Airport expansions

[camflyer]

Similarly at Gatwick South - doorway to the left just after Fastrack security takes you the mezzanine level avoiding duty free.

But, yes, the duty free rat run is a global phenomenon

Woops - I meant Gatwick South (not enough coffee this morning). Of course there is no north and south at Stansted,.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Absolutely. At Edinburgh you have no choice, but to walk through the World Duty Free shop after clearing security!

At least with the duty free slalom everyone is (mostly) walking in the same direction and you can just put your head down and get through it.

At T5 the whole terminal is basically a duty free shop and everyone is funnelled through that narrow corridor. People end up walking in every direction through it, milling about, and so you can’t even just put your head down. Not unless you wanted to play a game of gormless tourist skittles.

 

[route101]

Oslo airport had a duty free store after Passport control but before baggage reclaim and customs. I have come across small duty free store on arrival but this was a big one.

 

[zero]

Oslo airport had a duty free store after Passport control but before baggage reclaim and customs. I have come across small duty free store on arrival but this was a big one.

Is that something to do with Norway not being in the EU?

 

[sh24]

Oslo airport had a duty free store after Passport control but before baggage reclaim and customs. I have come across small duty free store on arrival but this was a big one.

See also Istanbul which has huge duty free stores post immigration pre customs.

 

[TravelDream]

Oslo airport had a duty free store after Passport control but before baggage reclaim and customs. I have come across small duty free store on arrival but this was a big one.

It's getting more and more common nowadays I think. Stansted has one. Probably other airports too.

 

[Tetchytyke]

It's getting more and more common nowadays I think. Stansted has one. Probably other airports too.

The ones at Heathrow have been cut right back after the government changed the rules. You now have to physically take the goods out of the UK to benefit from duty free. It also means you can't buy on your way out and leave it for collection on your way back.

Other parts of the world embrace it still. The one in Dubai is enormous.

 

[Cloud Strife]

Is that something to do with Norway not being in the EU?

Yes, duty free on arrival isn't permitted in the EU, but Norway/Iceland/Switzerland all have it. It's because the EU sees duty free as being exclusively connected to departure as an export incentive, rather than as an import incentive.

There's a lot of lobbying towards changing this, but the EU has stood firm so far.

 

[Snow1964]

Goverment has released more documents and another consultation on Heathrow expansion.

Seem to be very good at issuing statements and consultations, even if actually putting spades in the ground and building something remains a dream

Heathrow Expansion National Policy Statement​

The draft Heathrow Expansion National Policy Statement (HENPS) provides the basis for decision making on any proposal to expand Heathrow. If finalised, the policies within it will have effect in relation to applications for development consent for a new Northwest Runway at Heathrow Airport.

Draft Heathrow Expansion National Policy Statement consultation​

The government is seeking views on proposed amendments to the Airports National Policy Statement (ANPS). This includes changing the name of the ANPS to the Heathrow Expansion National Policy Statement (HENPS) to better reflect its purpose.
The draft HENPS applies only to expansion at Heathrow Airport through a Northwest Runway scheme and takes into consideration surface access (road and rail links to Heathrow Airport), economic, social and environmental considerations related to its proposed expansion.

Heathrow Airport expansion

Increasing airport capacity in the south-east of England.

www.gov.uk

 

[camflyer]

Goverment has released more documents and another consultation on Heathrow expansion.

Seem to be very good at issuing statements and consultations, even if actually putting spades in the ground and building something remains a dream

Heathrow Airport expansion

Increasing airport capacity in the south-east of England.

www.gov.uk

And now we can expect more delays with the upcoming change of government.

 

[TravelDream]

And now we can expect more delays with the upcoming change of government.

Although it is terrible for Britain's growth and connectivity, I sort of accept that the third runway at Heathrow isn't happening.

Too many restrictions from governments which change too frequently, too many regulations, and too many pointless judicial reviews which all make the already high costs spiral.

There are lots of potential easy wins for governments that would provide real growth and real jobs, but they don't take them because of a small number of loud voices.

 

[BrianW]

Although it is terrible for Britain's growth and connectivity, I sort of accept that the third runway at Heathrow isn't happening.

Too many restrictions from governments which change too frequently, too many regulations, and too many pointless judicial reviews which all make the already high costs spiral.

There are lots of potential easy wins for governments that would provide real growth and real jobs, but they don't take them because of a small number of loud voices.

The government was elected with a substantial majority and 'mandate' for 'change'. Successive ministers have spoken of changing planning priorities and procedures, blocking the blockers. 'Facts on the ground' have been SLOW to materialise. If there are 'easy wins' to be made I'm sure they will be, though quick they may not be, due to shortage of and competition for funding. That does not change, nor (sadly to my mind) do the Great British public show much inclination to pay more in taxes to improve matters.

 

[camflyer]

Although it is terrible for Britain's growth and connectivity, I sort of accept that the third runway at Heathrow isn't happening.

Too many restrictions from governments which change too frequently, too many regulations, and too many pointless judicial reviews which all make the already high costs spiral.

There are lots of potential easy wins for governments that would provide real growth and real jobs, but they don't take them because of a small number of loud voices.

Hard to know what a Burnham government would mean for a third runway as it's something he won't have had to think about until now. It will depend on who he puts into the Treasury and DOT. If Ed Milliband it made Chancellor then it won't be going anywhere.

 

[TravelDream]

If there are 'easy wins' to be made I'm sure they will be, though quick they may not be, due to shortage of and competition for funding. That does not change, nor (sadly to my mind) do the Great British public show much inclination to pay more in taxes to improve matters.

Of course there are easy wins.

Parliament is sovereign. Parliament can pass 'Heathrow Third Runway Act' primary legislation which would quickly get around nonsense costly and slow impact assessments, judicial reviews and continuous delays and prevarication.

Then there's the Town and Country Planning Act - simply repeal it. It's a garbage piece of legislation which holds Britain back immensely to the benefit of 'I'm alright Jack' type property owners.

Going slightly off topic, but very much on topic here, parliament has chosen not to use its powers and had abdicated too many of them to the judiciary. That's state failure and it is very apparent in major infrastructure projects like airport expansion.

The public don't need to pay more taxes for these projects as they are wholly or primarily privately financed. Indeed, I would argue that taxes being cut would be more helpful, but that would require tightening the belt of huge state largess on things like welfare. On whether Burnham will help or hinder, I have no idea. Reeves is a pretty strong supporter of the third runway and she will likely go. Milliband in a senior role likely won't help.

 

[swt_passenger]

Gatwick expansion lawful, court finds. Well fancy that...

BBC live reports here:

In his ruling on Tuesday, High Court Judge Mr Justice Mould dismissed two legal challenges brought by local campaigners against the planned expansion of Gatwick Airport.

The judge ruled that Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander had acted lawfully when she approved the project in September.

In a 100-page judgment published on Tuesday, he said Alexander accepted the scheme would have “moderately adverse and significant” environmental impacts, but concluded it would not “materially impact” the government’s ability to meet its net zero targets.

Gatwick Airport expansion approval was lawful, court rules

Campaigners fought the plans which were approved by Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander in September 2025.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Wolfie]

Gatwick expansion lawful, court finds. Well fancy that...

BBC live reports here:

Gatwick Airport expansion approval was lawful, court rules

Campaigners fought the plans which were approved by Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander in September 2025.

www.bbc.co.uk

I don't know the full details of this case but do know that higher courts have previously made different findings in other cases. Next stop the Court of Appeal l imagine.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Jun 2026 ==

Of course there are easy wins.

Parliament is sovereign. Parliament can pass 'Heathrow Third Runway Act' primary legislation which would quickly get around nonsense costly and slow impact assessments, judicial reviews and continuous delays and prevarication.

Then there's the Town and Country Planning Act - simply repeal it. It's a garbage piece of legislation which holds Britain back immensely to the benefit of 'I'm alright Jack' type property owners.

Going slightly off topic, but very much on topic here, parliament has chosen not to use its powers and had abdicated too many of them to the judiciary. That's state failure and it is very apparent in major infrastructure projects like airport expansion.

The public don't need to pay more taxes for these projects as they are wholly or primarily privately financed. Indeed, I would argue that taxes being cut would be more helpful, but that would require tightening the belt of huge state largess on things like welfare. On whether Burnham will help or hinder, I have no idea. Reeves is a pretty strong supporter of the third runway and she will likely go. Milliband in a senior role likely won't help.

Oh joy, an unrestrained capitalist of the type who have destroyed the USA as a place to live for ordinary people. Hell no to that here!

 

[Tetchytyke]

The public don't need to pay more taxes for these projects as they are wholly or primarily privately financed.

If you really truly believe that, may I also interest you in this bridge?

Gatwick expansion lawful, court finds. Well fancy that...

I’m as shocked as you are!

Especially when you look at the career of Mr Justice Mould, who prior to becoming a judge was a barrister who specialised in planning law. Specifically, he specialised in representing big construction firms at public inquiries to get large-scale construction projects through in the face of public opposition.

Tim Mould KC appointed as a High Court Judge - Landmark Chambers

Explore 'Tim Mould KC appointed as a High Court Judge' at Landmark Chambers for in-depth analysis and expert commentary on pressing legal issues. Stay…

www.landmarkchambers.co.uk

At Landmark, Tim practised in planning, environmental, and local government law, particularly in major transport schemes, promoting railway bills and other projects in Parliament and at public inquiry.

Nope, no idea why he would decide in favour of Gatwick.

Oh joy, an unrestrained capitalist of the type who have destroyed the USA as a place to live for ordinary people. Hell no to that here!

Don’t forget that anyone who complains is just an evil selfish NIMBY who should be ignored.

Of course none of the people championing Heathrow and Gatwick expansions actually have to live anywhere near either airport. Reeves is all in favour of Heathrow expansion and strongly criticises anyone who disagrees as a terrible NIMBY. Curiously, she wasn’t quite so keen on Leeds/Bradford expansion when it was near her house. How odd.

 

[camflyer]

Especially when you look at the career of Mr Justice Mould, who prior to becoming a judge was a barrister who specialised in planning law. Specifically, he specialised in representing big construction firms at public inquiries to get large-scale construction projects through in the face of public opposition.

Surely you'd want a judge on the case who was a specialist in planning law.

This judgement was a step in the right direction but I'm sure the campaigners will be back with more delaying tactics.

 

[Bald Rick]

Especially when you look at the career of Mr Justice Mould, who prior to becoming a judge was a barrister who specialised in planning law. Specifically, he specialised in representing big construction firms at public inquiries to get large-scale construction projects through in the face of public opposition.

To be fair, he is exactly the sort of person who is suitably qualified and expert in the relevant areas to determine a case which is argued over a point of planning law.

I’ve met him, and he was a) extremely helpful towards the railway in resolving matters related to third party development that would prejudice future railway projects, and b) was an extraordinarily intelligent person.

 

[TravelDream]

Gatwick expansion lawful, court finds. Well fancy that...

Great news.
Though just one step on the very costly and time consuming path to the second runway being moved

Some very simple solutions.
Enact primary legislation as stated above e.g. Gatwick Runway Act.
Change the law so those who push (the two Gatwick campaign groups in this case) for judicial reviews are financially responsible for appeals when they lose. Not just legal costs, but consequential damages too.

It's is so sad for our country that these tiny groups of luddites, flat Earthers, busybodies, and general build nothing nowhere types can hold the country's economic development to ransom with little to no consequence.

Especially when you look at the career of Mr Justice Mould, who prior to becoming a judge was a barrister who specialised in planning law. Specifically, he specialised in representing big construction firms at public inquiries to get large-scale construction projects through in the face of public opposition.

So the judge has both impressive qualifications and significant experience in an area he has made a ruling on. How shockingly terrible!

Who exactly would you like to rule on the matter?

 

[Tetchytyke]

To be fair, he is exactly the sort of person who is suitably qualified and expert in the relevant areas to determine a case which is argued over a point of planning law.

He is, and he’s clearly very intelligent to have had the career he’s had, but that’s not really my point.

A man who has spent his entire career earning his money from big construction companies getting big construction projects approved in the face of widespread local public opposition is now judging a case where a big construction company wants to get a big construction project approved in the face of widespread local public opposition. Amazingly, he finds in favour of the big construction project and finds against the local public opposition. Maybe my cynicism is unfair.

It's is so sad for our country that these tiny groups of luddites, flat Earthers, busybodies, and general build nothing nowhere types can hold the country's economic development to ransom with little to no consequence.

I find it rather sadder that the people who hold these sorts of opinions never have to face the realities of living next to these big construction projects. As Rachel Reeves so hypocritically demonstrates, their opinions always seem to change when it’s their back garden that now has an airport or a motorway in it.

Anyway. Expanding Gatwick makes more sense than expanding Heathrow as it, thankfully, affects fewer people. So if we have to have airport expansion at least it is the least damaging form of airport expansion.

I remain very sceptical that we do need airport expansion, though. My view is that we need to use the capacity we do have properly (Heathrow is “full” because it is clogged up with 150-seat A319 aircraft, and the same applies even more so at Gatwick) before concreting over yet more countryside. Maybe I am a Luddite.

 

[TravelDream]

I find it rather sadder that the people who hold these sorts of opinions never have to face the realities of living next to these big construction projects. As Rachel Reeves so hypocritically demonstrates, their opinions always seem to change when it’s their back garden that now has an airport or a motorway in it.

Anyway. Expanding Gatwick makes more sense than expanding Heathrow as it, thankfully, affects fewer people. So if we have to have airport expansion at least it is the least damaging form of airport expansion.

I remain very sceptical that we do need airport expansion, though. My view is that we need to use the capacity we do have properly (Heathrow is “full” because it is clogged up with 150-seat A319 aircraft, and the same applies even more so at Gatwick) before concreting over yet more countryside. Maybe I am a Luddite.

But that belies reality.

It's simply not viable to fly an Airbus A380 or Boeing 747 from London to Paris or Frankfurt.
For one, the costs just wouldn't work out at all for the airlines as the planes are too big and inefficient. They would use much more fuel per passenger than a smaller aircraft as large aircraft are simply not designed for short hops and it would be quite environmentally unfriendly to do so. Boarding and deboarding would take far too long.
Plus so many other factors like routes like there requiring frequency for both high-yielding business travelers and connecting traffic.

Heathrow/ Gatwick, and Britain, requires connections to France, Spain, Germany etc, not just long haul destinations.

Plus the move is generally to larger passenger capacity aircraft. We are seeing a move among all airlines from smaller variants of the A320/737 families to larger ones.


And I do now live next to a major airport. Guess what? The airport was here before me and the airspace is designed to minimize noise pollution so I can't really complain.

Britain has been held back for too long economically by lack of investment and development in infrastructure. It is shameful when we look at other countries how they are developing as we live in what is essentially managed decline.
I am actually slightly hopeful for the incoming Burnham administration. Though not too hopeful.

 

[SynthD]

Not just legal costs, but consequential damages too.

What are the consequential damages?

 

[Bald Rick]

A man who has spent his entire career earning his money from big construction companies getting big construction projects approved in the face of widespread local public opposition is now judging a case where a big construction company wants to get a big construction project approved in the face of widespread local public opposition. Amazingly, he finds in favour of the big construction project and finds against the local public opposition. Maybe my cynicism is unfair.

That would indeed be a fair criticism if he had indeed spent his whole career doing what you say. That’s not the case.

In the example where I met him, he was earning money from the railway, preventing a big construction company from gaining permission to build something that would harm the railway’s interests. I can’t believe that this is the only time he has been involved in a case from the ‘other side’.

 

[Cross City]

Don’t forget that anyone who complains is just an evil selfish NIMBY who should be ignored.

Correct!

NIMBYism is the sole reason why infrastructure in this country is 3-4 decades behind continental Europe.

It's a cancer and needs sorting out through aggressive planning reform.

 

[Tetchytyke]

It's simply not viable to fly an Airbus A380 or Boeing 747 from London to Paris or Frankfurt.

Yet that’s exactly what happens in Japan, where it is very common for high capacity wide body aircraft to fly short domestic routes.

I get why airlines would prefer to fly 3x150-seat aircraft per day rather than 1x450 seat aircraft per day. But the consequences of that is Heathrow and Gatwick are clogged up with lots of small aircraft. The airports aren’t full, the capacity is utilised inefficiently.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jun 2026 ==

NIMBYism is the sole reason why infrastructure in this country is 3-4 decades behind continental Europe.

It isn’t, and it isn’t.

Next.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jun 2026 ==

And I do now live next to a major airport. Guess what? The airport was here before me

And if they double the size of the airport, and move it closer to your back garden? And if the construction lorries rumble past your bedroom window from 6am to 10pm? And if the dust- all the dust- from the construction work covers everything you own and clogs your lungs?

That’s the thing. Current Heathrow was there first. New Heathrow, five miles to the north, was not.

 

[Watershed]

But the consequences of that is Heathrow and Gatwick are clogged up with lots of small aircraft. The airports aren’t full, the capacity is utilised inefficiently.

Heathrow and Gatwick simply don't have the gate capacity for a huge increase in widebody aircraft. Their current terminal designs centre around a fair proportion (for Heathrow) or the majority (for Gatwick) of aircraft being narrow bodies.

The necessary terminal expansions to accommodate more widebodies would be just as controversial as runway changes because larger aircraft are, on the whole, louder and more polluting in total (even if more efficient per passenger). See for example London City's terminal expansion plans which were refused by Newham Council - despite no runway changes being involved.

 

[camflyer]

Yet that’s exactly what happens in Japan, where it is very common for high capacity wide body aircraft to fly short domestic routes.

Japan is the only country in the world which routinely uses widebodies for domestic flights. Even the US doesn't for coast to coast services.

However, they are used high capacity AND high frequency because there is sufficient demand for them. The widebodies aren't replacing several narrow bodied services.

 

[Terry Tibbs]

Heathrow is not ‘clogged’ with A319s. Aviation is perhaps one of the final industries left in the UK which is almost entirely run by free market economics. The airlines respond to the demands of the market and if that means A319s fly in and out of Heathrow more than you would like it is because that is what the market demands. If the market changes and less frequent but higher capacity flights are demanded then the industry will respond accordingly. UK aviation is a successful industry at the moment as it has little input from those who try to make it ‘what it ought to be’ and rather let the market dictate accordingly.
There are times of the year when passenger demand sees long haul aircraft do short haul routes. Christmas is one such time in Europe. Peak holiday season is another.
Putting standard build long haul aircraft on short haul routes (if this is what is being suggested) is rarely done due to the differences in engineering of said aircraft. They are built for different jobs. Again, the aircraft manufacturers would respond if airlines wanted A350s to fly short haul routes but as of yet that option is not available. It’s not available as there’s no demand for it.
Heathrow is constrained by the unavailability of land surrounding it as well as its night curfew. The former might change but I doubt the latter will.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Britain, requires connections to France, Spain, Germany etc, not just long haul destinations.

Move the airport to a greenfield site then and build the necessary transport connections. Stop trying to expand a site right next to a dense urban area and constrained by poor road capacity.

Rail capacity is adequate, but an Essex site for a new airport would also come with the potential for good rail links.