+ ON THE SOAPBOX: Chris Tarry

Gatwick Airport has been given the green light by the Secretary of State for Transport to develop its second runway.

The expansion could see the airport's new runway become operational by 2029 and is expected to accommodate up to 80 million passengers per annum and facilitate up to 100,000 more flights.

Gatwick's current north runway is too close for it to operate at the same time and is only used as a taxiway or for take-off and landings when its main runway cannot operate.

Plans therefore involve upgrading the airport's existing northern runway and moving it 12 metres north so both can operate simultaneously.

Additional development plans announced include improvements to taxiways, terminal extensions and support facilities, as well as upgrades to surrounding highways and waterways.

Stewart Wingate, VINCI Airports' Managing Director for the UK, said shareholders will fund the £2.2 billion project as he expects it to "unlock significant growth, tourism and trade benefits for London Gatwick and the UK and create thousands of jobs."

Our regular contributor Chris Tarry, Chair of the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport Aviation Policy Group had this to say.

“The award of the DCO for Gatwick is clearly a positive step in meeting the government’s objective to expand capacity in the London area. “On the basis of reasonable assumptions, including meeting the surface access targets it is likely to be available in the early part of the next decade.

"Importantly, the conditions on surface access rightly emphasise sustainable transport, and it is only fair that such requirements should also apply consistently to Heathrow, where current public transport use is lower.

“Whilst current and likely future traffic at the airport is likely to be almost all point to point, it is important to recognise that almost 80% of the traffic at Heathrow does not involve a connection where in the future the main sources of growth will be point to point and leisure.

“Over time the similarities in the markets served by the airports will further converge except in the case of cargo where Gatwick is unlikely to be a substitute.

“The likelihood that Gatwick’s additional capacity of 30 million can be added at a capital cost of £75 per passenger in 2025 prices (£2.2 billion/ 30 million), brings into sharp relief the cost of the proposed Heathrow developments which, on the same basis, suggest a cost of between £625 and £1,225 for each additional passenger.”

“The current debate and discussion over how the costs will be recovered for the and how much of this will be paid for by today’s passengers at Heathrow but where they will not benefit from the new facilities, let alone the impact on demand of a material increase in charges that will need to be passed through, is of fundamental importance.

“Despite the enthusiasm of the government, it is quite realistic to expect that the expansion of Heathrow will be delayed beyond the time periods so far indicated and further widen the gap between when the new capacity at Gatwick is available and when that at Heathrow might open.

“It also reinforces the need for the selected project at Heathrow to be fit for the actual demands of airlines and passengers and also to be affordable, something which is not yet entirely clear.” 

Chris Tarry heads up the CTAIR consultancy and continues with his regular column for Airline Business.  
www.ctaira.com   www.flightglobal.com 

His comments first appeared on the CILT (Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport) website.
https://ciltinternational.org

Index/Home page
 

READERS' COMMENT

All comments are filtered to exclude any excesses but the Editor does not have to agree with what is being said. 200 words maximum

David Starkie,

I do wonder whether the persistence with the 3,500m runway is a cynical attempt to feed off the Governments desperation with the growth message, to obtain taxpayer funding. Otherwise Brad Burgess is spot-on. CASE ASSOCIATES

Brad Burgess, Ex MD City Flyer Express Gatwick

As ever, the government (and LHR) are determined to let the perfect be the enemy of the good (cf HS2). The 3500m runway will never get built whereas a shorter runway would have a better chance. At least LGW understands this going for a modest proposal that will happen rather than going for a full separation, full length runway which would never happen.