Linking UK airports by rail

[martin butler]

How many of the UK airports can be directly accessed by rail travelling from Airport to airport,
And could a service ever be run that joins up most of the main ones to each other by rail,

There are heathrow, Stanstead, Gatwick trains, but no service linking each to each other could a route be worked out that takes in Heathrow, Luton, Stanstead and Gatwick ?

 

[stadler]

How many of the UK airports can be directly accessed by rail travelling from Airport to airport,
And could a service ever be run that joins up most of the main ones to each other by rail,

There are heathrow, Stanstead, Gatwick trains, but no service linking each to each other could a route be worked out that takes in Heathrow, Luton, Stanstead and Gatwick ?

How much demand is there for airport to airport travel. The amount of people landing at one airport and then changing to a connecting flight from another airport must be very small. Currently the only direct airport service i can think of is Gatwick to Luton which has frequent direct Thameslink services. Heathrow can be reached from Gatwick and Luton by one simple Farringdon change or from Southend or Stansted or City by one simple London Liverpool Street or Stratford or Shenfield change. It is easy enough as it is and the amount of people travelling from airport to airport is probably not large enough to justify a new direct service.

 

[zwk500]

How many of the UK airports can be directly accessed by rail travelling from Airport to airport,

For the top 10 airports, ranking for passenger numbers shown in parentheses, primary connection only shown:
Heathrow (1), Gatwick (2), Manchester (3), Stansted (4) have a national rail station adjacent to the terminal.
Luton (5) and Birmingham (7) have people movers connecting to a national rail station.
Edinburgh (6), is connected to the tram.
Bristol (8), Glasgow (9), Belfast International and (10) all have bus links with a nearby main rail station.

And could a service ever be run that joins up most of the main ones to each other by rail,

No. Operationally, technically and commercially it'd never make sense. A railtour might be able to do Gatwick and Manchester passing Luton and Birmingham.

There are heathrow, Stanstead, Gatwick trains, but no service linking each to each other could a route be worked out that takes in Heathrow, Luton, Stanstead and Gatwick ?

As above, why? People aren't generally changing planes between the airports in sufficient numbers to justify separate services, when the capacity exists to get those people into London and back out far easier.

 

[Mgameing123]

For the top 10 airports, ranking for passenger numbers shown in parentheses, primary connection only shown:
Heathrow (1), Gatwick (2), Manchester (3), Stansted (4) have a national rail station adjacent to the terminal.
Luton (5) and Birmingham (7) have people movers connecting to a national rail station.
Edinburgh (6), is connected to the tram.
Bristol (8), Glasgow (9), Belfast International and (10) all have bus links with a nearby main rail station.

No. Operationally, technically and commercially it'd never make sense. A railtour might be able to do Gatwick and Manchester passing Luton and Birmingham.

As above, why? People aren't generally changing planes between the airports in sufficient numbers to justify separate services, when the capacity exists to get those people into London and back out far easier.

But isn’t that mainly because there is no good connection between the airports?

 

[Alpine Rider]

I am far from convinced of any case for operating a direct heathrow Gatwick rail link.

I occasionally transit from Heathrow to Gatwick on route for an Easyjet flight home to Geneva and have always found the National Express bus link is excellent. Smart clean coaches with comfortable seats which provide a great elevated view (even if much of it is around the M25). The bus costs less than half the price of a rail ticket and at around an hour door to door is usually quicker than the typical 2 hours by rail.

 

[thenorthern]

Birmingham Airport and Southampton Airport are directly linked by rail but I think that is just a coincidence.

To be honest airport rail links are largely quite poor in the United Kingdom. If you think about it, Heathrow Airport which supposedly serves the whole United Kingdom is served by one London Underground line, a relatively expensive fast service (Heathrow Express) and the Elizabeth Line.

 

[TheGrew]

I don't think connecting airports really makes sense. What I think will be interesting to see is if Birmingham and Manchester grow more following HS2.
The other thing that would be great, though I think unlikely to happen, is if the GWML were diverted under Heathrow and had at least some long-distance services stop there in a similar way to Schiphol. I think any form of Western access to the airport would be well utilised.

 

[Mgameing123]

Birmingham Airport and Southampton Airport are directly linked by rail but I think that is just a coincidence.

To be honest airport rail links are largely quite poor in the United Kingdom. If you think about it, Heathrow Airport which supposedly serves the whole United Kingdom is served by one London Underground line, a relatively expensive fast service (Heathrow Express) and the Elizabeth Line.

And a TON of coaches. But your right, I believe my HS3 proposal though could solve that issue: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/hs3-paddington-to-newport.271688/

 

[zwk500]

But isn’t that mainly because there is no good connection between the airports?

No, it's because the vast majority of UK connections operate through Heathrow. Gatwick and Manchester have some hub-and-spoke flights but also a large volume of point-to-point flights. Most other airports are overwhelmingly low-cost point to point. UK regional airports also tend to have feeder flights to overseas hubs like Schiphol.

To be honest airport rail links are largely quite poor in the United Kingdom. If you think about it, Heathrow Airport which supposedly serves the whole United Kingdom is served by one London Underground line, a relatively expensive fast service (Heathrow Express) and the Elizabeth Line.

The Elizabeth line connects almost the entire UK long-distance rail network within 2 changes. How is that poor?

 

[Severnia333]

For the top 10 airports, ranking for passenger numbers shown in parentheses, primary connection only shown:
Heathrow (1), Gatwick (2), Manchester (3), Stansted (4) have a national rail station adjacent to the terminal.
Luton (5) and Birmingham (7) have people movers connecting to a national rail station.
Edinburgh (6), is connected to the tram.
Bristol (8), Glasgow (9), Belfast International and (10) all have bus links with a nearby main rail station.

No. Operationally, technically and commercially it'd never make sense. A railtour might be able to do Gatwick and Manchester passing Luton and Birmingham.

As above, why? People aren't generally changing planes between the airports in sufficient numbers to justify separate services, when the capacity exists to get those people into London and back out far easier.

Bristol is a much less convenient link and much further from the city and any rail than Belfast or Glasgow though.

 

[Mgameing123]

No, it's because the vast majority of UK connections operate through Heathrow. Gatwick and Manchester have some hub-and-spoke flights but also a large volume of point-to-point flights. Most other airports are overwhelmingly low-cost point to point. UK regional airports also tend to have feeder flights to overseas hubs like Schiphol.

The Elizabeth line connects almost the entire UK long-distance rail network within 2 changes. How is that poor?

I mean compared to Frankfurt Am Main Lufthagen with direct high speed rail connections then yes it’s poor.

 

[thenorthern]

The Elizabeth line connects almost the entire UK long-distance rail network within 2 changes. How is that poor?

Compare that to Paris CDG, Schiphol, Frankfurt, Fiumicino, Vienna, Copenhagen and Brussels all of which have regular direct intercity connections to most parts of their respective countries.

 

[SynthD]

There were 26k journeys from Luton Parkway to Gatwick Airport last year (and similar other unaffected years). A decent portion of those will be people parking at their local parkway station (which happens to have an airport) for a Gatwick flight. For people paying attention to split ticketing, East Croydon has 32k. Are these two connected airports any suggestion of what people want?

 

[edwin_m]

For the top 10 airports, ranking for passenger numbers shown in parentheses, primary connection only shown:
Heathrow (1), Gatwick (2), Manchester (3), Stansted (4) have a national rail station adjacent to the terminal.
Luton (5) and Birmingham (7) have people movers connecting to a national rail station.
Edinburgh (6), is connected to the tram.
Bristol (8), Glasgow (9), Belfast International and (10) all have bus links with a nearby main rail station.

Also Newcastle (Metro), London City (DLR), Belfast George Best, Southampton and Prestwick outside the top ten. Honourable non-mention to Teesside.

The only way an airport to airport rail link makes sense is if a second airport is developed as an "overspill" to a hub airport, with numerous connections involving a transfer between them. But this will involve going landside through immigration controls and and travelling a considerable distance, and is probably unattractive enough that any hub attempting it would fail. I'm not aware of any such operation anywhere except possibly Iceland, where domestic flights go from Reykjavik and international ones from Kevlavik about 30 miles away. But Iceland doesn't have a railway at all.

 

[Topological]

Compare that to Paris CDG, Schiphol, Frankfurt, Fiumicino, Vienna, Copenhagen and Brussels all of which have regular direct intercity connections to most parts of their respective countries.

I still think they should have built the Heathrow branch on HS2 for similar reasons.

 

[thenorthern]

For the top 10 airports, ranking for passenger numbers shown in parentheses, primary connection only shown:
Heathrow (1), Gatwick (2), Manchester (3), Stansted (4) have a national rail station adjacent to the terminal.
Luton (5) and Birmingham (7) have people movers connecting to a national rail station.
Edinburgh (6), is connected to the tram.
Bristol (8), Glasgow (9), Belfast International and (10) all have bus links with a nearby main rail station.

Also Newcastle (Metro), London City (DLR), Belfast George Best, Southampton and Prestwick outside the top ten. Honourable non-mention to Teesside.

The only way an airport to airport rail link makes sense is if a second airport is developed as an "overspill" to a hub airport, with numerous connections involving a transfer between them. But this will involve going landside through immigration controls and and travelling a considerable distance, and is probably unattractive enough that any hub attempting it would fail. I'm not aware of any such operation anywhere except possibly Iceland, where domestic flights go from Reykjavik and international ones from Kevlavik about 30 miles away. But Iceland doesn't have a railway at all.

Don't forget Inverness which is directly served by an airport station.

I know it's not technically part of the United Kingdom but given it's included in CAA statistics, I thought I should also mention Isle of Man Airport which of course is served by the Isle of Man Steam Railway.

 

[edwin_m]

Don't forget Inverness which is directly served by an airport station.

Oops. It even comes in ahead of Prestwick.

 

[lachlan]

I don't think connecting airports really makes sense. What I think will be interesting to see is if Birmingham and Manchester grow more following HS2.
The other thing that would be great, though I think unlikely to happen, is if the GWML were diverted under Heathrow and had at least some long-distance services stop there in a similar way to Schiphol. I think any form of Western access to the airport would be well utilised.

I still think they should have built the Heathrow branch on HS2 for similar reasons.

Old Oak Common will improve accessibility to Heathrow for long distance rail passengers. I don't think diverting the main lines would be worth the disruption/cost to the railway network.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Dec 2025 ==

Regarding airport-airport links, what journeys would this make easier that are currently difficult?

 

[Topological]

Old Oak Common will improve accessibility to Heathrow for long distance rail passengers. I don't think diverting the main lines would be worth the disruption/cost to the railway network.

OOC will improve things a lot, and I am very glad it is being built to be served by all trains.

However, I do also think that a Heathrow to Manchester service on HS2 would have worked, likewise Heathrow to Birmingham. It would have been a stub, but the designed route did seem to make sense to me.

As long as the lobby against GWR stopping all trains at OOC dont get their way.

 

[William3000]

Birmingham Airport and Southampton Airport are directly linked by rail but I think that is just a coincidence.

To be honest airport rail links are largely quite poor in the United Kingdom. If you think about it, Heathrow Airport which supposedly serves the whole United Kingdom is served by one London Underground line, a relatively expensive fast service (Heathrow Express) and the Elizabeth Line.

Birmingham Airport is pretty well connected by rail - albeit it could do with an easterly connection - getting to Leicester, Peterborough, Kettering, Cambridge isn’t ideal.

 

[zwk500]

Birmingham Airport is pretty well connected by rail - albeit it could do with an easterly connection - getting to Leicester, Peterborough, Kettering, Cambridge isn’t ideal.

Best option for that is probably a direct bus link to Coleshill Parkway. If doubling back via New Street isn't frequent/convenient enough.

 

[thenorthern]

With Birmingham, Southampton, Luton, Gatwick, Prestwick and Teesside, it was largely just luck that that the airports were built next to a railway line. Until the 1990s airport rail links were not seen as important as flying was still rather expensive. Then along came the cheap flights boom.

 

[OVS Flatbottom]

Bristol is a much less convenient link and much further from the city and any rail than Belfast or Glasgow though.

I believe Belfast International (which was the Belfast airport specified in the previous post, and is the busier of the two airports) is actually farther from the city, and from the nearest rail station, than Bristol.

 

[thenorthern]

A couple of years ago there was mention of a Heathwick linking Heathrow and Gatwick for transit passengers. The problem is that passengers would no longer be classed as airside transit passengers and would now be landside transit passengers meaning unless they are a British or Irish citizen they would need an Electronic Travel Authorisation at £16 or a UK Transit visa at £70. Both need to be applied for in advance meaning the number of passengers using Heathwick would not justify the cost.

 

[signed]

I am far from convinced of any case for operating a direct heathrow Gatwick rail link.

Especially when Oxford Express the Airline runs for £15 turn up every 30min

 

[blueberry11]

A couple of years ago there was mention of a Heathwick linking Heathrow and Gatwick for transit passengers. The problem is that passengers would no longer be classed as airside transit passengers and would now be landside transit passengers meaning unless they are a British or Irish citizen they would need an Electronic Travel Authorisation at £16 or a UK Transit visa at £70. Both need to be applied for in advance meaning the number of passengers using Heathwick would not justify the cost.

The UK initially required an ETA for all transiting passengers, even for those transiting airside (without passing thru border control). Around when the scheme was required for Europeans, an exemption was added for those transiting airside. Passengers going thru border control still need an ETA.

 

[signed]

Compare that to Paris CDG, Schiphol, Frankfurt, Fiumicino, Vienna, Copenhagen and Brussels all of which have regular direct intercity connections to most parts of their respective countries.

Paris CDG is not a good example, the IC service is mostly the token 1-2tpd service SNCF loves to run, with afaik the exception of Lille-Marseille, which runs 8 times per day. In practice, you are much more likely to head down to Paris for your train.

I would add Geneva and Zurich Airport to that list,

 

[The Planner]

Best option for that is probably a direct bus link to Coleshill Parkway. If doubling back via New Street isn't frequent/convenient enough.

Certainly was pushed that way in the past.

Coleshill parkway railway station hi-res stock photography and images - Alamy

Find the perfect coleshill parkway railway station stock photo, image, vector, illustration or 360 image. Available for both RF and RM licensing.

www.alamy.com

 

[Mgameing123]

Compare that to Paris CDG, Schiphol, Frankfurt, Fiumicino, Vienna, Copenhagen and Brussels all of which have regular direct intercity connections to most parts of their respective countries.

Copenhagen even has direct trains to Sweden.

 

[zwk500]

Copenhagen even has direct trains to Sweden.

Copenghagen airport is halfway to Malmo, it's not a reasonable comparison to Heathrow.