Drivers face paying congestion charge at LHR...
Thread Starter
Drivers face paying congestion charge at LHR...
From today's Sunday Times:
"Drivers face paying congestion charge at Heathrow
Dipesh Gadher,Transport Correspondent
PASSENGERS arriving at Heathrow by car face paying a congestion charge under proposals being considered by the government to tackle traffic pollution at Britain’s biggest airport.
The charge would affect thousands of motorists entering a fixed cordon around Heathrow, possibly including the main spur road that links it to the M4 motorway. Ministers hope that the move will encourage more people to travel to the airport by public transport, with money from the new levy likely to be used to upgrade existing rail and bus facilities.
Without this shift in travel patterns, the government fears that it will be unable to meet a stringent European Union emissions cap that comes into effect in 2010 and has the potential to delay plans to build a third runway at Heathrow.
Proposals for the congestion charge are outlined in documents released by the Department for Transport last week under the Freedom of Information Act. The documents relate to the meetings of a stakeholder group examining access to the west London airport.
They reveal how the group — which includes officials from the transport department and executives at the British Airports Authority, the owner of Heathrow — has commissioned Sinclair Knight Merz, a leading consultancy, to forecast the impact of different charges on traffic levels.
Although Alistair Darling, the transport secretary, has backed a national road pricing scheme, the satellite-based technology needed for such an ambitious project would not be available until 2015 at the earliest, according to a government feasibility study.
However, a localised scheme — similar to that already operating in central London — would be possible to implement much sooner at Heathrow."
Now, before the moderators banish this to the 'Passengers and SLF' forum, I'd point out that this will probably affect crews far more than passengers. It's bad enough having to travel from that overpriced bus station masquerading as an airport, but for those who live nowhere near a rail station, to have to pay for the government's abject failure of a transport policy would be totally absurd.
Let's say I land at 2000 at T2. If the flight is on time that is. Which is rare at LHR. I'm then supposed to trudge over to T3, wait for a bus to Reading at 2107, then catch the last train (if it's on time) from Reading at 2220 to my country railway station, arriving at 2256 then try to find a taxi (the last bus is at 2236 - how typical of non-integrated transport policies) to finish the journey, arriving home if I'm lucky at around 2315.
Err, no. I will, of course, still use my car despite the high parking charges and the thieving taxation of this government - and be home by about 2130.
Or preferably, bin Thiefrow altogether and use the infinitely more passenger-friendly BHX!
"Drivers face paying congestion charge at Heathrow
Dipesh Gadher,Transport Correspondent
PASSENGERS arriving at Heathrow by car face paying a congestion charge under proposals being considered by the government to tackle traffic pollution at Britain’s biggest airport.
The charge would affect thousands of motorists entering a fixed cordon around Heathrow, possibly including the main spur road that links it to the M4 motorway. Ministers hope that the move will encourage more people to travel to the airport by public transport, with money from the new levy likely to be used to upgrade existing rail and bus facilities.
Without this shift in travel patterns, the government fears that it will be unable to meet a stringent European Union emissions cap that comes into effect in 2010 and has the potential to delay plans to build a third runway at Heathrow.
Proposals for the congestion charge are outlined in documents released by the Department for Transport last week under the Freedom of Information Act. The documents relate to the meetings of a stakeholder group examining access to the west London airport.
They reveal how the group — which includes officials from the transport department and executives at the British Airports Authority, the owner of Heathrow — has commissioned Sinclair Knight Merz, a leading consultancy, to forecast the impact of different charges on traffic levels.
Although Alistair Darling, the transport secretary, has backed a national road pricing scheme, the satellite-based technology needed for such an ambitious project would not be available until 2015 at the earliest, according to a government feasibility study.
However, a localised scheme — similar to that already operating in central London — would be possible to implement much sooner at Heathrow."
Now, before the moderators banish this to the 'Passengers and SLF' forum, I'd point out that this will probably affect crews far more than passengers. It's bad enough having to travel from that overpriced bus station masquerading as an airport, but for those who live nowhere near a rail station, to have to pay for the government's abject failure of a transport policy would be totally absurd.
Let's say I land at 2000 at T2. If the flight is on time that is. Which is rare at LHR. I'm then supposed to trudge over to T3, wait for a bus to Reading at 2107, then catch the last train (if it's on time) from Reading at 2220 to my country railway station, arriving at 2256 then try to find a taxi (the last bus is at 2236 - how typical of non-integrated transport policies) to finish the journey, arriving home if I'm lucky at around 2315.
Err, no. I will, of course, still use my car despite the high parking charges and the thieving taxation of this government - and be home by about 2130.
Or preferably, bin Thiefrow altogether and use the infinitely more passenger-friendly BHX!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Under the clag EGKA
Posts: 1,028
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has got to be a wind up but I quite like the idea. Calm down and hear me out. Ok it is a lunatic idea but raising the question adds another facet to the expansion debate. For my part I think that expanding south eastern capacity is short sighted. We need to reduce the lunacy of transporting thousands of PAX daily overland from north UK to get to Stansted, Heathrow and Gatwick. Expanding northern airports would reduce ground traffic, reduce local pollution in the south and improve the chances of economic regeneration in the north. Maybe then Prescot wouldn't need to concerte over the south east.
Thread Starter
I agree that expanding Thiefrow is absurd - it's just red car theory:
Why do you make red cars?
Because more people buy them.
Why do you buy a red car?
Because there's little alternative.
People only travel from LHR because there are few alternatives - not necessarily because they want to!
There should be NO further expansion of LHR until not just the northern airports, but ALL UK regional airports are encouraged to expand at least within their current capacity.
Why do you make red cars?
Because more people buy them.
Why do you buy a red car?
Because there's little alternative.
People only travel from LHR because there are few alternatives - not necessarily because they want to!
There should be NO further expansion of LHR until not just the northern airports, but ALL UK regional airports are encouraged to expand at least within their current capacity.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Fleetwood
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am all for the expansion of regionals! Personally I need to travel from Fleetwood to Northern Ireland. The only flying option for me is LPL or MAN both about 60 mile drive. Ryanair does have daily flights to Dublin from EGNH but that entails a 90 mile drve at the other end.
Its a pity none of the Low Cost Airlines do a route to Northern Ireland from Blackpool. I often wonder why that is.
Is it a low perceived passenger yield or a lack of understanding of demographics?
I think its down to passengers telling the airlines that they want to travel to and from local airports and airlines asking passengers what they want too.
Knowing where your passengers are starting their journey and ending their journey could help the airlines plan more passenger friendly routes
Its not just legislation that makes policy, but market worth unfortunately.
Its a pity none of the Low Cost Airlines do a route to Northern Ireland from Blackpool. I often wonder why that is.
Is it a low perceived passenger yield or a lack of understanding of demographics?
I think its down to passengers telling the airlines that they want to travel to and from local airports and airlines asking passengers what they want too.
Knowing where your passengers are starting their journey and ending their journey could help the airlines plan more passenger friendly routes
Its not just legislation that makes policy, but market worth unfortunately.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couple of years back, company I worked for in a cost saving frenzy put in place a rule that only Public Transport be used to get to the airport (usually Heathrow).
One week later 16 people turned up at an office in Milan at 4:30pm Monday having missed most of the days work as no PT ran early enough to get the first flight out.
Management got the message. Said rule was rescinded that week.
One week later 16 people turned up at an office in Milan at 4:30pm Monday having missed most of the days work as no PT ran early enough to get the first flight out.
Management got the message. Said rule was rescinded that week.
I've only made a few posts so I don't feel the need to order a Personal Title and help support PPRuNe
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why does every thread on here have to have the 'diverters' crawl out of their holes? 
This thread 'was' about a traffic congestion charge being proposed around LHR and it's now hijacked by SLF complaining about the lack of choice between MAN and LPL to Belfast!
I do wish that posters would consider debating the topic, which in this case was aimed at the problems crew who use LHR would have if they had to rely on public transport to get to and from LHR for work. It's not about having a whinge that BHX or MAN are under utilised... or that there should be a new airport at Fleetwood! 
This thread 'was' about a traffic congestion charge being proposed around LHR and it's now hijacked by SLF complaining about the lack of choice between MAN and LPL to Belfast!
I do wish that posters would consider debating the topic, which in this case was aimed at the problems crew who use LHR would have if they had to rely on public transport to get to and from LHR for work. It's not about having a whinge that BHX or MAN are under utilised... or that there should be a new airport at Fleetwood!
Thought this 20 years ago . Why doesn't BA for example run a Johannesburg or Sydney etc from Manchester - I wonder what the percentage factor is , divided north/south - ish . Even a Cape Town could be split with South Afican between Heathrow and Manchester ie. Mon BA Heathrow SA Manchester and Tue. vv. They would still have the daily flight .
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: out of a suitcase
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The truth is that this inept bunch of car hating wasters that the Great British public voted in at the last general election will in cahoots with the loony mayor of London continue to try and price private motorists off the roads by any means they think we will accept. By the 1970`s public transport became almost redundant in many parts of the UK because people realised that they could travel where and when they wanted in comfort and privacy in other words they made their own choices! this is a concept that successive Labour governments have hated (as in their view the nanny state knows best). With the advent of locos in the last few years people again made their choice, which was to fly instead of using dirty, old, unreliable, expensive trains so now we also have the possibility of ever increasing taxation on aviation to fund all sorts of schemes including the latest EU idea of taxing aviation fuel to fund developing nations !!!, my taxes are sorely needed in my own country rather than be given away elsewhere. Until the British people start to realise that unless they take a stand against this governments tax and waste policy of their wealth the picking of their pockets will continue with ever increasing regularity and expense.They will use a never ending string of lies and excuses to justify their attempts to control and restrict individual choice (unless of course you happen to be a Labour Cabinet minister in which case you have your very own private bus lane to use for your limo). It is possible to stand up to this government as the fuel blockade protests four years ago proved but unless we start to fight back soon we may be too late to prevent being priced out of our cars and aircraft
Lady Lexxington
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Manor House
Age: 44
Posts: 1,145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can sort of see the theory behind this latest crackpot idea from our friends in red. However there are a few small issues that must be dealt with first. For example I regularly fly MAN-LHR to see friends who live in sunbury, about 10-15mins away. Now, say I was to get there by public transport, I would just stay at home, because it is not possible, without eating into most of the day, I could grab a cab, but they would charge me £40 because, "it's out of the area guv". MADNESS
Put the public transport infrastructre in place to all areas then you can levy a congestion fee, but not before. Are they proposing to introduce this charge before 2012, back the bid, give the IOC more reasons not to, but that's a different thread.
Put the public transport infrastructre in place to all areas then you can levy a congestion fee, but not before. Are they proposing to introduce this charge before 2012, back the bid, give the IOC more reasons not to, but that's a different thread.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Manchester
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Same old story UK story. Offer no sensible public transport alternative and then penalise the driver for using their car.
effortless,
As for passengers from the North, as far as MAN goes, the transfer traffic via LHR gets less with every foreign carrier that flys in...
effortless,
As for passengers from the North, as far as MAN goes, the transfer traffic via LHR gets less with every foreign carrier that flys in...
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: out of a suitcase
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BUT WHY ANY LEVY MORE CHARGES??? motorists already pay significantly more in tax than is spent on the roads anyway, if the billions raised through these excessive motoring taxes were spent on transport instead of using to fund other areas totally unconnected to transport there would be no need to levy any extra unwarranted charges and I daresay fuel would be half the price too !!! Now we begin to see the same taxation trends with aviation too
Last edited by I.C.Nosignal; 20th Feb 2005 at 12:43.
PPRuNe Supporter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Devon, UK
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I first heard of this scheme (a couple of years ago) it was as a means of reducing the local air pollution in order that a third runway could be built. It was not designed to reduce road traffic per se, and is therefore not strictly speaking a congestion charge. As it lies at the confluence of 2 very busy motorways and is itself very busy, the air around Heathrow is full of pollutants, only some of which are from aircraft. The scheme was originally conceived as a way of promoting growth at Heathrow, not stifling it.
If, as I suspect, this measure is targeted at detering passengers (as opposed to those who work at the airport) from using their cars, I for one would support it so long as an adequate public transport system exists beforehand. This is not the case at present. It is not beyond the realms of possibility for staff to be given passes to enter the airport thus avoiding any charges. Whilst there will be problems, and injustices, and someone is bound to be worse off, and Black Cab drivers will say that they are the only essential vehicles at the airport, and some permit holders are bound to abuse the scheme etc etc, there is no reason to think that such a scheme would make it easier to get to work, not harder.
If, as I suspect, this measure is targeted at detering passengers (as opposed to those who work at the airport) from using their cars, I for one would support it so long as an adequate public transport system exists beforehand. This is not the case at present. It is not beyond the realms of possibility for staff to be given passes to enter the airport thus avoiding any charges. Whilst there will be problems, and injustices, and someone is bound to be worse off, and Black Cab drivers will say that they are the only essential vehicles at the airport, and some permit holders are bound to abuse the scheme etc etc, there is no reason to think that such a scheme would make it easier to get to work, not harder.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Fleetwood
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cargo Boy -
Sorry if you felt my post a diversion, but I was just trying to reinforce an earlier post who pointed out a valid reason for the traffic congestion at LHR and that is the seemingly lack of alternative starting points on flights. More flights originating at or finishing at LHR means more traffic. This in turn is exacerbated by a lack of alternative transport to and from the airport!
Alternative routes and departure points to similar destinations would help resolve the situation at LHR and hopefully curb the possibility of congestion charges as would decent tranport links - Bus/Rail etc.
No there never will be an airport at Fleetwood
Your apology for lambasting my post is accepted (not expecting one really)
Shan't bother on this thread again since I don't intend to use LHR.
Sorry if you felt my post a diversion, but I was just trying to reinforce an earlier post who pointed out a valid reason for the traffic congestion at LHR and that is the seemingly lack of alternative starting points on flights. More flights originating at or finishing at LHR means more traffic. This in turn is exacerbated by a lack of alternative transport to and from the airport!
Alternative routes and departure points to similar destinations would help resolve the situation at LHR and hopefully curb the possibility of congestion charges as would decent tranport links - Bus/Rail etc.
No there never will be an airport at Fleetwood
Your apology for lambasting my post is accepted
(not expecting one really)Shan't bother on this thread again since I don't intend to use LHR.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle
But crew will not have to rely on public transport to get to work, they will just have to pay the congestion charge fee along with the rest of us - and you could argue that someone on £100k is in a better position to pay than someone on £20K
I do wish that posters would consider debating the topic, which in this case was aimed at the problems crew who use LHR would have if they had to rely on public transport to get to and from LHR for work.
Thread Starter
The difference being that thay will have to pay almost every day, whereas passengers will only pay on the days they need to fly.
How many cabin crew are on £100K per annum?
If you are one of those rare people who live outside London and actually have a reliable public transport link, fine. But there are not many who fall into that category, much as fatty 2 Jags, Darling Alistair, Red Ken and all the other labour loonies might not realise. If I had a rail station within walking distance which connected directly to London Airport, then of course I'd take the train. But I don't - and the alternative of walking 1/2 a mile in the rain to the nearest bus stop, waiting for a crowded, uncomfortable bus to turn up, then taking nearly an hour to get to the airport coach from Oxford is a non-starter. And it'd be even worse coming back again....
So I shall continue to use my car and travel in comfort even if some labour loony tries to charge me for the privilege - that is, if I am obliged to use wretched Thiefrow. Normally I will use the far better airport at Birmingham.
How many cabin crew are on £100K per annum?
If you are one of those rare people who live outside London and actually have a reliable public transport link, fine. But there are not many who fall into that category, much as fatty 2 Jags, Darling Alistair, Red Ken and all the other labour loonies might not realise. If I had a rail station within walking distance which connected directly to London Airport, then of course I'd take the train. But I don't - and the alternative of walking 1/2 a mile in the rain to the nearest bus stop, waiting for a crowded, uncomfortable bus to turn up, then taking nearly an hour to get to the airport coach from Oxford is a non-starter. And it'd be even worse coming back again....
So I shall continue to use my car and travel in comfort even if some labour loony tries to charge me for the privilege - that is, if I am obliged to use wretched Thiefrow. Normally I will use the far better airport at Birmingham.
PPRuNe Supporter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Devon, UK
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The very first word of the report is PASSENGERS. That would suggest that it may be a targeted measure.
The notion is completely impractical at present because London and the surrounding area does not have a 24 hour transport system.
There would appear to be a lot of "it's all about me" and not a lot of what is good for the aviation industry. Would the aviation industry and Heathrow in particular benefit from the construction of a third runway? Debatable (but not here, start a new thread). But it will not get one unless something can be done about reducing air pollution in the area.
The notion is completely impractical at present because London and the surrounding area does not have a 24 hour transport system.
There would appear to be a lot of "it's all about me" and not a lot of what is good for the aviation industry. Would the aviation industry and Heathrow in particular benefit from the construction of a third runway? Debatable (but not here, start a new thread). But it will not get one unless something can be done about reducing air pollution in the area.