londoners fear misery at Heathrow will drive away visitors - Time to BOYCOTT Heat
"d.g.s." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 8/18/2007 4:15 AM [email protected] jumped down, turned around, and
> wrote:
>
>> On Aug 17, 3:43 pm, Jim McCarthy <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>> You must be a braindead cretin, that you fail to realise that many. many
>>> readers of the ng are travellers to Europe, many through Heathrow!!
>>>
>>> Of course they are interested in all the problems with Heathrow.
>>>
>> Not really. Flights through Heathrow are generally a bit cheaper than
>> those using other airports. And that is all that matters, isn't it?
>
> Eh? Given that the likes of Ryanair and easyJet don't even operate out
> of Heathrow, that's not generally true.
It is if you want to travel a long way.
Ryanair and Easyjet don't even cross the Atlantic, never mind do the long
trips to Asia.
If you are flying 'long haul' then Heathrow is significantly cheaper.
--
William Black
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.
news:[email protected]...
> On 8/18/2007 4:15 AM [email protected] jumped down, turned around, and
> wrote:
>
>> On Aug 17, 3:43 pm, Jim McCarthy <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>> You must be a braindead cretin, that you fail to realise that many. many
>>> readers of the ng are travellers to Europe, many through Heathrow!!
>>>
>>> Of course they are interested in all the problems with Heathrow.
>>>
>> Not really. Flights through Heathrow are generally a bit cheaper than
>> those using other airports. And that is all that matters, isn't it?
>
> Eh? Given that the likes of Ryanair and easyJet don't even operate out
> of Heathrow, that's not generally true.
It is if you want to travel a long way.
Ryanair and Easyjet don't even cross the Atlantic, never mind do the long
trips to Asia.
If you are flying 'long haul' then Heathrow is significantly cheaper.
--
William Black
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.
Aug 19th 2007 | 3:54 am
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Londoners fear misery at Heathrow will drive away visitors - Time to BOYCOTT Heat
"William Black" <[email protected]> wrote t...
>
>
> If you are flying 'long haul' then Heathrow is significantly cheaper.
>
>
Only lately have I had access to direct service into LHR from DFW, since AA
was exiled to Gatwick. For me and several millions of others hereabouts,
flights to GTW were usually cheaper than service to LHR. Non-stop they were
quicker, and DFW's an hour closer driving that IAH.
TMO
>
>
> If you are flying 'long haul' then Heathrow is significantly cheaper.
>
>
Only lately have I had access to direct service into LHR from DFW, since AA
was exiled to Gatwick. For me and several millions of others hereabouts,
flights to GTW were usually cheaper than service to LHR. Non-stop they were
quicker, and DFW's an hour closer driving that IAH.
TMO
Aug 19th 2007 | 5:56 am
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Londoners fear misery at Heathrow will drive away visitors - Time to BOYCOTT Heat
"TMOliver" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "William Black" <[email protected]> wrote t...
>>
>>
>> If you are flying 'long haul' then Heathrow is significantly cheaper.
>>
>>
> Only lately have I had access to direct service into LHR from DFW, since
> AA was exiled to Gatwick. For me and several millions of others
> hereabouts, flights to GTW were usually cheaper than service to LHR.
> Non-stop they were quicker, and DFW's an hour closer driving that IAH.
>
Flights to the USA from the UK are odd.
For a start there are an awful lot of them to a variety of airports in the
USA, but from very few airports in the UK. I can fly direct to Philadelphia
or Atlanta from Manchester, but not New York or Dallas, (well, I can get
to Newark, which is actually worse for me than a change and onwards to JFK)
for reasons that have nothing to do with anything very much
I can fly to the Middle East and onwards to Asia from just about everywhere
in the UK (This year it looks like it'll be from Newcastle) but if I want to
fly to the USA I have to use either one of the London airports or
Manchester, and the London airports are significantly cheaper.
It's going to get worse when the A380 starts carrying passengers because I
don't think there's a provincial airport in the UK that can take one, and
with the possible exception of Manchester I don't think there's a provincial
airport that can actually handle that many passengers in an hour or so, and
what the immigration queues at Heathrow will be like when one comes in I
hate to imagine, it already take us almost an hour to get through if we're
at the back of the queue...
But, to get to the point, I don't think it's possible for you to fly
direct to a UK provincial airport, and it isn't possible for me to fly
direct to New York (JFK) from a UK provincial airport, for reasons that
have nothing to do with the level of business available for such flights.
And yet, for some reason, flights to JFK from Heathrow are cheaper...
Odd init...
--
William Black
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.
news:[email protected]...
>
> "William Black" <[email protected]> wrote t...
>>
>>
>> If you are flying 'long haul' then Heathrow is significantly cheaper.
>>
>>
> Only lately have I had access to direct service into LHR from DFW, since
> AA was exiled to Gatwick. For me and several millions of others
> hereabouts, flights to GTW were usually cheaper than service to LHR.
> Non-stop they were quicker, and DFW's an hour closer driving that IAH.
>
Flights to the USA from the UK are odd.
For a start there are an awful lot of them to a variety of airports in the
USA, but from very few airports in the UK. I can fly direct to Philadelphia
or Atlanta from Manchester, but not New York or Dallas, (well, I can get
to Newark, which is actually worse for me than a change and onwards to JFK)
for reasons that have nothing to do with anything very much
I can fly to the Middle East and onwards to Asia from just about everywhere
in the UK (This year it looks like it'll be from Newcastle) but if I want to
fly to the USA I have to use either one of the London airports or
Manchester, and the London airports are significantly cheaper.
It's going to get worse when the A380 starts carrying passengers because I
don't think there's a provincial airport in the UK that can take one, and
with the possible exception of Manchester I don't think there's a provincial
airport that can actually handle that many passengers in an hour or so, and
what the immigration queues at Heathrow will be like when one comes in I
hate to imagine, it already take us almost an hour to get through if we're
at the back of the queue...
But, to get to the point, I don't think it's possible for you to fly
direct to a UK provincial airport, and it isn't possible for me to fly
direct to New York (JFK) from a UK provincial airport, for reasons that
have nothing to do with the level of business available for such flights.
And yet, for some reason, flights to JFK from Heathrow are cheaper...
Odd init...
--
William Black
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.
Aug 19th 2007 | 6:16 am
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Londoners fear misery at Heathrow will drive away visitors - Time to BOYCOTT Heat
"William Black" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:lv%[email protected]...
>
> "TMOliver" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "William Black" <[email protected]> wrote t...
>>>
>>
>
> Flights to the USA from the UK are odd.
>
> For a start there are an awful lot of them to a variety of airports in the
> USA, but from very few airports in the UK. I can fly direct to
> Philadelphia or Atlanta from Manchester, but not New York or Dallas,
> (well, I can get to Newark, which is actually worse for me than a change
> and onwards to JFK) for reasons that have nothing to do with anything very
> much
>
BA fly from Manchester direct to JFK and BMI fly direct from Manchester to
Chicago (and Las Vegas?)
news:lv%[email protected]...
>
> "TMOliver" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "William Black" <[email protected]> wrote t...
>>>
>>
>
> Flights to the USA from the UK are odd.
>
> For a start there are an awful lot of them to a variety of airports in the
> USA, but from very few airports in the UK. I can fly direct to
> Philadelphia or Atlanta from Manchester, but not New York or Dallas,
> (well, I can get to Newark, which is actually worse for me than a change
> and onwards to JFK) for reasons that have nothing to do with anything very
> much
>
BA fly from Manchester direct to JFK and BMI fly direct from Manchester to
Chicago (and Las Vegas?)
