London City Airport stops construction on its £170m terminal expansion

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.

• Jay says:

  14 Aug14 August 05:22

  So sensible. Government need to do the same with HS2.

  • J says:

    14 Aug14 August 06:49

    Other European countries have been benefiting for literally decades from a vast network of high speed rail. As in so many other areas the UK looks increasingly backward. Cancelling it would be a terrible mistake.

    • Andrew says:

      14 Aug14 August 09:49

      Other countries are far bigger. Paris to Nice for example takes around 6 hours with the TGV. London to Edinburgh can be done in 4:30 hr even with our ‘slow’ trains.

      The real benefit of HS2 is in freeing up capacity on the existing commuter routes but there are probably cheaper ways that could have been done.

      • RussellH says:

        14 Aug14 August 12:28

        No, no cheaper way of doing it. New build is much cheaper, quicker, and simpler than trying to expand existing infrastructure that is in use while you are trying to work around that.

      • ChrisC says:

        14 Aug14 August 14:19

        “but there are probably cheaper ways that could have been done.”

        They looked at all the possible options and that included widening the right of way to add extra tracks to the side (often not geographically possible or if it is would require massive building works anyway) or to build a viaduct over the existing lines and put tracks on that but that would cause even more disruption with extended line closures at night and weekends and every bank holiday for who knows how many years.

        The signaling is already the best it can be on the line and it would only be possible to add extra trains by reducing the clearance between trains which would mean reduced speeds which would increase journey times.

        So what ways would you suggest?

        • Paul Pogba says:

          14 Aug14 August 22:48

          There is still capacity potential on the chiltern line (it’s not even electrified) and in any case the Teams meeting revolution means we may never need extra capacity.

  • Spursdebs says:

    14 Aug14 August 07:27

    If only, there’s loads of HS2 work going on in Bucks.

  • Rhys says:

    14 Aug14 August 07:48

    Won’t happen – the government is using giant infrastructure projects to try and stimulate the economy.

  • John says:

    14 Aug14 August 08:08

    The same? Well if the government does it they will spend millions on a study to see if it makes sense to pause the work. By the time the study is finished, it will conclude that the work was paused while the study was being undertaken and it is now time to start work again. Meanwhile contractors have been paid more millions to wait.

  • Andrew says:

    14 Aug14 August 08:33

    Definitely not.

    We saw the tragic consequences of relying on 150 year old earth banks, bridges and infrastructure to run a modern railway this week.

    It’s time to get a move on with HS2 and deliver a safe modern railway.

    • Chris says:

      14 Aug14 August 19:29

      Rail in Britain is already unbelievably safe, perhaps even too safe given the huge cost.

  • TGLoyalty says:

    14 Aug14 August 09:15

    Completely disagree. The cost keeps increasing because they spent years talking about it. Time to get it done.

    I think this plan to stop construction at LCY is short term thinking that will come back to bite them in the future.

  • NorksSaint says:

    14 Aug14 August 09:57

    The only shame with HS2 is that it doesn’t directly run through LHR – a huge missed opportunity to start to join up infrastructure like every other European country!
    Completely agree that we should just get on and build the thing and more like it, i suspect in 25 yrs we wont sit here and debate whether it was a good idea, we’ll know it was, much like the constant discussion around 3rd Runway at LHR and Terminal 5 back in the day.

    It really is time this country put itself on the front foot of things. If some people had their way we’d still be debating the Twyford cutting on the M3 and the Newbury by-pass for the A34.

    • ChrisC says:

      14 Aug14 August 14:26

      I belive it didn’t pass the cost benefit analysis test plus it would have added journey times to/from Euston.

      There will be lots of connections from HS2 and the GWR line to the south west and crossrail o Heathrow at Old Oak Common Station

    • Mikeact says:

      14 Aug14 August 20:25

      I remember the last two very well, the traffic lights at Twyford, and I wonder how many of the A34 protesters now drive through Newbury….none of them of course…idiots.

• Dubious says:

  14 Aug14 August 06:30

  The new parallel taxiway and parking stands should help with aircraft efficiency too – less need to batch up three departures followed by three arrivals at a time which opens up more flexibility in the schedules.

• William Wood says:

  14 Aug14 August 08:13

  Off topic-
  It seems that BA and possibly others are cancelling domestic flights from time to time which means that those relying on them to reach London for onward travel are in a risky position. Not only would they miss the onward flight but overseas hotel accommodation booked would be prejudiced. Any comment?

  • Andrew says:

    14 Aug14 August 08:47

    BA have always cancelled domestic flights from time to time.

    They are the first to be cancelled when there is weather problems or other capacity issues at Heathrow. They are usually pretty good at rerouting. Wouldn’t be the first time I’ve:-

    Been put in a fast black to Glasgow
    Made the dash to Waverley
    Rerouted via American
    Or even grabbed a £1 one way hire car and driven to Heathrow.

    Obviously there are fewer onward flights too at the moment.

    What’s your biggest risk and concern about “prejudiced bookings”?

    Hotels are a core part of the travel industry, you won’t be the first person who has called them to tell them you’re not going to arrive until the next morning.

  • Lady London says:

    14 Aug14 August 13:44

    Eu261 duty of care still applies so airline is responsible for hotels and rerouting

• Froggitt says:

  14 Aug14 August 09:19

  Get back to it when traffic picks up, those foundations aren’t going anywhere……

• mr_jetlag says:

  14 Aug14 August 09:45

  Makes sense – the funds being committed, means that the facility can be drawn on whenever traffic (and cashflow) return to reasonable levels.

  • Rob says:

    14 Aug14 August 10:14

    Except that, as the article states, we were already looking at 3 years until completion. Come 2023/4/5, the number of flights will be FAR above what it was in 2019 due to the new taxiway and parking gates but there will be no extra terminal capacity. There may even be less depending on how much of the existing place has to be shut to let the work get finished.

  • AJA says:

    14 Aug14 August 10:29

    It’s a shame they can’t do the construction work now while there are fewer passengers which would reduce disruption but I think it’s understandable to put it on hold. Let’s hope the economy and demand returns soon.

    • Lady London says:

      14 Aug14 August 13:48

      the only reason not to do it now seems to be they would have to pay interest on the funds as they are drawn at a time revenue is thin.

      If you believe in the City of London then they should be using this opportunity to get that expansion built now. Very shortsighted to suspend works now. I can only think their owners decided they are not willing to stand up to the short-term cashflow implications.

      • mr_jetlag says:

        14 Aug14 August 20:42

        Yes this was my interpretation as well. Line fees (unfunded) are typically 0.25% vs whatever the loan or bond interest would be. Rob’s point about traffic returning in the medium term is irrelevant if debt servicing kills the business…

  • Jordan D says:

    14 Aug14 August 11:28

    Shame because the expanded terminal (if memory serves) had to be completed before other infra improvements, like the car park, were to be completed. As others have said, shame they can’t do more now, when disruption will be less. I doubt they will be able to react quick enough when things do pick up.

• Nick says:

  14 Aug14 August 10:07

  ‘68,000 square meters’… what, the airport is being constructed out of old electricity meters or something??

  Ohhh, maybe you mean ‘metres’?

  Literacy is important.

  • Rob says:

    14 Aug14 August 10:10

    Rhys has spent a lot of time in the US though 🙂

    You should have seen the changes I needed to make to Anika’s flight review this week to remove all references to diapers etc ….!

    • planeconcorde says:

      14 Aug14 August 11:19

      “stroller” wasn’t changed to “push chair” though. 😉

      • RussellH says:

        14 Aug14 August 13:11

        Which I had to think about for a few seconds too, even though I lived in the US for three years.
        I would guess that diaper is a word that the English are far more familiar with than stoller, proably because stroller means something else in English, wheras diaper is an imported word.

        • Andrew says:

          14 Aug14 August 15:37

          Nope

          Diaper is the original old English word, even Shakespeare used it.

          English evolved and moved down the route of nappy, whilst the US stuck with ye olde English and still use Diaper.

          My colleague, a native Frog, insists on speaking English on his regular academic vists to Montreal as according to him they “speak 19th century French”.

        • RussellH says:

          14 Aug14 August 19:46

          Ah, did not know that.
          So it fits with pitcher and gotten as archaisims here, but still standard American.
          [I once was appealed to in my teaching days by a pupil from London who had had his work marked down by my American colleague fior writing 'had got' instead of 'had gotten'. It took me around five minutes to convince my colleague - and still friend, 40+ years later, that we had not said 'gooten' in the UK for a few hundred year.]

        • John says:

          15 Aug15 August 07:34

          Ye is a misspelling and mispronunciation of þe.

      • Peter North says:

        14 Aug14 August 13:24

        It’s called the Queens English for a reason.

        Whether your a queen or not!

        • Irons80 says:

          14 Aug14 August 14:22

          *You’re* not great at the Queen’s English judging by your standards of grammar, so I wouldn’t comment!

    • C says:

      14 Aug14 August 11:56

      And some of us who are [US] American but our long-term UK residents with UK baby vocabulary from the UK completely confuse everyone. Or I find they just think that we’re Canadian.

      • C says:

        14 Aug14 August 11:57

        Edited: And some of us who are [US] American but our long-term UK residents with UK baby vocabulary completely confuse everyone. Or I find they just think that we’re Canadian.

  • RussellH says:

    14 Aug14 August 13:19

    I have often wondered why we apparently adopted the French spelling metre rather than the gern Meter.
    Nevertheless it is a useful distinction to be able to make between the SI until of length and a measuring device.
    Just as it is useful to have both programme (TV, radio, etc.) and program (software).
    I am pleased that Rob did edit Anika’s article – I wish UK newspapers reporting on the upcoming US presidential election would edit the American “mail-in ballot” to “postal vote”

    • ChrisC says:

      15 Aug15 August 09:13

      It distinguishes between two types of vote so it’s correct.

      An absentee ballot (which is still a postal vote) has to be requested by an individual whereas a mail in ballot (yes which is also a postal vote) refers to when the state sends them out to all registered voters.

      Apparently in one persons mind (and that of some of his supporters) the first is absolutely fine but the second is the work of the devil!

• Tony says:

  14 Aug14 August 12:20

  HS2 needs to be completed.
  My only gripe is why oh why did it not start at LHR?

  • RussellH says:

    14 Aug14 August 13:04

    Becaue the majority of the traffic will be people travelling to / from London, not LHR.

    AIUI, the original plans were for it to run via LHR, when they started to look at the additional cost (LHR is not on any sensible route to the north) and the extra journey time for the majority of the passengers who have no interest in LHR it made much more sense to have a decent, modern interchange at Old Oak Common where you will be able to pick up a train to LHR easily.

  • Bagoly says:

    14 Aug14 August 20:00

    Even better, start at Ashford International, and go via Gatwick and Heathrow on the way to Birmingham.
    Further north the plans do go to all of BHX, MAN, and EMA.

• The Savage Squirrel says:

  14 Aug14 August 13:49

  Looks a massively short-sighted delay given that we’re building this for demand in 2023-2043, not today.

  Having said that, cashflow is king and if you’ve worked out you needthat liquid cash to pay bills right now, then there isn’t much choice.

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.