London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old September 23rd 19, 11:37 AM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2019
Posts: 303
Default Heathrow CC

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



  #2   Report Post  
Old September 23rd 19, 11:56 AM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,809
Default Heathrow CC

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
  #3   Report Post  
Old September 23rd 19, 12:06 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2019
Posts: 303
Default Heathrow CC

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.

  #4   Report Post  
Old September 23rd 19, 12:15 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jun 2019
Posts: 126
Default Heathrow CC

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.

  #5   Report Post  
Old September 23rd 19, 02:07 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,809
Default Heathrow CC

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


  #6   Report Post  
Old September 23rd 19, 02:58 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,271
Default Heathrow CC

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
  #7   Report Post  
Old September 23rd 19, 03:06 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jan 2011
Posts: 463
Default Heathrow CC

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.
  #8   Report Post  
Old September 23rd 19, 03:27 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,809
Default Heathrow CC

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
  #9   Report Post  
Old September 23rd 19, 03:58 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2019
Posts: 303
Default Heathrow CC

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.
  #10   Report Post  
Old September 23rd 19, 04:04 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2019
Posts: 303
Default Heathrow CC

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.


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 08:27 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 London Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about London Transport"

 

Copyright © 2017