Trains vs Planes

[Tweed]

I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

The train is pretty slow rumbling through the Brussels - Antwerp area but
picks up speed in NL. Had to get a local train for an onward connection
within NL. Joy to use. Despite it being just before 1750 in rush hour there
were plenty of seats in the double deck train. Around 10 Euro for a 40
minute trip. Announcements, live from the guard, both in Dutch and English.

Door to door 11 hours instead of around 6 if going by plane. The insistence
of turning up early for the Eurostar is certainly taking a lot away from
any high speed nature of the train itself.

Even in the posh seats they start to feel a bit hard after 4 hours.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

Just one of the many advantages of brexit.

[Sam Wilson]

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps. There’s a fair bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit. If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

Sam

[Coffee]

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps. There’s a fair bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit. If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

Privacy prevents third parties being within earshot. Although groups
seem to be allowed to present together.

[Tweed]

Post by Coffee

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps. There’s a fair bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit. If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

Privacy prevents third parties being within earshot. Although groups
seem to be allowed to present together.

Not my experience at Eurostar Amsterdam today. Two UK booths next to each
other. Entirely possible to hear the conversation at the adjacent booth.
The Amsterdam operation in general is a bit sub standard.

[Sam Wilson]

Post by Coffee

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps. There’s a fair bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit. If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

Privacy prevents third parties being within earshot. Although groups
seem to be allowed to present together.

I’ve never had a problem with couples or (some time ago, and only at
airports) family groups presenting themselves together. There would be
good reasons for children not to be processed alone.

Sam

[Roland Perry]

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps. There’s a fair bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit. If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

The funny thing is, airport design (and yes, hence International station
design, because it's fundamentally the same process on the ground) is
based on the premise that you want to *throttle* rather than *expedite*
the flow of passengers, so that you can spread the people out over a
larger area.

Otherwise you get precisely what's being complained about at St Pancras
(bursting full departure lounges[1]) all the time, not just when trains
are running late.

This was studied by engineers ahead of the introduction of the 747, on
account of the much larger number of passengers each held. The wikipedia
page makes a brief reference to this: "The 747 enjoyed a fairly smooth
introduction into service, overcoming concerns that some airports would
not be able to accommodate an aircraft that large", but his is exactly
the same mis-reading of the situation as those who said "Why all the
fuss about Y2K, nothing bad happened did it".

[1] And inbound, onwards ground transportation being overwhelmed.

[Certes]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps.  There’s a fair
bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit.  If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

The funny thing is, airport design (and yes, hence International station
design, because it's fundamentally the same process on the ground) is
based on the premise that you want to *throttle* rather than *expedite*
the flow of passengers, so that you can spread the people out over a
larger area.
Otherwise you get precisely what's being complained about at St Pancras
(bursting full departure lounges[1]) all the time, not just when trains
are running late.
This was studied by engineers ahead of the introduction of the 747, on
account of the much larger number of passengers each held. The wikipedia
page makes a brief reference to this: "The 747 enjoyed a fairly smooth
introduction into service, overcoming concerns that some airports would
not be able to accommodate an aircraft that large", but his is exactly
the same mis-reading of the situation as those who said "Why all the
fuss about Y2K, nothing bad happened did it".
[1] And inbound, onwards ground transportation being overwhelmed.

Airports (and, increasingly, railway stations) are designed for the
operator, not for the passenger. Their primary function is to be a
profitable retail outlet. Runways, tracks and an excuse for a lounge
are just necessary evils to divert shoppers from the cheaper and more
conveniently located rival malls elsewhere. They need to be placed at
the furthest corners of the site, like supermarket milk and bread, so
customers need to walk past everything else in an attempt to find them.

[Tweed]

Post by Certes

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps.  There’s a fair
bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit.  If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

The funny thing is, airport design (and yes, hence International station
design, because it's fundamentally the same process on the ground) is
based on the premise that you want to *throttle* rather than *expedite*
the flow of passengers, so that you can spread the people out over a
larger area.
Otherwise you get precisely what's being complained about at St Pancras
(bursting full departure lounges[1]) all the time, not just when trains
are running late.
This was studied by engineers ahead of the introduction of the 747, on
account of the much larger number of passengers each held. The wikipedia
page makes a brief reference to this: "The 747 enjoyed a fairly smooth
introduction into service, overcoming concerns that some airports would
not be able to accommodate an aircraft that large", but his is exactly
the same mis-reading of the situation as those who said "Why all the
fuss about Y2K, nothing bad happened did it".
[1] And inbound, onwards ground transportation being overwhelmed.

Airports (and, increasingly, railway stations) are designed for the
operator, not for the passenger. Their primary function is to be a
profitable retail outlet. Runways, tracks and an excuse for a lounge
are just necessary evils to divert shoppers from the cheaper and more
conveniently located rival malls elsewhere. They need to be placed at
the furthest corners of the site, like supermarket milk and bread, so
customers need to walk past everything else in an attempt to find them.

Eurostar can’t cope with its sudden desire for people to check in much
earlier and thus having lots of people hanging around. Coupled with
unreliable feeder train services into London so people have to add in even
more margin and thus more hanging around. Switzerland is often cited as the
land where trains run on time. In my limited experience Dutch trains also
run to the minute and frequently. They also have soft comfortable seats.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps.  There’s a fair
bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit.  If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

The funny thing is, airport design (and yes, hence International station
design, because it's fundamentally the same process on the ground) is
based on the premise that you want to *throttle* rather than *expedite*
the flow of passengers, so that you can spread the people out over a
larger area.
Otherwise you get precisely what's being complained about at St Pancras
(bursting full departure lounges[1]) all the time, not just when trains
are running late.
This was studied by engineers ahead of the introduction of the 747, on
account of the much larger number of passengers each held. The wikipedia
page makes a brief reference to this: "The 747 enjoyed a fairly smooth
introduction into service, overcoming concerns that some airports would
not be able to accommodate an aircraft that large", but his is exactly
the same mis-reading of the situation as those who said "Why all the
fuss about Y2K, nothing bad happened did it".
[1] And inbound, onwards ground transportation being overwhelmed.

Airports (and, increasingly, railway stations) are designed for the
operator, not for the passenger. Their primary function is to be a
profitable retail outlet. Runways, tracks and an excuse for a lounge
are just necessary evils to divert shoppers from the cheaper and more
conveniently located rival malls elsewhere. They need to be placed at
the furthest corners of the site, like supermarket milk and bread, so
customers need to walk past everything else in an attempt to find them.

Eurostar can’t cope with its sudden desire for people to check in much
earlier and thus having lots of people hanging around. Coupled with
unreliable feeder train services into London so people have to add in even
more margin and thus more hanging around. Switzerland is often cited as the
land where trains run on time. In my limited experience Dutch trains also
run to the minute and frequently. They also have soft comfortable seats.

Eurostar was designed around free movement of peoples.[1] For some
reason that was taken away and then everybody moans because of the
resulting congestion.

[1] Debatable in the case of Gare du Nord!

[Tweed]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps.  There’s a fair
bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit.  If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

The funny thing is, airport design (and yes, hence International station
design, because it's fundamentally the same process on the ground) is
based on the premise that you want to *throttle* rather than *expedite*
the flow of passengers, so that you can spread the people out over a
larger area.
Otherwise you get precisely what's being complained about at St Pancras
(bursting full departure lounges[1]) all the time, not just when trains
are running late.
This was studied by engineers ahead of the introduction of the 747, on
account of the much larger number of passengers each held. The wikipedia
page makes a brief reference to this: "The 747 enjoyed a fairly smooth
introduction into service, overcoming concerns that some airports would
not be able to accommodate an aircraft that large", but his is exactly
the same mis-reading of the situation as those who said "Why all the
fuss about Y2K, nothing bad happened did it".
[1] And inbound, onwards ground transportation being overwhelmed.

Airports (and, increasingly, railway stations) are designed for the
operator, not for the passenger. Their primary function is to be a
profitable retail outlet. Runways, tracks and an excuse for a lounge
are just necessary evils to divert shoppers from the cheaper and more
conveniently located rival malls elsewhere. They need to be placed at
the furthest corners of the site, like supermarket milk and bread, so
customers need to walk past everything else in an attempt to find them.

Eurostar can’t cope with its sudden desire for people to check in much
earlier and thus having lots of people hanging around. Coupled with
unreliable feeder train services into London so people have to add in even
more margin and thus more hanging around. Switzerland is often cited as the
land where trains run on time. In my limited experience Dutch trains also
run to the minute and frequently. They also have soft comfortable seats.

Eurostar was designed around free movement of peoples.[1] For some
reason that was taken away and then everybody moans because of the
resulting congestion.
[1] Debatable in the case of Gare du Nord!

Passport control has always been a thing with Eurostar even pre Brexit. We
have never been part of Schengen.

[Sam Wilson]

Post by Tweed

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps.  There’s a fair
bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit.  If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

The funny thing is, airport design (and yes, hence International station
design, because it's fundamentally the same process on the ground) is
based on the premise that you want to *throttle* rather than *expedite*
the flow of passengers, so that you can spread the people out over a
larger area.
Otherwise you get precisely what's being complained about at St Pancras
(bursting full departure lounges[1]) all the time, not just when trains
are running late.
This was studied by engineers ahead of the introduction of the 747, on
account of the much larger number of passengers each held. The wikipedia
page makes a brief reference to this: "The 747 enjoyed a fairly smooth
introduction into service, overcoming concerns that some airports would
not be able to accommodate an aircraft that large", but his is exactly
the same mis-reading of the situation as those who said "Why all the
fuss about Y2K, nothing bad happened did it".
[1] And inbound, onwards ground transportation being overwhelmed.

Airports (and, increasingly, railway stations) are designed for the
operator, not for the passenger. Their primary function is to be a
profitable retail outlet. Runways, tracks and an excuse for a lounge
are just necessary evils to divert shoppers from the cheaper and more
conveniently located rival malls elsewhere. They need to be placed at
the furthest corners of the site, like supermarket milk and bread, so
customers need to walk past everything else in an attempt to find them.

Eurostar can’t cope with its sudden desire for people to check in much
earlier and thus having lots of people hanging around. Coupled with
unreliable feeder train services into London so people have to add in even
more margin and thus more hanging around. Switzerland is often cited as the
land where trains run on time. In my limited experience Dutch trains also
run to the minute and frequently. They also have soft comfortable seats.

Eurostar was designed around free movement of peoples.[1] For some
reason that was taken away and then everybody moans because of the
resulting congestion.
[1] Debatable in the case of Gare du Nord!

Passport control has always been a thing with Eurostar even pre Brexit. We
have never been part of Schengen.

True, but it didn’t usually require shuffling through the passport and
stamping it before.

Sam

[Tweed]

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Tweed

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps.  There’s a fair
bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit.  If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

The funny thing is, airport design (and yes, hence International station
design, because it's fundamentally the same process on the ground) is
based on the premise that you want to *throttle* rather than *expedite*
the flow of passengers, so that you can spread the people out over a
larger area.
Otherwise you get precisely what's being complained about at St Pancras
(bursting full departure lounges[1]) all the time, not just when trains
are running late.
This was studied by engineers ahead of the introduction of the 747, on
account of the much larger number of passengers each held. The wikipedia
page makes a brief reference to this: "The 747 enjoyed a fairly smooth
introduction into service, overcoming concerns that some airports would
not be able to accommodate an aircraft that large", but his is exactly
the same mis-reading of the situation as those who said "Why all the
fuss about Y2K, nothing bad happened did it".
[1] And inbound, onwards ground transportation being overwhelmed.

Airports (and, increasingly, railway stations) are designed for the
operator, not for the passenger. Their primary function is to be a
profitable retail outlet. Runways, tracks and an excuse for a lounge
are just necessary evils to divert shoppers from the cheaper and more
conveniently located rival malls elsewhere. They need to be placed at
the furthest corners of the site, like supermarket milk and bread, so
customers need to walk past everything else in an attempt to find them.

Eurostar can’t cope with its sudden desire for people to check in much
earlier and thus having lots of people hanging around. Coupled with
unreliable feeder train services into London so people have to add in even
more margin and thus more hanging around. Switzerland is often cited as the
land where trains run on time. In my limited experience Dutch trains also
run to the minute and frequently. They also have soft comfortable seats.

Eurostar was designed around free movement of peoples.[1] For some
reason that was taken away and then everybody moans because of the
resulting congestion.
[1] Debatable in the case of Gare du Nord!

Passport control has always been a thing with Eurostar even pre Brexit. We
have never been part of Schengen.

True, but it didn’t usually require shuffling through the passport and
stamping it before.
Sam

The stamping bit takes a few seconds. The reading of the passport on the
machine takes considerably longer. Hopefully the stamping bit might go away
once the EU gets its much delayed electronic border system working.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Tweed

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps.  There’s a fair
bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit.  If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

The funny thing is, airport design (and yes, hence International station
design, because it's fundamentally the same process on the ground) is
based on the premise that you want to *throttle* rather than *expedite*
the flow of passengers, so that you can spread the people out over a
larger area.
Otherwise you get precisely what's being complained about at St Pancras
(bursting full departure lounges[1]) all the time, not just when trains
are running late.
This was studied by engineers ahead of the introduction of the 747, on
account of the much larger number of passengers each held. The wikipedia
page makes a brief reference to this: "The 747 enjoyed a fairly smooth
introduction into service, overcoming concerns that some airports would
not be able to accommodate an aircraft that large", but his is exactly
the same mis-reading of the situation as those who said "Why all the
fuss about Y2K, nothing bad happened did it".
[1] And inbound, onwards ground transportation being overwhelmed.

Airports (and, increasingly, railway stations) are designed for the
operator, not for the passenger. Their primary function is to be a
profitable retail outlet. Runways, tracks and an excuse for a lounge
are just necessary evils to divert shoppers from the cheaper and more
conveniently located rival malls elsewhere. They need to be placed at
the furthest corners of the site, like supermarket milk and bread, so
customers need to walk past everything else in an attempt to find them.

Eurostar can’t cope with its sudden desire for people to check in much
earlier and thus having lots of people hanging around. Coupled with
unreliable feeder train services into London so people have to add in even
more margin and thus more hanging around. Switzerland is often cited as the
land where trains run on time. In my limited experience Dutch trains also
run to the minute and frequently. They also have soft comfortable seats.

Eurostar was designed around free movement of peoples.[1] For some
reason that was taken away and then everybody moans because of the
resulting congestion.
[1] Debatable in the case of Gare du Nord!

Passport control has always been a thing with Eurostar even pre Brexit. We
have never been part of Schengen.

As a member of the EU UK passports didn't need checking and stamping.

[Tweed]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps.  There’s a fair
bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit.  If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

The funny thing is, airport design (and yes, hence International station
design, because it's fundamentally the same process on the ground) is
based on the premise that you want to *throttle* rather than *expedite*
the flow of passengers, so that you can spread the people out over a
larger area.
Otherwise you get precisely what's being complained about at St Pancras
(bursting full departure lounges[1]) all the time, not just when trains
are running late.
This was studied by engineers ahead of the introduction of the 747, on
account of the much larger number of passengers each held. The wikipedia
page makes a brief reference to this: "The 747 enjoyed a fairly smooth
introduction into service, overcoming concerns that some airports would
not be able to accommodate an aircraft that large", but his is exactly
the same mis-reading of the situation as those who said "Why all the
fuss about Y2K, nothing bad happened did it".
[1] And inbound, onwards ground transportation being overwhelmed.

Airports (and, increasingly, railway stations) are designed for the
operator, not for the passenger. Their primary function is to be a
profitable retail outlet. Runways, tracks and an excuse for a lounge
are just necessary evils to divert shoppers from the cheaper and more
conveniently located rival malls elsewhere. They need to be placed at
the furthest corners of the site, like supermarket milk and bread, so
customers need to walk past everything else in an attempt to find them.

Eurostar can’t cope with its sudden desire for people to check in much
earlier and thus having lots of people hanging around. Coupled with
unreliable feeder train services into London so people have to add in even
more margin and thus more hanging around. Switzerland is often cited as the
land where trains run on time. In my limited experience Dutch trains also
run to the minute and frequently. They also have soft comfortable seats.

Eurostar was designed around free movement of peoples.[1] For some
reason that was taken away and then everybody moans because of the
resulting congestion.
[1] Debatable in the case of Gare du Nord!

Passport control has always been a thing with Eurostar even pre Brexit. We
have never been part of Schengen.

As a member of the EU UK passports didn't need checking and stamping.

Well they’d need checking at least, otherwise you might be an American…..

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Tweed

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps.  There’s a fair
bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit.  If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

The funny thing is, airport design (and yes, hence International station
design, because it's fundamentally the same process on the ground) is
based on the premise that you want to *throttle* rather than *expedite*
the flow of passengers, so that you can spread the people out over a
larger area.
Otherwise you get precisely what's being complained about at St Pancras
(bursting full departure lounges[1]) all the time, not just when trains
are running late.
This was studied by engineers ahead of the introduction of the 747, on
account of the much larger number of passengers each held. The wikipedia
page makes a brief reference to this: "The 747 enjoyed a fairly smooth
introduction into service, overcoming concerns that some airports would
not be able to accommodate an aircraft that large", but his is exactly
the same mis-reading of the situation as those who said "Why all the
fuss about Y2K, nothing bad happened did it".
[1] And inbound, onwards ground transportation being overwhelmed.

Airports (and, increasingly, railway stations) are designed for the
operator, not for the passenger. Their primary function is to be a
profitable retail outlet. Runways, tracks and an excuse for a lounge
are just necessary evils to divert shoppers from the cheaper and more
conveniently located rival malls elsewhere. They need to be placed at
the furthest corners of the site, like supermarket milk and bread, so
customers need to walk past everything else in an attempt to find them.

Eurostar can’t cope with its sudden desire for people to check in much
earlier and thus having lots of people hanging around. Coupled with
unreliable feeder train services into London so people have to add in even
more margin and thus more hanging around. Switzerland is often cited as the
land where trains run on time. In my limited experience Dutch trains also
run to the minute and frequently. They also have soft comfortable seats.

Eurostar was designed around free movement of peoples.[1] For some
reason that was taken away and then everybody moans because of the
resulting congestion.
[1] Debatable in the case of Gare du Nord!

Passport control has always been a thing with Eurostar even pre Brexit. We
have never been part of Schengen.

As a member of the EU UK passports didn't need checking and stamping.

Well they’d need checking at least, otherwise you might be an American…..

You normally just had to show it as you walked past.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed
Passport control has always been a thing with Eurostar even pre Brexit. We
have never been part of Schengen.

As a member of the EU UK passports didn't need checking and stamping.

Well they’d need checking at least, otherwise you might be an American…..

You normally just had to show it as you walked past.

And someone had previously done a risk assessment and decided that not
many Americans would go to the trouble of borrowing someone else's UK
passport just to be able to fast-track some border controls (mainly
cross channel ferries I think) by waving the cover.

As a Brit entering Schengen by air, I was acutely aware that we would
all have to wait in line to have our passports examined. This added
typically 20 minutes to an arrival from the UK at Geneva after .ch
joined Schengen.

And the only time I've ever missed a connecting flight was waiting in
the inadequately staffed Schengen "transfer" queue at Frankfurt, which
was necessary when arriving from the UK and traveling onwards on
effectively a domestic flight to a Schengen member.

[Tweed]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed
Passport control has always been a thing with Eurostar even pre Brexit. We
have never been part of Schengen.

As a member of the EU UK passports didn't need checking and stamping.

Well they’d need checking at least, otherwise you might be an American…..

You normally just had to show it as you walked past.

And someone had previously done a risk assessment and decided that not
many Americans would go to the trouble of borrowing someone else's UK
passport just to be able to fast-track some border controls (mainly
cross channel ferries I think) by waving the cover.
As a Brit entering Schengen by air, I was acutely aware that we would
all have to wait in line to have our passports examined. This added
typically 20 minutes to an arrival from the UK at Geneva after .ch
joined Schengen.
And the only time I've ever missed a connecting flight was waiting in
the inadequately staffed Schengen "transfer" queue at Frankfurt, which
was necessary when arriving from the UK and traveling onwards on
effectively a domestic flight to a Schengen member.

I too suffered in that queue at Frankfurt (pre Brexit) and vowed to avoid
Frankfurt for connecting flights if at all possible. Munich works much
better.

Touch wood, I’ve not really suffered with excessive post Brexit passport
queues. Not sure if it is just a co-incidence or not, but entry back into
the UK has improved no end. Many more electronic passport gates in service
and working faster than before.

I’m not too sure of the efficacy of all this passport stamping - there’s
nobody totting up my entry and exit stamps to see if I’ve exceeded my
allowable days. All they do is desperately hunt through the passport to
find the marching entry stamp when you exit. I guess it will probably be
tallied up once the Schengen electronic border system finally becomes live.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps.  There’s a fair
bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit.  If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

The funny thing is, airport design (and yes, hence International station
design, because it's fundamentally the same process on the ground) is
based on the premise that you want to *throttle* rather than *expedite*
the flow of passengers, so that you can spread the people out over a
larger area.
Otherwise you get precisely what's being complained about at St Pancras
(bursting full departure lounges[1]) all the time, not just when trains
are running late.
This was studied by engineers ahead of the introduction of the 747, on
account of the much larger number of passengers each held. The wikipedia
page makes a brief reference to this: "The 747 enjoyed a fairly smooth
introduction into service, overcoming concerns that some airports would
not be able to accommodate an aircraft that large", but his is exactly
the same mis-reading of the situation as those who said "Why all the
fuss about Y2K, nothing bad happened did it".
[1] And inbound, onwards ground transportation being overwhelmed.

Airports (and, increasingly, railway stations) are designed for the
operator, not for the passenger. Their primary function is to be a
profitable retail outlet. Runways, tracks and an excuse for a lounge
are just necessary evils to divert shoppers from the cheaper and more
conveniently located rival malls elsewhere. They need to be placed at
the furthest corners of the site, like supermarket milk and bread, so
customers need to walk past everything else in an attempt to find them.

Eurostar can’t cope with its sudden desire for people to check in much
earlier and thus having lots of people hanging around. Coupled with
unreliable feeder train services into London so people have to add in even
more margin and thus more hanging around. Switzerland is often cited as the
land where trains run on time. In my limited experience Dutch trains also
run to the minute and frequently. They also have soft comfortable seats.

Both Dutch and Swiss trains achieve much of their on-time performance by
having rather relaxed timings. Which goes with their smaller countries
and less complex networks, than the UK.

[Bob]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps.  There’s a fair
bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit.  If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

The funny thing is, airport design (and yes, hence International station
design, because it's fundamentally the same process on the ground) is
based on the premise that you want to *throttle* rather than *expedite*
the flow of passengers, so that you can spread the people out over a
larger area.
Otherwise you get precisely what's being complained about at St Pancras
(bursting full departure lounges[1]) all the time, not just when trains
are running late.
This was studied by engineers ahead of the introduction of the 747, on
account of the much larger number of passengers each held. The wikipedia
page makes a brief reference to this: "The 747 enjoyed a fairly smooth
introduction into service, overcoming concerns that some airports would
not be able to accommodate an aircraft that large", but his is exactly
the same mis-reading of the situation as those who said "Why all the
fuss about Y2K, nothing bad happened did it".
[1] And inbound, onwards ground transportation being overwhelmed.

Airports (and, increasingly, railway stations) are designed for the
operator, not for the passenger. Their primary function is to be a
profitable retail outlet. Runways, tracks and an excuse for a lounge
are just necessary evils to divert shoppers from the cheaper and more
conveniently located rival malls elsewhere. They need to be placed at
the furthest corners of the site, like supermarket milk and bread, so
customers need to walk past everything else in an attempt to find them.

Eurostar can’t cope with its sudden desire for people to check in much
earlier and thus having lots of people hanging around. Coupled with
unreliable feeder train services into London so people have to add in even
more margin and thus more hanging around. Switzerland is often cited as the
land where trains run on time. In my limited experience Dutch trains also
run to the minute and frequently. They also have soft comfortable seats.

Both Dutch and Swiss trains achieve much of their on-time performance
by having rather relaxed timings. Which goes with their smaller
countries and less complex networks, than the UK.

Ah, the "less complex" meme again, some things just won't ever go away.
Switzerland has about as much railway as all of England in a country
considerably smaller, meaning it is a denser and therefore more
interconnected (ie complex) network. It has the 4th busiest station in
Europe in terms of passenger numbers (Zürich HB), half as busy again as
the UK's busiest, and large volumes of international freight and
passenger services add further problems of timetable pollution from
other countries.

Robin

[Roland Perry]

Post by Bob

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take
the plane
from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps.  There’s a fair
bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit.  If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

The funny thing is, airport design (and yes, hence International station
design, because it's fundamentally the same process on the ground) is
based on the premise that you want to *throttle* rather than *expedite*
the flow of passengers, so that you can spread the people out over a
larger area.
Otherwise you get precisely what's being complained about at St Pancras
(bursting full departure lounges[1]) all the time, not just when trains
are running late.
This was studied by engineers ahead of the introduction of the 747, on
account of the much larger number of passengers each held. The wikipedia
page makes a brief reference to this: "The 747 enjoyed a fairly smooth
introduction into service, overcoming concerns that some airports would
not be able to accommodate an aircraft that large", but his is exactly
the same mis-reading of the situation as those who said "Why all the
fuss about Y2K, nothing bad happened did it".
[1] And inbound, onwards ground transportation being overwhelmed.

Airports (and, increasingly, railway stations) are designed for
operator, not for the passenger. Their primary function is to be a
profitable retail outlet. Runways, tracks and an excuse for a lounge
are just necessary evils to divert shoppers from the cheaper and more
conveniently located rival malls elsewhere. They need to be placed at
the furthest corners of the site, like supermarket milk and bread, so
customers need to walk past everything else in an attempt to find them.

Eurostar can’t cope with its sudden desire for people to check in much
earlier and thus having lots of people hanging around. Coupled with
unreliable feeder train services into London so people have to add in even
more margin and thus more hanging around. Switzerland is often cited as the
land where trains run on time. In my limited experience Dutch trains also
run to the minute and frequently. They also have soft comfortable seats.

Both Dutch and Swiss trains achieve much of their on-time
performance by having rather relaxed timings. Which goes with their
smaller countries and less complex networks, than the UK.

Ah, the "less complex" meme again, some things just won't ever go away.

It might not "go away", because being of being true, of course.

Post by Bob
Switzerland has about as much railway as all of England in a country
considerably smaller, meaning it is a denser and therefore more
interconnected (ie complex) network.

I'm prepared to review the situation.

We need to agree some parameters: how about number of route-miles,
number of stations, longest distance between stations at either end of
the country. If you can provide those for Switzerland, I'll do it for
UK.

I don't think passenger-miles is appropriate, because there's no
particular reason why longer trains need more recovery time en-route (ie
a more relaxed timetable) than short trains.

Post by Bob
It has the 4th busiest station in Europe in terms of passenger numbers
(Zürich HB), half as busy again as the UK's busiest, and large volumes
of international freight and passenger services add further problems of
timetable pollution from other countries.

We could add in number of freight trains a day, but the figures might be
harder to come by. On the other hand, there's no reason why if the
patheo simple existence of freight trains on the same tracks.

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by Tweed
Switzerland is often cited as the
land where trains run on time.

Mostly by those who haven't been there ;)


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[Charles Ellson]

On Sat, 10 Dec 2022 15:27:07 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Tweed
Switzerland is often cited as the
land where trains run on time.

Mostly by those who haven't been there ;)

It was rubbish the first time round when Uncle Benito was credited
with achieving it.

[Rolf Mantel]

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Tweed
Switzerland is often cited as the
land where trains run on time.

Mostly by those who haven't been there ;)

Just on Friday my ICE in Mannheim was late with the reason 'delayed
abroad (in Switzerland)'. I've heared rumours that the Swiss will not
priorizite foreign high-speed trains over domestic trains any more.

Rolf

[Roland Perry]

Post by Certes

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the
plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are
really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps.  There’s a
fair bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit.  If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second
electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

The funny thing is, airport design (and yes, hence International
station design, because it's fundamentally the same process on the
ground) is based on the premise that you want to *throttle* rather
than *expedite* the flow of passengers, so that you can spread the
people out over a larger area.
Otherwise you get precisely what's being complained about at St
Pancras (bursting full departure lounges[1]) all the time, not just
when trains are running late.
This was studied by engineers ahead of the introduction of the 747,
on account of the much larger number of passengers each held. The
wikipedia page makes a brief reference to this: "The 747 enjoyed a
fairly smooth introduction into service, overcoming concerns that
some airports would not be able to accommodate an aircraft that
large", but his is exactly the same mis-reading of the situation as
those who said "Why all the fuss about Y2K, nothing bad happened did it".
[1] And inbound, onwards ground transportation being overwhelmed.

Airports (and, increasingly, railway stations) are designed for the
operator, not for the passenger. Their primary function is to be a
profitable retail outlet.

That doesn't really impact the thoughput time for passengers who ignore
the shopping opportunities.

Post by Certes
Runways, tracks and an excuse for a lounge are just necessary evils to
divert shoppers from the cheaper and more conveniently located rival
malls elsewhere.

You really think people catch a flight just to shop airside, rather than
a their local Mall? Actually, I have shopped cheaper airside at
duty-free electronics shops, but only because I was there anyway.

Post by Certes
They need to be placed at
the furthest corners of the site, like supermarket milk and bread, so
customers need to walk past everything else in an attempt to find them.

I can't think of any airport where the gates have been moved to create
longer walks. Even at St Pancras (which I have complained about a lot)
you couldn't fit all the new platforms inside the shed, so the shorter
ones need to be in the extension. Unless it had been designed as a
double-decker with the E* platforms under the domestic ones, and every
time that's been discussed here it's been dismissed as a ridiculous
notion.

[Theo]

Post by Roland Perry
I can't think of any airport where the gates have been moved to create
longer walks. Even at St Pancras (which I have complained about a lot)
you couldn't fit all the new platforms inside the shed, so the shorter
ones need to be in the extension. Unless it had been designed as a
double-decker with the E* platforms under the domestic ones, and every
time that's been discussed here it's been dismissed as a ridiculous
notion.

This is Stansted:
Loading Image.../m/1083x0/

The gates weren't moved, but the route to the gates was made substantially
longer. If you could nip through Harris and Hoole you would save about 6
minutes walk.

Theo

[Certes]

Post by Theo

Post by Roland Perry
I can't think of any airport where the gates have been moved to create
longer walks. Even at St Pancras (which I have complained about a lot)
you couldn't fit all the new platforms inside the shed, so the shorter
ones need to be in the extension. Unless it had been designed as a
double-decker with the E* platforms under the domestic ones, and every
time that's been discussed here it's been dismissed as a ridiculous
notion.

https://a.storyblok.com/f/98871/1100x755/e6b7eda558/london-stansted.jpg/m/1083x0/
The gates weren't moved, but the route to the gates was made substantially
longer. If you could nip through Harris and Hoole you would save about 6
minutes walk.

Thank you. That's a perfect example of a greedy and arrogant operator
selfishly inconveniencing thousands of passengers for their own benefit.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Certes

Post by Theo

Post by Roland Perry
I can't think of any airport where the gates have been moved to create
longer walks. Even at St Pancras (which I have complained about a lot)
you couldn't fit all the new platforms inside the shed, so the shorter
ones need to be in the extension. Unless it had been designed as a
double-decker with the E* platforms under the domestic ones, and every
time that's been discussed here it's been dismissed as a ridiculous
notion.

https://a.storyblok.com/f/98871/1100x755/e6b7eda558/london-stansted.jpg
/m/1083x0/
The gates weren't moved, but the route to the gates was made
substantially
longer. If you could nip through Harris and Hoole you would save about 6
minutes walk.

Thank you. That's a perfect example of a greedy and arrogant operator
selfishly inconveniencing thousands of passengers for their own benefit.

Overall, those passengers would be far more inconvenienced if as an
alternative revenue stream they put up the landing charges, and some
airlines decided they would not fly from there any more.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Theo

Post by Roland Perry
I can't think of any airport where the gates have been moved to create
longer walks. Even at St Pancras (which I have complained about a lot)
you couldn't fit all the new platforms inside the shed, so the shorter
ones need to be in the extension. Unless it had been designed as a
double-decker with the E* platforms under the domestic ones, and every
time that's been discussed here it's been dismissed as a ridiculous
notion.

https://a.storyblok.com/f/98871/1100x755/e6b7eda558/london-stansted.jpg/
m/1083x0/
The gates weren't moved, but the route to the gates was made substantially
longer. If you could nip through Harris and Hoole

Are the gray areas staff-only

Post by Theo
you would save about 6 minutes walk.

My heart bleeds. If that means you miss your flight, something else has
gone seriously wrong.

[Theo]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Theo

Post by Roland Perry
I can't think of any airport where the gates have been moved to create
longer walks. Even at St Pancras (which I have complained about a lot)
you couldn't fit all the new platforms inside the shed, so the shorter
ones need to be in the extension. Unless it had been designed as a
double-decker with the E* platforms under the domestic ones, and every
time that's been discussed here it's been dismissed as a ridiculous
notion.

https://a.storyblok.com/f/98871/1100x755/e6b7eda558/london-stansted.jpg/
m/1083x0/
The gates weren't moved, but the route to the gates was made substantially
longer. If you could nip through Harris and Hoole

Are the gray areas staff-only

I think so.

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Theo
you would save about 6 minutes walk.

My heart bleeds. If that means you miss your flight, something else has
gone seriously wrong.

It's a big deal if you're of limited mobility (for which the other options
are 'wheelchair' or 'buggy', which have their own issues). It adds to the
unnecessary stress.

I once took somebody in a wheelchair through and I think there's a staff
only cutthrough somewhere around the back of Moneycorp, but we essentially
tailgated a member of staff through - it isn't an advertised route, even for
wheelchairs.

Theo

[Sam Wilson]

Post by Theo

Post by Roland Perry
I can't think of any airport where the gates have been moved to create
longer walks. Even at St Pancras (which I have complained about a lot)
you couldn't fit all the new platforms inside the shed, so the shorter
ones need to be in the extension. Unless it had been designed as a
double-decker with the E* platforms under the domestic ones, and every
time that's been discussed here it's been dismissed as a ridiculous
notion.

https://a.storyblok.com/f/98871/1100x755/e6b7eda558/london-stansted.jpg/m/1083x0/
The gates weren't moved, but the route to the gates was made substantially
longer. If you could nip through Harris and Hoole you would save about 6
minutes walk.

Spot the ironically named Escape Lounge. IKEA at least has little
bypasses.

Sam

[Tweed]

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Theo

Post by Roland Perry
I can't think of any airport where the gates have been moved to create
longer walks. Even at St Pancras (which I have complained about a lot)
you couldn't fit all the new platforms inside the shed, so the shorter
ones need to be in the extension. Unless it had been designed as a
double-decker with the E* platforms under the domestic ones, and every
time that's been discussed here it's been dismissed as a ridiculous
notion.

https://a.storyblok.com/f/98871/1100x755/e6b7eda558/london-stansted.jpg/m/1083x0/
The gates weren't moved, but the route to the gates was made substantially
longer. If you could nip through Harris and Hoole you would save about 6
minutes walk.

Spot the ironically named Escape Lounge. IKEA at least has little
bypasses.
Sam

You can avoid the shop for a fee!

https://simpleflying.com/london-stansted-security-fast-track/

However, Stansted Airport also offers an upgraded offering. Fast Track
Plus. For an extra £3, passengers are offered a dedicated route to the
departure lounge. Stansted Airport's departure lounge is laid out in a big
C shape, meaning passengers must walk through the World Duty-Free shop and
past all the other shops in the terminal. Fast Track Plus allows passengers
to skip the whole C, going straight from the start to the end. This option
is only available when booked directly with the airport and not via a third
party while booking flight tickets.

[Certes]

Post by Tweed

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Theo

Post by Roland Perry
I can't think of any airport where the gates have been moved to create
longer walks. Even at St Pancras (which I have complained about a lot)
you couldn't fit all the new platforms inside the shed, so the shorter
ones need to be in the extension. Unless it had been designed as a
double-decker with the E* platforms under the domestic ones, and every
time that's been discussed here it's been dismissed as a ridiculous
notion.

https://a.storyblok.com/f/98871/1100x755/e6b7eda558/london-stansted.jpg/m/1083x0/
The gates weren't moved, but the route to the gates was made substantially
longer. If you could nip through Harris and Hoole you would save about 6
minutes walk.

Spot the ironically named Escape Lounge. IKEA at least has little
bypasses.

You can avoid the shop for a fee!
https://simpleflying.com/london-stansted-security-fast-track/
However, Stansted Airport also offers an upgraded offering. Fast Track
Plus. For an extra £3, passengers are offered a dedicated route to the
departure lounge. Stansted Airport's departure lounge is laid out in a big
C shape, meaning passengers must walk through the World Duty-Free shop and
past all the other shops in the terminal. Fast Track Plus allows passengers
to skip the whole C, going straight from the start to the end. This option
is only available when booked directly with the airport and not via a third
party while booking flight tickets.

Money-grabbing bastards. I hope the shopkeepers are suitably humiliated
by the knowledge that people actually pay to avoid visiting them.

[Theo]

Post by Tweed
You can avoid the shop for a fee!
https://simpleflying.com/london-stansted-security-fast-track/
However, Stansted Airport also offers an upgraded offering. Fast Track
Plus. For an extra £3, passengers are offered a dedicated route to the
departure lounge. Stansted Airport's departure lounge is laid out in a big
C shape, meaning passengers must walk through the World Duty-Free shop and
past all the other shops in the terminal. Fast Track Plus allows passengers
to skip the whole C, going straight from the start to the end. This option
is only available when booked directly with the airport and not via a third
party while booking flight tickets.

Interesting, that's the staff-only route I took.

For £3 and with a group it would be almost worth it (I presume only one pass
needed to open the door), but it's actually £10 as you have to pay for
FastTrack (£7) as well. If I had somebody with mobility issues I'd be
thinking about it, though.

Theo

[Sam Wilson]

Post by Theo

Post by Roland Perry
I can't think of any airport where the gates have been moved to create
longer walks. Even at St Pancras (which I have complained about a lot)
you couldn't fit all the new platforms inside the shed, so the shorter
ones need to be in the extension. Unless it had been designed as a
double-decker with the E* platforms under the domestic ones, and every
time that's been discussed here it's been dismissed as a ridiculous
notion.

https://a.storyblok.com/f/98871/1100x755/e6b7eda558/london-stansted.jpg/m/1083x0/
The gates weren't moved, but the route to the gates was made substantially
longer. If you could nip through Harris and Hoole you would save about 6
minutes walk.

Does it actually take that long to walk the distance, modulo crowds of
shoppers blocking the way? I ask because in CdG I saw a sign telling me it
was 25 minutes (IIRC) to get to the gate where my flight was leaving, and
in fact it was about 4 minutes. It might have taken 25 minutes for people
who were more interested in the shopping experience.

Sam

[Theo]

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Theo
https://a.storyblok.com/f/98871/1100x755/e6b7eda558/london-stansted.jpg/m/1083x0/
The gates weren't moved, but the route to the gates was made substantially
longer. If you could nip through Harris and Hoole you would save about 6
minutes walk.

Does it actually take that long to walk the distance, modulo crowds of
shoppers blocking the way? I ask because in CdG I saw a sign telling me it
was 25 minutes (IIRC) to get to the gate where my flight was leaving, and
in fact it was about 4 minutes. It might have taken 25 minutes for people
who were more interested in the shopping experience.

I think the '15 minutes' on the map (probably more like 17 minutes starting
from security) is because they're accounting 10 minutes for the satellite
shuttle - presumably at the worst case frequency. It doesn't seem
implausible to take of the order of 7 minutes walking through the chicanery
if there are crowds of other people - can't really power-walk through if
it's congested. Sometimes you can overtake people through the side aisles
of the duty free shop, but that will depend on them being clear.

Theo

[Coffee]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Certes

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the
plane  from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are
really  trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps.  There’s a fair
bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit.  If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second
electronic  bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

 The funny thing is, airport design (and yes, hence International
station  design, because it's fundamentally the same process on the
ground) is  based on the premise that you want to *throttle* rather
than *expedite*  the flow of passengers, so that you can spread the
people out over a  larger area.
 Otherwise you get precisely what's being complained about at St
Pancras  (bursting full departure lounges[1]) all the time, not just
when trains  are running late.
 This was studied by engineers ahead of the introduction of the 747,
on  account of the much larger number of passengers each held. The
wikipedia  page makes a brief reference to this: "The 747 enjoyed a
fairly smooth  introduction into service, overcoming concerns that
some airports would  not be able to accommodate an aircraft that
large", but his is exactly  the same mis-reading of the situation as
those who said "Why all the  fuss about Y2K, nothing bad happened did
it".
 [1] And inbound, onwards ground transportation being overwhelmed.

Airports (and, increasingly, railway stations) are designed for the
operator, not for the passenger.  Their primary function is to be a
profitable retail outlet.

That doesn't really impact the thoughput time for passengers who ignore
the shopping opportunities.

It does because once through the checks you're forced to meander through
the duty free before reaching the main hall.

Hint. If the assistance security at Gatwick is open to all use that one
as it takes you direct to the main hall just outside Wetherspoons.

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Certes
Runways, tracks and an excuse for a lounge are just necessary evils to
divert shoppers from the cheaper and more conveniently located rival
malls elsewhere.

You really think people catch a flight just to shop airside, rather than
a their local Mall? Actually, I have shopped cheaper airside at
duty-free electronics shops, but only because I was there anyway.

Post by Certes
They need to be placed at
the furthest corners of the site, like supermarket milk and bread, so
customers need to walk past everything else in an attempt to find them.

I can't think of any airport where the gates have been moved to create
longer walks. Even at St Pancras (which I have complained about a lot)
you couldn't fit all the new platforms inside the shed, so the shorter
ones need to be in the extension. Unless it had been designed as a
double-decker with the E* platforms under the domestic ones, and every
time that's been discussed here it's been dismissed as a ridiculous notion.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Coffee

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Certes
Airports (and, increasingly, railway stations) are designed for the
operator, not for the passenger.  Their primary function is to be a
profitable retail outlet.

That doesn't really impact the thoughput time for passengers who
ignore the shopping opportunities.

It does because once through the checks you're forced to meander
through the duty free before reaching the main hall.

Six minutes, like at Stansted?

There are some gates which are *far* more than six minutes extra from
security than others, irrespective of the retail issue.

[D A Stocks]

Post by Coffee
Hint. If the assistance security at Gatwick is open to all use that one
as it takes you direct to the main hall just outside Wetherspoons.

The asistance security at both Gatwick terminals is just another lane in the
main security hall. However, there is a route available to anyone *after*
security that avoids the worst of the retail maze. This works in both
terminals; it's just a matter of looking for the alternative and not
following the sheep.

--
DAS

[Theo]

Post by D A Stocks
The asistance security at both Gatwick terminals is just another lane in the
main security hall. However, there is a route available to anyone *after*
security that avoids the worst of the retail maze. This works in both
terminals; it's just a matter of looking for the alternative and not
following the sheep.

For South Terminal there's a loop, but the map marks 'airline information'
in a potential cutthrough:
https://www.gatwickairport.com/contentassets/8d4b795686474a6ba63e19852f248153/gatwick_south_v22.pdf

Is there a route through? There's also an 'under development' unit on that
map, but I imagine that's not open.

Theo

[Mark Goodge]

On 11 Dec 2022 18:23:27 +0000 (GMT), Theo

Post by Theo

Post by D A Stocks
The asistance security at both Gatwick terminals is just another lane in the
main security hall. However, there is a route available to anyone *after*
security that avoids the worst of the retail maze. This works in both
terminals; it's just a matter of looking for the alternative and not
following the sheep.

For South Terminal there's a loop, but the map marks 'airline information'
https://www.gatwickairport.com/contentassets/8d4b795686474a6ba63e19852f248153/gatwick_south_v22.pdf
Is there a route through? There's also an 'under development' unit on that
map, but I imagine that's not open.

The thing that bugs me about most airports these days is that there's
nowhere to just sit and watch planes while you're waiting to be called to
the gate. it's not that I want to avoid spending money - I'll happily buy a
coffee to drink while I'm planewatching, and if it's around lunchtime then a
sandwich or burger as well. But the designers seem to assume that even being
able to look away from a retail unit is unacceptable - there has to be
retail in all directions, with the passengers corralled in the middle of it
all and nothing to see except shopfronts. The Gatwick floorplan is a typical
example of that.

Mark

[Recliner]

Post by Mark Goodge
On 11 Dec 2022 18:23:27 +0000 (GMT), Theo

Post by Theo

Post by D A Stocks
The asistance security at both Gatwick terminals is just another lane in the
main security hall. However, there is a route available to anyone *after*
security that avoids the worst of the retail maze. This works in both
terminals; it's just a matter of looking for the alternative and not
following the sheep.

For South Terminal there's a loop, but the map marks 'airline information'
https://www.gatwickairport.com/contentassets/8d4b795686474a6ba63e19852f248153/gatwick_south_v22.pdf
Is there a route through? There's also an 'under development' unit on that
map, but I imagine that's not open.

The thing that bugs me about most airports these days is that there's
nowhere to just sit and watch planes while you're waiting to be called to
the gate. it's not that I want to avoid spending money - I'll happily buy a
coffee to drink while I'm planewatching, and if it's around lunchtime then a
sandwich or burger as well. But the designers seem to assume that even being
able to look away from a retail unit is unacceptable - there has to be
retail in all directions, with the passengers corralled in the middle of it
all and nothing to see except shopfronts. The Gatwick floorplan is a typical
example of that.

Needless to say, many of the business and first class lounges provide
excellent views of the airport, with no distracting retail getting in the
way (all the food and drink on offer is free). They're also often at a
higher level, so the views are better anyway.

[Nobody]

On Sun, 11 Dec 2022 21:33:20 -0000 (UTC), Recliner

Post by Mark Goodge
On 11 Dec 2022 18:23:27 +0000 (GMT), Theo

Post by Theo

Post by D A Stocks
The asistance security at both Gatwick terminals is just another lane in the
main security hall. However, there is a route available to anyone *after*
security that avoids the worst of the retail maze. This works in both
terminals; it's just a matter of looking for the alternative and not
following the sheep.

For South Terminal there's a loop, but the map marks 'airline information'
https://www.gatwickairport.com/contentassets/8d4b795686474a6ba63e19852f248153/gatwick_south_v22.pdf
Is there a route through? There's also an 'under development' unit on that
map, but I imagine that's not open.

The thing that bugs me about most airports these days is that there's
nowhere to just sit and watch planes while you're waiting to be called to
the gate.

As in the case of railway Waiting Rooms, totally enclosed with
four-paned grime-encrusted opaque windows outwards to platforms...
unless one wanted to kill one's back in the smoke-filled (sometimes
frigid) chuffing of Stephenson's Invention on a multi-barred sooty
bench.

We're sooo hard-done by these days!

[Coffee]

Post by Nobody
On Sun, 11 Dec 2022 21:33:20 -0000 (UTC), Recliner

Post by Mark Goodge
On 11 Dec 2022 18:23:27 +0000 (GMT), Theo

Post by Theo

Post by D A Stocks
The asistance security at both Gatwick terminals is just another lane in the
main security hall. However, there is a route available to anyone *after*
security that avoids the worst of the retail maze. This works in both
terminals; it's just a matter of looking for the alternative and not
following the sheep.

For South Terminal there's a loop, but the map marks 'airline information'
https://www.gatwickairport.com/contentassets/8d4b795686474a6ba63e19852f248153/gatwick_south_v22.pdf
Is there a route through? There's also an 'under development' unit on that
map, but I imagine that's not open.

The thing that bugs me about most airports these days is that there's
nowhere to just sit and watch planes while you're waiting to be called to
the gate.

As in the case of railway Waiting Rooms, totally enclosed with
four-paned grime-encrusted opaque windows outwards to platforms...
unless one wanted to kill one's back in the smoke-filled (sometimes
frigid) chuffing of Stephenson's Invention on a multi-barred sooty
bench.
We're sooo hard-done by these days!

You have a totally enclosed railway waiting room at your home railway
station. You're very lucky. We have a bus shelter which barely
complies with no smoking regulations.

[Nobody]

On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 11:11:56 +0000, Coffee

Post by Coffee

Post by Nobody
On Sun, 11 Dec 2022 21:33:20 -0000 (UTC), Recliner

Post by Mark Goodge
On 11 Dec 2022 18:23:27 +0000 (GMT), Theo

Post by Theo

Post by D A Stocks
The asistance security at both Gatwick terminals is just another lane in the
main security hall. However, there is a route available to anyone *after*
security that avoids the worst of the retail maze. This works in both
terminals; it's just a matter of looking for the alternative and not
following the sheep.

For South Terminal there's a loop, but the map marks 'airline information'
https://www.gatwickairport.com/contentassets/8d4b795686474a6ba63e19852f248153/gatwick_south_v22.pdf
Is there a route through? There's also an 'under development' unit on that
map, but I imagine that's not open.

The thing that bugs me about most airports these days is that there's
nowhere to just sit and watch planes while you're waiting to be called to
the gate.

As in the case of railway Waiting Rooms, totally enclosed with
four-paned grime-encrusted opaque windows outwards to platforms...
unless one wanted to kill one's back in the smoke-filled (sometimes
frigid) chuffing of Stephenson's Invention on a multi-barred sooty
bench.
We're sooo hard-done by these days!

You have a totally enclosed railway waiting room at your home railway
station. You're very lucky. We have a bus shelter which barely
complies with no smoking regulations.

I was being sarcastic about the Good Ol' Days of NZ Gov't Snailways...

[Tweed]

Post by Coffee

Post by Nobody
On Sun, 11 Dec 2022 21:33:20 -0000 (UTC), Recliner

Post by Mark Goodge
On 11 Dec 2022 18:23:27 +0000 (GMT), Theo

Post by Theo

Post by D A Stocks
The asistance security at both Gatwick terminals is just another lane in the
main security hall. However, there is a route available to anyone *after*
security that avoids the worst of the retail maze. This works in both
terminals; it's just a matter of looking for the alternative and not
following the sheep.

For South Terminal there's a loop, but the map marks 'airline information'
https://www.gatwickairport.com/contentassets/8d4b795686474a6ba63e19852f248153/gatwick_south_v22.pdf
Is there a route through? There's also an 'under development' unit on that
map, but I imagine that's not open.

The thing that bugs me about most airports these days is that there's
nowhere to just sit and watch planes while you're waiting to be called to
the gate.

As in the case of railway Waiting Rooms, totally enclosed with
four-paned grime-encrusted opaque windows outwards to platforms...
unless one wanted to kill one's back in the smoke-filled (sometimes
frigid) chuffing of Stephenson's Invention on a multi-barred sooty
bench.
We're sooo hard-done by these days!

You have a totally enclosed railway waiting room at your home railway
station. You're very lucky. We have a bus shelter which barely
complies with no smoking regulations.

Have you considered moving? Everything seems terrible where you live given
what you report.

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by Mark Goodge
On 11 Dec 2022 18:23:27 +0000 (GMT), Theo

Post by Theo

Post by D A Stocks
The asistance security at both Gatwick terminals is just another lane in the
main security hall. However, there is a route available to anyone *after*
security that avoids the worst of the retail maze. This works in both
terminals; it's just a matter of looking for the alternative and not
following the sheep.

For South Terminal there's a loop, but the map marks 'airline information'
https://www.gatwickairport.com/contentassets/8d4b795686474a6ba63e19852f248153/gatwick_south_v22.pdf
Is there a route through? There's also an 'under development' unit on that
map, but I imagine that's not open.

The thing that bugs me about most airports these days is that there's
nowhere to just sit and watch planes while you're waiting to be called to
the gate. it's not that I want to avoid spending money - I'll happily buy a
coffee to drink while I'm planewatching, and if it's around lunchtime then a
sandwich or burger as well. But the designers seem to assume that even being
able to look away from a retail unit is unacceptable - there has to be
retail in all directions, with the passengers corralled in the middle of it
all and nothing to see except shopfronts. The Gatwick floorplan is a typical
example of that.

While Bristol has no runway view, Heathrow T5 has large windows, Madeira
and Nagasaki both have airside outdoor viewing areas, Gatwick North you
could loiter on the footbridge I suppose? Gran Canaria has a lounge with an
outdoor viewing area, Amsterdam lounges have view of planes.

Those places which allow you a seat at the gate (so again, not Bristol!)
usually have a view of planes there - examples include Bangkok, Singapore,
Hong Kong, Taipei, Naha, Narita…

Bilbao has an odd viewing area for people waiting for arriving passengers,
which looks over the luggage carousels!!


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[h***@yahoo.co.uk]

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Mark Goodge
On 11 Dec 2022 18:23:27 +0000 (GMT), Theo

Post by Theo

Post by D A Stocks
The asistance security at both Gatwick terminals is just another lane in the
main security hall. However, there is a route available to anyone *after*
security that avoids the worst of the retail maze. This works in both
terminals; it's just a matter of looking for the alternative and not
following the sheep.

For South Terminal there's a loop, but the map marks 'airline information'
https://www.gatwickairport.com/contentassets/8d4b795686474a6ba63e19852f248153/gatwick_south_v22.pdf
Is there a route through? There's also an 'under development' unit on that
map, but I imagine that's not open.

The thing that bugs me about most airports these days is that there's
nowhere to just sit and watch planes while you're waiting to be called to
the gate. it's not that I want to avoid spending money - I'll happily buy a
coffee to drink while I'm planewatching, and if it's around lunchtime then a
sandwich or burger as well. But the designers seem to assume that even being
able to look away from a retail unit is unacceptable - there has to be
retail in all directions, with the passengers corralled in the middle of it
all and nothing to see except shopfronts. The Gatwick floorplan is a typical
example of that.

While Bristol has no runway view, Heathrow T5 has large windows, Madeira
and Nagasaki both have airside outdoor viewing areas, Gatwick North you
could loiter on the footbridge I suppose? Gran Canaria has a lounge with an
outdoor viewing area, Amsterdam lounges have view of planes.
Those places which allow you a seat at the gate (so again, not Bristol!)
usually have a view of planes there - examples include Bangkok, Singapore,
Hong Kong, Taipei, Naha, Narita…
Bilbao has an odd viewing area for people waiting for arriving passengers,
which looks over the luggage carousels!!
Anna Noyd-Dryver

Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though
access is paid.

[Tweed]

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Mark Goodge
On 11 Dec 2022 18:23:27 +0000 (GMT), Theo

Post by Theo

Post by D A Stocks
The asistance security at both Gatwick terminals is just another lane in the
main security hall. However, there is a route available to anyone *after*
security that avoids the worst of the retail maze. This works in both
terminals; it's just a matter of looking for the alternative and not
following the sheep.

For South Terminal there's a loop, but the map marks 'airline information'
https://www.gatwickairport.com/contentassets/8d4b795686474a6ba63e19852f248153/gatwick_south_v22.pdf
Is there a route through? There's also an 'under development' unit on that
map, but I imagine that's not open.

The thing that bugs me about most airports these days is that there's
nowhere to just sit and watch planes while you're waiting to be called to
the gate. it's not that I want to avoid spending money - I'll happily buy a
coffee to drink while I'm planewatching, and if it's around lunchtime then a
sandwich or burger as well. But the designers seem to assume that even being
able to look away from a retail unit is unacceptable - there has to be
retail in all directions, with the passengers corralled in the middle of it
all and nothing to see except shopfronts. The Gatwick floorplan is a typical
example of that.

While Bristol has no runway view, Heathrow T5 has large windows, Madeira
and Nagasaki both have airside outdoor viewing areas, Gatwick North you
could loiter on the footbridge I suppose? Gran Canaria has a lounge with an
outdoor viewing area, Amsterdam lounges have view of planes.
Those places which allow you a seat at the gate (so again, not Bristol!)
usually have a view of planes there - examples include Bangkok, Singapore,
Hong Kong, Taipei, Naha, Narita…
Bilbao has an odd viewing area for people waiting for arriving passengers,
which looks over the luggage carousels!!
Anna Noyd-Dryver

Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though
access is paid.

Add Gibraltar to the list with outdoor viewing areas.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Tweed

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Mark Goodge
On 11 Dec 2022 18:23:27 +0000 (GMT), Theo

Post by Theo

Post by D A Stocks
The asistance security at both Gatwick terminals is just another lane in the
main security hall. However, there is a route available to anyone *after*
security that avoids the worst of the retail maze. This works in both
terminals; it's just a matter of looking for the alternative and not
following the sheep.

For South Terminal there's a loop, but the map marks 'airline information'
https://www.gatwickairport.com/contentassets/8d4b795686474a6ba63e19852f248153/gatwick_south_v22.pdf
Is there a route through? There's also an 'under development' unit on that
map, but I imagine that's not open.

The thing that bugs me about most airports these days is that there's
nowhere to just sit and watch planes while you're waiting to be called to
the gate. it's not that I want to avoid spending money - I'll happily buy a
coffee to drink while I'm planewatching, and if it's around lunchtime then a
sandwich or burger as well. But the designers seem to assume that even being
able to look away from a retail unit is unacceptable - there has to be
retail in all directions, with the passengers corralled in the middle of it
all and nothing to see except shopfronts. The Gatwick floorplan is a typical
example of that.

While Bristol has no runway view, Heathrow T5 has large windows, Madeira
and Nagasaki both have airside outdoor viewing areas, Gatwick North you
could loiter on the footbridge I suppose? Gran Canaria has a lounge with an
outdoor viewing area, Amsterdam lounges have view of planes.
Those places which allow you a seat at the gate (so again, not Bristol!)
usually have a view of planes there - examples include Bangkok, Singapore,
Hong Kong, Taipei, Naha, Narita…
Bilbao has an odd viewing area for people waiting for arriving passengers,
which looks over the luggage carousels!!
Anna Noyd-Dryver

Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though
access is paid.

Add Gibraltar to the list with outdoor viewing areas.

And Gatwick, though it is at the other end of the runway!

[M***@dastardlyhq.com]

On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 18:56:59 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though
access is paid.

Add Gibraltar to the list with outdoor viewing areas.

And Gatwick, though it is at the other end of the runway!

Gatwick north terminal used to have an open air viewing area before security
so you could go and watch the plane land that you were meeting. Naturally
this was popular so they closed it for the usual fatuous "security" reasons.
Perhaps they thought someone could sneak a manpad up there and take out a
plane, who knows how these people think.

[Tweed]

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 18:56:59 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though
access is paid.

Add Gibraltar to the list with outdoor viewing areas.

And Gatwick, though it is at the other end of the runway!

Gatwick north terminal used to have an open air viewing area before security
so you could go and watch the plane land that you were meeting. Naturally
this was popular so they closed it for the usual fatuous "security" reasons.
Perhaps they thought someone could sneak a manpad up there and take out a
plane, who knows how these people think.

I’m surprised that some of the Heathrow car parks are so close to the
runway.

[M***@dastardlyhq.com]

On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 10:31:35 -0000 (UTC)

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 18:56:59 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though
access is paid.

Add Gibraltar to the list with outdoor viewing areas.

And Gatwick, though it is at the other end of the runway!

Gatwick north terminal used to have an open air viewing area before security
so you could go and watch the plane land that you were meeting. Naturally
this was popular so they closed it for the usual fatuous "security" reasons.
Perhaps they thought someone could sneak a manpad up there and take out a
plane, who knows how these people think.

I’m surprised that some of the Heathrow car parks are so close to the
runway.

You'd have to be pretty determined to get through those fences though probably
possible with enough people and equipment before plod turned up. But it is
ironic that you can get far closer to the planes than you ever could at the
gatwick viewing area.

[Coffee]

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 18:56:59 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though
access is paid.

Add Gibraltar to the list with outdoor viewing areas.

And Gatwick, though it is at the other end of the runway!

Gatwick north terminal used to have an open air viewing area before security
so you could go and watch the plane land that you were meeting. Naturally
this was popular so they closed it for the usual fatuous "security" reasons.
Perhaps they thought someone could sneak a manpad up there and take out a
plane, who knows how these people think.

I seem to remember Irish terrorists attempted a home made device mounted
in a van at Heathrow. These security reasons were well founded.

[M***@dastardlyhq.com]

On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 11:00:05 +0000

Post by Coffee

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 18:56:59 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though
access is paid.

Add Gibraltar to the list with outdoor viewing areas.

And Gatwick, though it is at the other end of the runway!

Gatwick north terminal used to have an open air viewing area before security
so you could go and watch the plane land that you were meeting. Naturally
this was popular so they closed it for the usual fatuous "security" reasons.
Perhaps they thought someone could sneak a manpad up there and take out a
plane, who knows how these people think.

I seem to remember Irish terrorists attempted a home made device mounted
in a van at Heathrow. These security reasons were well founded.

Why would irish terrorists stick a bomb 3 floors up on the edge of a building
in a small area where everyone can see what you're doing when they could just
leave it unnoticed in a cafe or shop in arrivals instead?

[Graeme Wall]

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 11:00:05 +0000

Post by Coffee

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 18:56:59 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though
access is paid.

Add Gibraltar to the list with outdoor viewing areas.

And Gatwick, though it is at the other end of the runway!

Gatwick north terminal used to have an open air viewing area before security
so you could go and watch the plane land that you were meeting. Naturally
this was popular so they closed it for the usual fatuous "security" reasons.
Perhaps they thought someone could sneak a manpad up there and take out a
plane, who knows how these people think.

I seem to remember Irish terrorists attempted a home made device mounted
in a van at Heathrow. These security reasons were well founded.

Why would irish terrorists stick a bomb 3 floors up on the edge of a building
in a small area where everyone can see what you're doing when they could just
leave it unnoticed in a cafe or shop in arrivals instead?

The device being referred to was a home-made mortar, not just a bomb.

[M***@dastardlyhq.com]

On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 15:55:57 +0000

Post by Tweed

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 11:00:05 +0000

Post by Coffee

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 18:56:59 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though
access is paid.

Add Gibraltar to the list with outdoor viewing areas.

And Gatwick, though it is at the other end of the runway!

Gatwick north terminal used to have an open air viewing area before

security

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com

Post by Coffee

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
so you could go and watch the plane land that you were meeting. Naturally
this was popular so they closed it for the usual fatuous "security"

reasons.

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com

Post by Coffee

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
Perhaps they thought someone could sneak a manpad up there and take out a
plane, who knows how these people think.

I seem to remember Irish terrorists attempted a home made device mounted
in a van at Heathrow. These security reasons were well founded.

Why would irish terrorists stick a bomb 3 floors up on the edge of a building
in a small area where everyone can see what you're doing when they could just
leave it unnoticed in a cafe or shop in arrivals instead?

The device being referred to was a home-made mortar, not just a bomb.

And you don't think the plane spotters on the roof would notice some people
lugging a mortar up there and setting it up? "Don't mind us lads, this is
just for Bonfire Night!". Get real.

I suspect the real reason it closed is because they could. Why have the great
unwashed wandering around your building when you don't have to. Its not the
20th century anymore when people were treated like adults, now we all have to
be hearded and treated like children.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 15:55:57 +0000

Post by Tweed

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 11:00:05 +0000

Post by Coffee

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 18:56:59 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though
access is paid.

Add Gibraltar to the list with outdoor viewing areas.

And Gatwick, though it is at the other end of the runway!

Gatwick north terminal used to have an open air viewing area before

security

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com

Post by Coffee

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
so you could go and watch the plane land that you were meeting. Naturally
this was popular so they closed it for the usual fatuous "security"

reasons.

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com

Post by Coffee

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
Perhaps they thought someone could sneak a manpad up there and take out a
plane, who knows how these people think.

I seem to remember Irish terrorists attempted a home made device mounted
in a van at Heathrow. These security reasons were well founded.

Why would irish terrorists stick a bomb 3 floors up on the edge of a building
in a small area where everyone can see what you're doing when they could just
leave it unnoticed in a cafe or shop in arrivals instead?

The device being referred to was a home-made mortar, not just a bomb.

And you don't think the plane spotters on the roof would notice some people
lugging a mortar up there and setting it up? "Don't mind us lads, this is
just for Bonfire Night!". Get real.

Keep digging.

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
I suspect the real reason it closed is because they could. Why have the great
unwashed wandering around your building when you don't have to. Its not the
20th century anymore when people were treated like adults, now we all have to
be hearded and treated like children.

Perhaps because too many people behave like children these days.

[M***@dastardlyhq.com]

On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 16:15:48 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
in a small area where everyone can see what you're doing when they could

just

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
leave it unnoticed in a cafe or shop in arrivals instead?

The device being referred to was a home-made mortar, not just a bomb.

And you don't think the plane spotters on the roof would notice some people
lugging a mortar up there and setting it up? "Don't mind us lads, this is
just for Bonfire Night!". Get real.

Keep digging.

Keep thinking up a sensible reply. Or if you can imagine a way they'd get
a mortar up there unnoticed or why they'd pick the viewing roof instead of
an easier not to mention more effective location then do let us know Mr
Intelligence Mastermind.

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
be hearded and treated like children.

Perhaps because too many people behave like children these days.

Cart before horse.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 16:15:48 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
in a small area where everyone can see what you're doing when they could

just

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
leave it unnoticed in a cafe or shop in arrivals instead?

The device being referred to was a home-made mortar, not just a bomb.

And you don't think the plane spotters on the roof would notice some people
lugging a mortar up there and setting it up? "Don't mind us lads, this is
just for Bonfire Night!". Get real.

Keep digging.

Keep thinking up a sensible reply. Or if you can imagine a way they'd get
a mortar up there unnoticed or why they'd pick the viewing roof instead of
an easier not to mention more effective location then do let us know Mr
Intelligence Mastermind.

I notice that, once again, when you don't have a sensible argument you
have to result to childish insults.

[M***@dastardlyhq.com]

On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 17:48:37 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 16:15:48 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
in a small area where everyone can see what you're doing when they could

just

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
leave it unnoticed in a cafe or shop in arrivals instead?

The device being referred to was a home-made mortar, not just a bomb.

And you don't think the plane spotters on the roof would notice some people
lugging a mortar up there and setting it up? "Don't mind us lads, this is
just for Bonfire Night!". Get real.

Keep digging.

Keep thinking up a sensible reply. Or if you can imagine a way they'd get
a mortar up there unnoticed or why they'd pick the viewing roof instead of
an easier not to mention more effective location then do let us know Mr
Intelligence Mastermind.

I notice that, once again, when you don't have a sensible argument you
have to result to childish insults.

Wow, just wow. Your total lack of self awareness is on another level today.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 17:48:37 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 16:15:48 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
in a small area where everyone can see what you're doing when they could

just

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
leave it unnoticed in a cafe or shop in arrivals instead?

The device being referred to was a home-made mortar, not just a bomb.

And you don't think the plane spotters on the roof would notice some people
lugging a mortar up there and setting it up? "Don't mind us lads, this is
just for Bonfire Night!". Get real.

Keep digging.

Keep thinking up a sensible reply. Or if you can imagine a way they'd get
a mortar up there unnoticed or why they'd pick the viewing roof instead of
an easier not to mention more effective location then do let us know Mr
Intelligence Mastermind.

I notice that, once again, when you don't have a sensible argument you
have to result to childish insults.

Wow, just wow. Your total lack of self awareness is on another level today.

Try and understand that there was a real plot to set up a mortar attack
at Heathrow, unfortunately the IRA didn't have you to advise them.

They had already carried out a number of such attacks, including one on
Downing Street.

[Sam Wilson]

Post by M***@dastardlyhq.com
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 18:56:59 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Tweed

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though
access is paid.

Add Gibraltar to the list with outdoor viewing areas.

And Gatwick, though it is at the other end of the runway!

Gatwick north terminal used to have an open air viewing area before security
so you could go and watch the plane land that you were meeting. Naturally
this was popular so they closed it for the usual fatuous "security" reasons.
Perhaps they thought someone could sneak a manpad up there and take out a
plane, who knows how these people think.

Edinburgh and Manchester both used to have rooftop spectator areas.
Manchester used to have free access to the windows overlooking the apron,
and a publicly-accessible restaurant there too - I was taken there for my
birthday once as a small boy.

Sam

[John Levine]

Post by Tweed

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Bilbao has an odd viewing area for people waiting for arriving passengers,
which looks over the luggage carousels!!

Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though
access is paid.

Add Gibraltar to the list with outdoor viewing areas.

Should you ever be stuck at the Newark airport near NYC, take a quick
taxi ride to the IKEA on the other side of the NJ Turnpike where the
cafe patio has an excellent view of planes taking off and landing. And
they have those meatballs.

[Clank]

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
While Bristol has no runway view, Heathrow T5 has large windows, Madeira
and Nagasaki both have airside outdoor viewing areas, Gatwick North you
could loiter on the footbridge I suppose? Gran Canaria has a lounge with an
outdoor viewing area, Amsterdam lounges have view of planes.
Those places which allow you a seat at the gate (so again, not Bristol!)
usually have a view of planes there - examples include Bangkok, Singapore,
Hong Kong, Taipei, Naha, Narita?
Bilbao has an odd viewing area for people waiting for arriving passengers,
which looks over the luggage carousels!!

Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though access is paid.

Off the top of my head, Vienna and Munich both have full
length/height glass windows the length of the terminal buildings,
with a commanding view of the apron. Brussels similarly.


Otopeni has windows overlooking the apron, and the lounge at the
end of the pier also gives a cracking view of 08R/26L (personally
vouch as of 3 days ago). I believe there is a public viewing
gallery on the floor above that lounge as well, although I've
never been up there. The lounge at the inner end gives a less
exciting view of the apron, although you do just about get the
end of 08L/26R as well.

Heathrow T4 has a public viewing gallery up some stairs near one
of the gates (I forget which, but it's signed.) The lounge at
Malta (one of the best lounges you'll find) overlooks the runway
and even has an outdoor terrace with comfy chairs and parasols to
give you an unimpeded view. Doha is rather "indoorsy", but if
you head to the end of (IIRC) C pier on the transit (cable
hauled, same maker as Luton's DART I believe) you reach a
gorgeous winter garden, and the view of planes from the gates
there is great.

I could go on. I can't help thinking, of all the complaints to
make about airports - of which there are many - "not being able
to see planes" is probably the least of them...

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by Clank

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
While Bristol has no runway view, Heathrow T5 has large windows, Madeira
and Nagasaki both have airside outdoor viewing areas, Gatwick North you
could loiter on the footbridge I suppose? Gran Canaria has a lounge with an
outdoor viewing area, Amsterdam lounges have view of planes.
Those places which allow you a seat at the gate (so again, not Bristol!)
usually have a view of planes there - examples include Bangkok, Singapore,
Hong Kong, Taipei, Naha, Narita?
Bilbao has an odd viewing area for people waiting for arriving passengers,
which looks over the luggage carousels!!

Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though access is paid.

Off the top of my head, Vienna and Munich both have full
length/height glass windows the length of the terminal buildings,
with a commanding view of the apron. Brussels similarly.
Otopeni has windows overlooking the apron, and the lounge at the
end of the pier also gives a cracking view of 08R/26L (personally
vouch as of 3 days ago). I believe there is a public viewing
gallery on the floor above that lounge as well, although I've
never been up there. The lounge at the inner end gives a less
exciting view of the apron, although you do just about get the
end of 08L/26R as well.
Heathrow T4 has a public viewing gallery up some stairs near one
of the gates (I forget which, but it's signed.) The lounge at
Malta (one of the best lounges you'll find) overlooks the runway
and even has an outdoor terrace with comfy chairs and parasols to
give you an unimpeded view. Doha is rather "indoorsy", but if
you head to the end of (IIRC) C pier on the transit (cable
hauled, same maker as Luton's DART I believe) you reach a
gorgeous winter garden, and the view of planes from the gates
there is great.
I could go on. I can't help thinking, of all the complaints to
make about airports - of which there are many - "not being able
to see planes" is probably the least of them...

I can understand the complaint tbh - for those of us who visit airports
less frequently than some others, watching planes can be part of the
attraction while passing the seemingly interminable waits (and there never
seems to be a middle ground between "bag drop took so long that I now don't
have time for breakfast" and "stroll straight through security three hours
early").


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[Recliner]

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Clank

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
While Bristol has no runway view, Heathrow T5 has large windows, Madeira
and Nagasaki both have airside outdoor viewing areas, Gatwick North you
could loiter on the footbridge I suppose? Gran Canaria has a lounge with an
outdoor viewing area, Amsterdam lounges have view of planes.
Those places which allow you a seat at the gate (so again, not Bristol!)
usually have a view of planes there - examples include Bangkok, Singapore,
Hong Kong, Taipei, Naha, Narita?
Bilbao has an odd viewing area for people waiting for arriving passengers,
which looks over the luggage carousels!!

Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though access is paid.

Off the top of my head, Vienna and Munich both have full
length/height glass windows the length of the terminal buildings,
with a commanding view of the apron. Brussels similarly.
Otopeni has windows overlooking the apron, and the lounge at the
end of the pier also gives a cracking view of 08R/26L (personally
vouch as of 3 days ago). I believe there is a public viewing
gallery on the floor above that lounge as well, although I've
never been up there. The lounge at the inner end gives a less
exciting view of the apron, although you do just about get the
end of 08L/26R as well.
Heathrow T4 has a public viewing gallery up some stairs near one
of the gates (I forget which, but it's signed.) The lounge at
Malta (one of the best lounges you'll find) overlooks the runway
and even has an outdoor terrace with comfy chairs and parasols to
give you an unimpeded view. Doha is rather "indoorsy", but if
you head to the end of (IIRC) C pier on the transit (cable
hauled, same maker as Luton's DART I believe) you reach a
gorgeous winter garden, and the view of planes from the gates
there is great.
I could go on. I can't help thinking, of all the complaints to
make about airports - of which there are many - "not being able
to see planes" is probably the least of them...

I can understand the complaint tbh - for those of us who visit airports
less frequently than some others, watching planes can be part of the
attraction while passing the seemingly interminable waits (and there never
seems to be a middle ground between "bag drop took so long that I now don't
have time for breakfast" and "stroll straight through security three hours
early").

Plane watching is more interesting if there's a good variety of plane types
and airlines on view. An endless stream of Mr O'Leary's 738s soon gets
boring. For example, it's interesting to compare the lengt of runway used
by A380s, B777s and A320s.

[Coffee]

Post by Recliner

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Clank

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
While Bristol has no runway view, Heathrow T5 has large windows, Madeira
and Nagasaki both have airside outdoor viewing areas, Gatwick North you
could loiter on the footbridge I suppose? Gran Canaria has a lounge with an
outdoor viewing area, Amsterdam lounges have view of planes.
Those places which allow you a seat at the gate (so again, not Bristol!)
usually have a view of planes there - examples include Bangkok, Singapore,
Hong Kong, Taipei, Naha, Narita?
Bilbao has an odd viewing area for people waiting for arriving passengers,
which looks over the luggage carousels!!

Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though access is paid.

Off the top of my head, Vienna and Munich both have full
length/height glass windows the length of the terminal buildings,
with a commanding view of the apron. Brussels similarly.
Otopeni has windows overlooking the apron, and the lounge at the
end of the pier also gives a cracking view of 08R/26L (personally
vouch as of 3 days ago). I believe there is a public viewing
gallery on the floor above that lounge as well, although I've
never been up there. The lounge at the inner end gives a less
exciting view of the apron, although you do just about get the
end of 08L/26R as well.
Heathrow T4 has a public viewing gallery up some stairs near one
of the gates (I forget which, but it's signed.) The lounge at
Malta (one of the best lounges you'll find) overlooks the runway
and even has an outdoor terrace with comfy chairs and parasols to
give you an unimpeded view. Doha is rather "indoorsy", but if
you head to the end of (IIRC) C pier on the transit (cable
hauled, same maker as Luton's DART I believe) you reach a
gorgeous winter garden, and the view of planes from the gates
there is great.
I could go on. I can't help thinking, of all the complaints to
make about airports - of which there are many - "not being able
to see planes" is probably the least of them...

I can understand the complaint tbh - for those of us who visit airports
less frequently than some others, watching planes can be part of the
attraction while passing the seemingly interminable waits (and there never
seems to be a middle ground between "bag drop took so long that I now don't
have time for breakfast" and "stroll straight through security three hours
early").

Plane watching is more interesting if there's a good variety of plane types
and airlines on view. An endless stream of Mr O'Leary's 738s soon gets
boring. For example, it's interesting to compare the lengt of runway used
by A380s, B777s and A320s.

I would prefer to spend minimal time at the airport which does not
include watching planes.

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by Recliner

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Clank

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
While Bristol has no runway view, Heathrow T5 has large windows, Madeira
and Nagasaki both have airside outdoor viewing areas, Gatwick North you
could loiter on the footbridge I suppose? Gran Canaria has a lounge with an
outdoor viewing area, Amsterdam lounges have view of planes.
Those places which allow you a seat at the gate (so again, not Bristol!)
usually have a view of planes there - examples include Bangkok, Singapore,
Hong Kong, Taipei, Naha, Narita?
Bilbao has an odd viewing area for people waiting for arriving passengers,
which looks over the luggage carousels!!

Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though access is paid.

Off the top of my head, Vienna and Munich both have full
length/height glass windows the length of the terminal buildings,
with a commanding view of the apron. Brussels similarly.
Otopeni has windows overlooking the apron, and the lounge at the
end of the pier also gives a cracking view of 08R/26L (personally
vouch as of 3 days ago). I believe there is a public viewing
gallery on the floor above that lounge as well, although I've
never been up there. The lounge at the inner end gives a less
exciting view of the apron, although you do just about get the
end of 08L/26R as well.
Heathrow T4 has a public viewing gallery up some stairs near one
of the gates (I forget which, but it's signed.) The lounge at
Malta (one of the best lounges you'll find) overlooks the runway
and even has an outdoor terrace with comfy chairs and parasols to
give you an unimpeded view. Doha is rather "indoorsy", but if
you head to the end of (IIRC) C pier on the transit (cable
hauled, same maker as Luton's DART I believe) you reach a
gorgeous winter garden, and the view of planes from the gates
there is great.
I could go on. I can't help thinking, of all the complaints to
make about airports - of which there are many - "not being able
to see planes" is probably the least of them...

I can understand the complaint tbh - for those of us who visit airports
less frequently than some others, watching planes can be part of the
attraction while passing the seemingly interminable waits (and there never
seems to be a middle ground between "bag drop took so long that I now don't
have time for breakfast" and "stroll straight through security three hours
early").

Plane watching is more interesting if there's a good variety of plane types
and airlines on view. An endless stream of Mr O'Leary's 738s soon gets
boring. For example, it's interesting to compare the lengt of runway used
by A380s, B777s and A320s.

I don't know too much about plane types (big ones, bigger ones, small ones,
smaller ones!); I just like watching them go up and come down!


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[Tweed]

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Recliner

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Clank

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
While Bristol has no runway view, Heathrow T5 has large windows, Madeira
and Nagasaki both have airside outdoor viewing areas, Gatwick North you
could loiter on the footbridge I suppose? Gran Canaria has a lounge with an
outdoor viewing area, Amsterdam lounges have view of planes.
Those places which allow you a seat at the gate (so again, not Bristol!)
usually have a view of planes there - examples include Bangkok, Singapore,
Hong Kong, Taipei, Naha, Narita?
Bilbao has an odd viewing area for people waiting for arriving passengers,
which looks over the luggage carousels!!

Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though access is paid.

Off the top of my head, Vienna and Munich both have full
length/height glass windows the length of the terminal buildings,
with a commanding view of the apron. Brussels similarly.
Otopeni has windows overlooking the apron, and the lounge at the
end of the pier also gives a cracking view of 08R/26L (personally
vouch as of 3 days ago). I believe there is a public viewing
gallery on the floor above that lounge as well, although I've
never been up there. The lounge at the inner end gives a less
exciting view of the apron, although you do just about get the
end of 08L/26R as well.
Heathrow T4 has a public viewing gallery up some stairs near one
of the gates (I forget which, but it's signed.) The lounge at
Malta (one of the best lounges you'll find) overlooks the runway
and even has an outdoor terrace with comfy chairs and parasols to
give you an unimpeded view. Doha is rather "indoorsy", but if
you head to the end of (IIRC) C pier on the transit (cable
hauled, same maker as Luton's DART I believe) you reach a
gorgeous winter garden, and the view of planes from the gates
there is great.
I could go on. I can't help thinking, of all the complaints to
make about airports - of which there are many - "not being able
to see planes" is probably the least of them...

I can understand the complaint tbh - for those of us who visit airports
less frequently than some others, watching planes can be part of the
attraction while passing the seemingly interminable waits (and there never
seems to be a middle ground between "bag drop took so long that I now don't
have time for breakfast" and "stroll straight through security three hours
early").

Plane watching is more interesting if there's a good variety of plane types
and airlines on view. An endless stream of Mr O'Leary's 738s soon gets
boring. For example, it's interesting to compare the lengt of runway used
by A380s, B777s and A320s.

I don't know too much about plane types (big ones, bigger ones, small ones,
smaller ones!); I just like watching them go up and come down!
Anna Noyd-Dryver

Gibraltar and Madeira add a touch of excitement for the spectator because
of their short runways. Gibraltar has deployable arrestor wires for
military aircraft that need it.

[Sam Wilson]

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Recliner

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Clank

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
While Bristol has no runway view, Heathrow T5 has large windows, Madeira
and Nagasaki both have airside outdoor viewing areas, Gatwick North you
could loiter on the footbridge I suppose? Gran Canaria has a lounge with an
outdoor viewing area, Amsterdam lounges have view of planes.
Those places which allow you a seat at the gate (so again, not Bristol!)
usually have a view of planes there - examples include Bangkok, Singapore,
Hong Kong, Taipei, Naha, Narita?
Bilbao has an odd viewing area for people waiting for arriving passengers,
which looks over the luggage carousels!!

Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though access is paid.

Off the top of my head, Vienna and Munich both have full
length/height glass windows the length of the terminal buildings,
with a commanding view of the apron. Brussels similarly.
Otopeni has windows overlooking the apron, and the lounge at the
end of the pier also gives a cracking view of 08R/26L (personally
vouch as of 3 days ago). I believe there is a public viewing
gallery on the floor above that lounge as well, although I've
never been up there. The lounge at the inner end gives a less
exciting view of the apron, although you do just about get the
end of 08L/26R as well.
Heathrow T4 has a public viewing gallery up some stairs near one
of the gates (I forget which, but it's signed.) The lounge at
Malta (one of the best lounges you'll find) overlooks the runway
and even has an outdoor terrace with comfy chairs and parasols to
give you an unimpeded view. Doha is rather "indoorsy", but if
you head to the end of (IIRC) C pier on the transit (cable
hauled, same maker as Luton's DART I believe) you reach a
gorgeous winter garden, and the view of planes from the gates
there is great.
I could go on. I can't help thinking, of all the complaints to
make about airports - of which there are many - "not being able
to see planes" is probably the least of them...

I can understand the complaint tbh - for those of us who visit airports
less frequently than some others, watching planes can be part of the
attraction while passing the seemingly interminable waits (and there never
seems to be a middle ground between "bag drop took so long that I now don't
have time for breakfast" and "stroll straight through security three hours
early").

Plane watching is more interesting if there's a good variety of plane types
and airlines on view. An endless stream of Mr O'Leary's 738s soon gets
boring. For example, it's interesting to compare the lengt of runway used
by A380s, B777s and A320s.

I don't know too much about plane types (big ones, bigger ones, small ones,
smaller ones!); I just like watching them go up and come down!

I’m sure I’ve mentioned this before, but the last time I was on the rooftop
viewing area at Edinburgh, 2 or 3 redevelopments ago, I watched, in
succession, a 757 do its startled grouse impression, a cargo Lockheed
Electra haul itself more gracefully into the air, and a DC-3 roar down the
runway, lift its tail up and then, without gaining any apparent altitude,
retract its wheels and just clear the boundary fence. Compare and contrast
is indeed interesting!

Sam

[Clank]

I?m sure I?ve mentioned this before, but the last time I was on the rooftop
viewing area at Edinburgh, 2 or 3 redevelopments ago, I watched, in
succession, a 757 do its startled grouse impression, a cargo Lockheed
Electra haul itself more gracefully into the air, and a DC-3 roar down the
runway, lift its tail up and then, without gaining any apparent altitude,
retract its wheels and just clear the boundary fence. Compare and contrast
is indeed interesting!

I learned to fly donkeys ago at Lasham Airfield in Hampshire. We
shared the airfield with what was once Dan Air's maintenance
facility, by that time spun off as a contract maintenance
provider for large jet aircraft. When they had a plane coming in
or leaving - usually the first notice we'd get being the arrival
of fire engines (precautionary only if course) - there was always
a mad scramble to clear the runway of gliders and light aircraft,
because the wing vortexes off a jet could flip any small plane
anywhere near the runway. But watching an unladen jet take-off
close enough to make your whole body shudder made the
inconvenience worthwhile - a really impressive sight watching
them launch more like a rocket than a plane.

[Sam Wilson]

Post by Clank

I?m sure I?ve mentioned this before, but the last time I was on the rooftop
viewing area at Edinburgh, 2 or 3 redevelopments ago, I watched, in
succession, a 757 do its startled grouse impression, a cargo Lockheed
Electra haul itself more gracefully into the air, and a DC-3 roar down the
runway, lift its tail up and then, without gaining any apparent altitude,
retract its wheels and just clear the boundary fence. Compare and contrast
is indeed interesting!

I learned to fly donkeys ago at Lasham Airfield in Hampshire. We
shared the airfield with what was once Dan Air's maintenance
facility, by that time spun off as a contract maintenance
provider for large jet aircraft. When they had a plane coming in
or leaving - usually the first notice we'd get being the arrival
of fire engines (precautionary only if course) - there was always
a mad scramble to clear the runway of gliders and light aircraft,
because the wing vortexes off a jet could flip any small plane
anywhere near the runway. But watching an unladen jet take-off
close enough to make your whole body shudder made the
inconvenience worthwhile - a really impressive sight watching
them launch more like a rocket than a plane.

I remember nipping out for a long lunch with a colleague to watch the last
very lightly loaded Concorde takeoff from Edinburgh. It seemed to take
about a third of the runway to lift off!

Sam

[Marland]

Post by Clank

I?m sure I?ve mentioned this before, but the last time I was on the rooftop
viewing area at Edinburgh, 2 or 3 redevelopments ago, I watched, in
succession, a 757 do its startled grouse impression, a cargo Lockheed
Electra haul itself more gracefully into the air, and a DC-3 roar down the
runway, lift its tail up and then, without gaining any apparent altitude,
retract its wheels and just clear the boundary fence. Compare and contrast
is indeed interesting!

I learned to fly donkeys ago at Lasham Airfield in Hampshire. We
shared the airfield with what was once Dan Air's maintenance
facility, by that time spun off as a contract maintenance
provider for large jet aircraft. When they had a plane coming in
or leaving - usually the first notice we'd get being the arrival
of fire engines (precautionary only if course) - there was always
a mad scramble to clear the runway of gliders and light aircraft,
because the wing vortexes off a jet could flip any small plane
anywhere near the runway. But watching an unladen jet take-off
close enough to make your whole body shudder made the
inconvenience worthwhile - a really impressive sight watching
them launch more like a rocket than a plane.

One of the missus inlaws was one of Dan Dares technicians at Lasham though
that was before I met her. Used to pass by and had occasion to visit a
business on the airfield regularly and it was always quite surreal
experience to drive along a narrow country lane and find an airliner just
the other side
of hedge with a minimal fence or from one of the roads only a cornfield
between road and runway end.

<Dropped pin
https://maps.app.goo.gl/wr9v4aXpe6mEYG72A?g_st=ic>

Did your Railway interest extend enough then to seek out the remains of
Lasham and Bentworth Station of the Basingstoke and Alton light railway.
When I first visited the area it was still relatively intact and used by a
coal merchant.

<http://www.brsince78.co.uk/2560.htm>

but by the early 2000’s the corrugated Iron covered building lost the
battle against rot and corrosion
and collapsed.
The coal merchant has long gone and large gates now limit the view but I
understand the platform is still surviving amongst the bracken.

GH

[Recliner]

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Recliner

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Clank

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
While Bristol has no runway view, Heathrow T5 has large windows, Madeira
and Nagasaki both have airside outdoor viewing areas, Gatwick North you
could loiter on the footbridge I suppose? Gran Canaria has a lounge with an
outdoor viewing area, Amsterdam lounges have view of planes.
Those places which allow you a seat at the gate (so again, not Bristol!)
usually have a view of planes there - examples include Bangkok, Singapore,
Hong Kong, Taipei, Naha, Narita?
Bilbao has an odd viewing area for people waiting for arriving passengers,
which looks over the luggage carousels!!

Hamburg also has a viewing area for non-travelling mortals, though access is paid.

Off the top of my head, Vienna and Munich both have full
length/height glass windows the length of the terminal buildings,
with a commanding view of the apron. Brussels similarly.
Otopeni has windows overlooking the apron, and the lounge at the
end of the pier also gives a cracking view of 08R/26L (personally
vouch as of 3 days ago). I believe there is a public viewing
gallery on the floor above that lounge as well, although I've
never been up there. The lounge at the inner end gives a less
exciting view of the apron, although you do just about get the
end of 08L/26R as well.
Heathrow T4 has a public viewing gallery up some stairs near one
of the gates (I forget which, but it's signed.) The lounge at
Malta (one of the best lounges you'll find) overlooks the runway
and even has an outdoor terrace with comfy chairs and parasols to
give you an unimpeded view. Doha is rather "indoorsy", but if
you head to the end of (IIRC) C pier on the transit (cable
hauled, same maker as Luton's DART I believe) you reach a
gorgeous winter garden, and the view of planes from the gates
there is great.
I could go on. I can't help thinking, of all the complaints to
make about airports - of which there are many - "not being able
to see planes" is probably the least of them...

I can understand the complaint tbh - for those of us who visit airports
less frequently than some others, watching planes can be part of the
attraction while passing the seemingly interminable waits (and there never
seems to be a middle ground between "bag drop took so long that I now don't
have time for breakfast" and "stroll straight through security three hours
early").

Plane watching is more interesting if there's a good variety of plane types
and airlines on view. An endless stream of Mr O'Leary's 738s soon gets
boring. For example, it's interesting to compare the lengt of runway used
by A380s, B777s and A320s.

I don't know too much about plane types (big ones, bigger ones, small ones,
smaller ones!); I just like watching them go up and come down!

I had an example of unexpected interest at an airport earlier today at
Cairo airport. I spotted an Aeroflot 737, which surprised me, as I thought
Russian planes largely stayed within Putin's empire these days. I looked up
the registration and found these recent flights:

<https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/ra-73127>

The plane appears to have been leased from ACS in Dublin, and was stolen
and re-registered in March.

[Clank]

Post by Recliner
I had an example of unexpected interest at an airport earlier today at
Cairo airport. I spotted an Aeroflot 737, which surprised me, as I thought
Russian planes largely stayed within Putin's empire these days.

I'm still on Pobeda's (Aeroflot's domestic and loco subsidiary)
mailing list from the good old days before Ruddia went full
tonto, and while the list of exciting holiday destinations they
keep sending me gets increasingly - and amusingly ("visit the
beautiful dams and civil engineering of Azerbaijan") - desperate,
there are a number of international destinations where they've
felt safe from repossession; notably Dubai flights never seemed
to stop. Didn't know Egypt was on that list, but somehow
unsurprised...

Post by Recliner
The plane appears to have been leased from ACS in Dublin, and was stolen
and re-registered in March.

I'm a long way from a nervous flyer, but wild horses wouldn't get
me on a Russian registered plane now. They will all be like
flying Jenga towers - "let's find out if it can still fly after
*this* part is taken out and not replaced..."

Hardly the biggest shame of the war, but a shame nonetheless to
see Aeroflot brought so low; they had transformed themselves into
one of Europe's best airlines over the years. A mirror to the
grinding rise - and rapid fall - of the modern Russian state
generally.

[Clank]

Post by Clank
Ruddia

Don't bother searching for a hidden meaning in there, that's a
good old fashioned typo ;-).

[Recliner]

Post by Clank

Post by Recliner
I had an example of unexpected interest at an airport earlier today at
Cairo airport. I spotted an Aeroflot 737, which surprised me, as I thought
Russian planes largely stayed within Putin's empire these days.

I'm still on Pobeda's (Aeroflot's domestic and loco subsidiary)
mailing list from the good old days before Ruddia went full
tonto, and while the list of exciting holiday destinations they
keep sending me gets increasingly - and amusingly ("visit the
beautiful dams and civil engineering of Azerbaijan") - desperate,
there are a number of international destinations where they've
felt safe from repossession; notably Dubai flights never seemed
to stop. Didn't know Egypt was on that list, but somehow
unsurprised...

Post by Recliner
The plane appears to have been leased from ACS in Dublin, and was stolen
and re-registered in March.

I'm a long way from a nervous flyer, but wild horses wouldn't get
me on a Russian registered plane now. They will all be like
flying Jenga towers - "let's find out if it can still fly after
*this* part is taken out and not replaced..."

From the various results I got from Googling its new and pre-theft
registrations, I think this 738 was stood down for a while. Presumably it
was brought back into service when they ran out of parts for another 737 or
320 that had remained in service?

It occurs to me that 738s, being lower tech, might be easier to keep in
service than 320s.

Post by Clank
Hardly the biggest shame of the war, but a shame nonetheless to
see Aeroflot brought so low; they had transformed themselves into
one of Europe's best airlines over the years. A mirror to the
grinding rise - and rapid fall - of the modern Russian state
generally.

Yes, indeed. I remembered your previous good reviews of Aeroflot when I
unexpectedly saw this plane.

[h***@yahoo.co.uk]

Post by Clank

Post by Recliner
I had an example of unexpected interest at an airport earlier today at
Cairo airport. I spotted an Aeroflot 737, which surprised me, as I thought
Russian planes largely stayed within Putin's empire these days.

I'm still on Pobeda's (Aeroflot's domestic and loco subsidiary)
mailing list from the good old days before Ruddia went full
tonto, and while the list of exciting holiday destinations they
keep sending me gets increasingly - and amusingly ("visit the
beautiful dams and civil engineering of Azerbaijan") - desperate,
there are a number of international destinations where they've
felt safe from repossession; notably Dubai flights never seemed
to stop.

I think that they actually have. Or I thought I read that they had.

Post by Clank
Didn't know Egypt was on that list, but somehow
unsurprised...

Too much tourism revenue from Russia, I'm guessing.

[Clank]

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk

Post by Clank
felt safe from repossession; notably Dubai flights never seemed
to stop.

I think that they actually have. Or I thought I read that they had.

You're quite right actually; I don't pay that much attention to
their spam emails (and being honest my Russian isn't that
brilliant,) so when I saw them spamming me about Dubai I just
went "huh, still flying there huh?" and moved on.


Now I've gone back and rechecked, turns out that they were
actually advertising that they're *restarting* Dubai flights next
month.

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk

Post by Clank
Didn't know Egypt was on that list, but somehow
unsurprised...

×Too much tourism revenue from Russia, I'm guessing.

Indeed. Unsurprising for the same reasons, but nevertheless an
eyebrow raiser is that Turkey hasn't let a war stand in the way
of a tourist rouble or two...

(Aside... A couple of my friends (and their kids) from Kharkiv
were refugees in Turkey for a short while after the war, one of
the reasons they got out of there was that the place was rapidly
overrun with Russians. (I was in Istanbul myself not long after
the war started and can vouch for that.)

I went to see them a couple of weeks ago in their latest - and
hopefully last for a while - home in Budapest, where they're
settling much better. Budapest may seem an odd choice, but the
more usual places like Poland are somewhat less welcoming to
native Russian speaking Ukrainians than Ukrainian speaking, and
the people of Budapest are rather more welcoming and liberal than
the Orban government (which gets most of its electorate from the
sticks, not the cities) might suggest.)

[Roland Perry]

Post by Clank

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk

Post by Clank
felt safe from repossession; notably Dubai flights never seemed
to stop.

I think that they actually have. Or I thought I read that they had.

You're quite right actually; I don't pay that much attention to
their spam emails (and being honest my Russian isn't that
brilliant,) so when I saw them spamming me about Dubai I just
went "huh, still flying there huh?" and moved on.
Now I've gone back and rechecked, turns out that they were
actually advertising that they're *restarting* Dubai flights next
month.

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk

Post by Clank
Didn't know Egypt was on that list, but somehow
unsurprised...

×Too much tourism revenue from Russia, I'm guessing.

Indeed. Unsurprising for the same reasons, but nevertheless an
eyebrow raiser is that Turkey hasn't let a war stand in the way
of a tourist rouble or two...
(Aside... A couple of my friends (and their kids) from Kharkiv
were refugees in Turkey for a short while after the war, one of
the reasons they got out of there was that the place was rapidly
overrun with Russians. (I was in Istanbul myself not long after
the war started and can vouch for that.)
I went to see them a couple of weeks ago in their latest - and
hopefully last for a while - home in Budapest, where they're
settling much better. Budapest may seem an odd choice, but the
more usual places like Poland are somewhat less welcoming to
native Russian speaking Ukrainians than Ukrainian speaking,

AIUI the bits of Ukraine that are caught up in the latest ground
conflict, plus of course Crimea, are largely Russian-speaking.

Post by Clank
and the people of Budapest are rather more welcoming and liberal than
the Orban government (which gets most of its electorate from the
sticks, not the cities) might suggest.)

[Clank]

On 20 Dec 2022 at 9:19:52 AM EET, "Roland Perry" <***@perry.uk> wrote:

Henry Kissinger has entered the chat...

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Clank
I went to see them a couple of weeks ago in their latest - and
hopefully last for a while - home in Budapest, where they're
settling much better. Budapest may seem an odd choice, but the
more usual places like Poland are somewhat less welcoming to
native Russian speaking Ukrainians than Ukrainian speaking,

AIUI the bits of Ukraine that are caught up in the latest ground
conflict, plus of course Crimea, are largely Russian-speaking.

Well indeed. But if you cast your mind back to the start of the war, which
drove the largest wave of refugees, you'll recall that Kyiv, Ivano-Frankivsk,
and indeed pretty much the whole country were in-play. Poland in particular
was a particularly attractive landing zone for Ukrainian speakers because the
languages are extremely close and it was relatively easy for them to find
work. But that has also left Poland struggling to cope, with more than 1.5
million refugees registered there in the last data I looked at, and
anecdotally at least it's problematic for Russian speakers to settle in.

(One of my friends from L'viv actually joined the Territorial Defence Force
early in the war, and we remain in touch; he's stationed just outside Kharkiv
at the moment and tells me something at least in the same galaxy as normality
has settled over the place in the last few months, but given my now-Budapest
friends' office (an office I visited often) was hit by an Iskander within the
first couple of weeks (let's be generous and say Russian targeting is less
than entirely accurate - the office was only two blocks/600m away from the
State Administration buiding after all), and their apartment destroyed not
long after, it seems unlikely they'll be returning to find out any time soon.
Patricularly with young kids.)


The first time I went back to Ukraine a few months ago, the train into the
country was relatively busy - quite a lot of people from the west were
repatriating as the war appeared to have settled into what you describe, a
predominantly eastern ground conflict. The last time I was there, about 4
weeks ago, as missiles/drones had started landing as far west as L'viv again,
and the reality of winter without power sinks in (and probably more
critically, when the power goes so does the water, something I hand't really
thought of until I experienced it), the train east was practically empty, and
the train west rather busier...

Hopefully I'll go back in January, but who knows.

[Arthur Figgis]

Post by Roland Perry
AIUI the bits of Ukraine that are caught up in the latest ground
conflict, plus of course Crimea, are largely Russian-speaking.

Though language =/= allegiance (see also: everyone in the Republic of
Ireland speaks English)

[Clank]

Post by Roland Perry
AIUI the bits of Ukraine that are caught up in the latest ground
conflict, plus of course Crimea, are largely Russian-speaking.

Though language =/= allegiance (see also: everyone in the Republic of Ireland speaks English)

Although to be fair to Roland this does also seem to have come as
something of a surprise to one Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin,
Esq., of Krasnodarskiy Kray, who one might reasonably have had
higher expectations of being well informed in such
matters.

[Recliner]

Post by Clank

Post by Arthur Figgis

Post by Roland Perry
AIUI the bits of Ukraine that are caught up in the latest ground
conflict, plus of course Crimea, are largely Russian-speaking.

Though language =/= allegiance (see also: everyone in the Republic of
Ireland speaks English)

Although to be fair to Roland this does also seem to have come as
something of a surprise to one Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin,
Esq., of Krasnodarskiy Kray, who one might reasonably have had
higher expectations of being well informed in such
matters.

And, he's made sure since 2014 that, ironically, being Russian-speaking has
generally been very bad news for Ukrainians. He's given them far more
reasons to hate and despise, rather than like, Russians.

[Arthur Figgis]

Post by Recliner

Post by Clank

Post by Arthur Figgis

Post by Roland Perry
AIUI the bits of Ukraine that are caught up in the latest ground
conflict, plus of course Crimea, are largely Russian-speaking.

Though language =/= allegiance (see also: everyone in the Republic of
Ireland speaks English)

Although to be fair to Roland this does also seem to have come as
something of a surprise to one Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin,
Esq., of Krasnodarskiy Kray, who one might reasonably have had
higher expectations of being well informed in such
matters.

And, he's made sure since 2014 that, ironically, being Russian-speaking has
generally been very bad news for Ukrainians. He's given them far more
reasons to hate and despise, rather than like, Russians.

The whole "is Ukraine really its own thing, or just a lost bit of
Russia?" seems to have been pretty decisively settled, at least outside
Russia itself and weird Americans on social media.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Arthur Figgis

Post by Recliner

Post by Clank

Post by Arthur Figgis

Post by Roland Perry
AIUI the bits of Ukraine that are caught up in the latest ground
conflict, plus of course Crimea, are largely Russian-speaking.

Though language =/= allegiance (see also: everyone in the Republic of
Ireland speaks English)

Although to be fair to Roland this does also seem to have come as
  something of a surprise to one Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin,
  Esq., of Krasnodarskiy Kray, who one might reasonably have had
  higher expectations of being well informed in such
  matters.

And, he's made sure since 2014 that, ironically, being
Russian-speaking has
generally been very bad news for Ukrainians. He's given them far more
reasons to hate and despise, rather than like, Russians.

The whole "is Ukraine really its own thing, or just a lost bit of
Russia?" seems to have been pretty decisively settled, at least outside
Russia itself and weird Americans on social media.

Actually there is a version of history that says Ukraine is a lost bit
of Poland, or vice versa.

[h***@yahoo.co.uk]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Arthur Figgis

Post by Recliner

Post by Clank

Post by Arthur Figgis

Post by Roland Perry
AIUI the bits of Ukraine that are caught up in the latest ground
conflict, plus of course Crimea, are largely Russian-speaking.

Though language =/= allegiance (see also: everyone in the Republic of
Ireland speaks English)

Although to be fair to Roland this does also seem to have come as
  something of a surprise to one Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin,
  Esq., of Krasnodarskiy Kray, who one might reasonably have had
  higher expectations of being well informed in such
  matters.

And, he's made sure since 2014 that, ironically, being
Russian-speaking has
generally been very bad news for Ukrainians. He's given them far more
reasons to hate and despise, rather than like, Russians.

The whole "is Ukraine really its own thing, or just a lost bit of
Russia?" seems to have been pretty decisively settled, at least
outside Russia itself and weird Americans on social media.

Actually there is a version of history that says Ukraine is a lost bit
of Poland, or vice versa.

Part of western Ukraine, including Lviv, was Poland before World War II.

[Recliner]

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Arthur Figgis

Post by Recliner

Post by Clank

Post by Arthur Figgis

Post by Roland Perry
AIUI the bits of Ukraine that are caught up in the latest ground
conflict, plus of course Crimea, are largely Russian-speaking.

Though language =/= allegiance (see also: everyone in the Republic of
Ireland speaks English)

Although to be fair to Roland this does also seem to have come as
  something of a surprise to one Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin,
  Esq., of Krasnodarskiy Kray, who one might reasonably have had
  higher expectations of being well informed in such
  matters.

And, he's made sure since 2014 that, ironically, being
Russian-speaking has
generally been very bad news for Ukrainians. He's given them far more
reasons to hate and despise, rather than like, Russians.

The whole "is Ukraine really its own thing, or just a lost bit of
Russia?" seems to have been pretty decisively settled, at least
outside Russia itself and weird Americans on social media.

Actually there is a version of history that says Ukraine is a lost bit
of Poland, or vice versa.

Part of western Ukraine, including Lviv, was Poland before World War II.

Yes, and Putin's disinformation machine is putting out stories that Poland covets it again.

[Clank]

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Part of western Ukraine, including Lviv, was Poland before World War II.

Hence the closeness of language (Polish friends have described
understanding Ukrainian as rather like us reading original
Shakespeare - like a dialect that was frozen a few hundred years
ago.)

And indeed part was Hungary, and part of southern Ukraine was
Romania. The only people with any illusions as to how relevant
this is to modern boundaries are Putin and his acolyte in
Budapest (but Orban has always had a somewhat eccentric view of
the borders of his nation, so that is not too surprising.)


I seem to recall relating here some years ago how I found myself
strangely roped into helping a Ukrainian with the grammar for the
Romanian inscription he wanted carved into his relative from
once-Romania's gravestone.

[h***@yahoo.co.uk]

Post by Clank

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Part of western Ukraine, including Lviv, was Poland before World War II.

Hence the closeness of language (Polish friends have described
understanding Ukrainian as rather like us reading original
Shakespeare - like a dialect that was frozen a few hundred years
ago.)
And indeed part was Hungary, and part of southern Ukraine was
Romania.

Part of Western Ukraine was in the Austro-Hungarian Empire, in Galicia
Province.

Post by Clank
The only people with any illusions as to how relevant
this is to modern boundaries are Putin and his acolyte in
Budapest (but Orban has always had a somewhat eccentric view of
the borders of his nation, so that is not too surprising.)

Hungary seems to have trouble getting on with all its neighbours and
lays claim to their respective territories.

Post by Clank
I seem to recall relating here some years ago how I found myself
strangely roped into helping a Ukrainian with the grammar for the
Romanian inscription he wanted carved into his relative from
once-Romania's gravestone.

Do you speak Ukrainian?

[Clank]

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk

Post by Clank
I seem to recall relating here some years ago how I found myself
strangely roped into helping a Ukrainian with the grammar for the
Romanian inscription he wanted carved into his relative from
once-Romania's gravestone.

Do you speak Ukrainian?

Barely a word. Before 2014, it used to be the case that being able
to muddle along in broken Russian would get you a long way - and
some goodwill - anywhere in the country, but obviously not any
more. Now, much like Belgium, the safest way not to cause
offence is just not even to try one language or the other, and
stick to English!

Being able to read Cyrillic gets you a fair way though in general
day to day. There are enough common or close enough nouns
between the languages I do know, and once you can read Cyrillic
things like place names are easy, so muddling through in the sort
of contexts where you might be speaking with someone who can't
speak English (restaurants/menus, taxis, railway stations) is
easy enough.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Clank

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Part of western Ukraine, including Lviv, was Poland before World War II.

Hence the closeness of language (Polish friends have described
understanding Ukrainian as rather like us reading original
Shakespeare - like a dialect that was frozen a few hundred years
ago.)

Could be worse, could be Chaucer!

[Graeme Wall]

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Arthur Figgis

Post by Recliner

Post by Clank

Post by Arthur Figgis

Post by Roland Perry
AIUI the bits of Ukraine that are caught up in the latest ground
conflict, plus of course Crimea, are largely Russian-speaking.

Though language =/= allegiance (see also: everyone in the Republic of
Ireland speaks English)

Although to be fair to Roland this does also seem to have come as
  something of a surprise to one Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin,
  Esq., of Krasnodarskiy Kray, who one might reasonably have had
  higher expectations of being well informed in such
  matters.

And, he's made sure since 2014 that, ironically, being
Russian-speaking has
generally been very bad news for Ukrainians. He's given them far more
reasons to hate and despise, rather than like, Russians.

The whole "is Ukraine really its own thing, or just a lost bit of
Russia?" seems to have been pretty decisively settled, at least
outside Russia itself and weird Americans on social media.

Actually there is a version of history that says Ukraine is a lost bit
of Poland, or vice versa.

Part of western Ukraine, including Lviv, was Poland before World War II.

Misha Glenny did a three episodes about the history of Poland in his How
to Invent a Country radio series. Fascinating stuff, the country
disappeared for 123 years at one point.

[Roland Perry]

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk

Post by Clank
Didn't know Egypt was on that list, but somehow
unsurprised...

Too much tourism revenue from Russia, I'm guessing.

When I was in Moscow in around 2007 I was surprised to see
Sharm-el-Sheikh [recently the host of COP] as the most popular place on
the departure boards. Arriving for a conference at the Red Sea resort a
couple of years later it was clear that it was a "bubble" that both
countries agreed was in effect a domestic destination from Russia.

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk

Post by Clank
Didn't know Egypt was on that list, but somehow
unsurprised...

Too much tourism revenue from Russia, I'm guessing.

When I was in Moscow in around 2007 I was surprised to see
Sharm-el-Sheikh [recently the host of COP] as the most popular place on
the departure boards. Arriving for a conference at the Red Sea resort a
couple of years later it was clear that it was a "bubble" that both
countries agreed was in effect a domestic destination from Russia.

I think the plane bombing in 2015 significantly cut the Russian tourist traffic to Sharm El Sheikh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrojet_Flight_9268

[h***@yahoo.co.uk]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk

Post by Clank
Didn't know Egypt was on that list, but somehow
unsurprised...

Too much tourism revenue from Russia, I'm guessing.

When I was in Moscow in around 2007 I was surprised to see
Sharm-el-Sheikh [recently the host of COP] as the most popular place on
the departure boards. Arriving for a conference at the Red Sea resort a
couple of years later it was clear that it was a "bubble" that both
countries agreed was in effect a domestic destination from Russia.

I think the plane bombing in 2015 significantly cut the Russian tourist traffic to Sharm El Sheikh.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrojet_Flight_9268

Perhaps to Sharm El Sheikh, but not, I imagine, to Egypt.

[Recliner]

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk

Post by Clank
Didn't know Egypt was on that list, but somehow
unsurprised...

Too much tourism revenue from Russia, I'm guessing.

When I was in Moscow in around 2007 I was surprised to see
Sharm-el-Sheikh [recently the host of COP] as the most popular place on
the departure boards. Arriving for a conference at the Red Sea resort a
couple of years later it was clear that it was a "bubble" that both
countries agreed was in effect a domestic destination from Russia.

I think the plane bombing in 2015 significantly cut the Russian tourist traffic to Sharm El Sheikh.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrojet_Flight_9268

Perhaps to Sharm El Sheikh, but not, I imagine, to Egypt.

I don't think I heard any Russian at all being spoken on my recent trip to Egypt. I was visiting the ancient Egyptian
sites, and perhaps those don't interest Russians?

Sharm El Sheikh is an entirely different, sun and sand holiday destination, so I assume it appeals to different people.
I can see its appeal to people living in frozen Russia in mid-winter.

[D A Stocks]

Post by Theo

Post by D A Stocks
The asistance security at both Gatwick terminals is just another lane in the
main security hall. However, there is a route available to anyone *after*
security that avoids the worst of the retail maze. This works in both
terminals; it's just a matter of looking for the alternative and not
following the sheep.

For South Terminal there's a loop, but the map marks 'airline information'
https://www.gatwickairport.com/contentassets/8d4b795686474a6ba63e19852f248153/gatwick_south_v22.pdf
Is there a route through? There's also an 'under development' unit on that
map, but I imagine that's not open.

It's not shown on the plan for security (last page) because they don't want
the sheep to use it. On page 2 of the pdf there is an arrow bottom left
marked 'From Security'. That's it - you stay on the same level as security
and have to use the escalators or lifts *inside* the retail area to access
the gates. In both terminals there should be signs for Special Assistance
once you've been spat out of your security lane.

It's now about 3 years since I last went through the South Terminal but that
plan doesn't show any significant changes. It's a bit longer since I last
used the North terminal but they had only just finished re-doing departures
at the time so it's unlikely to have changed.

--
DAS

[Sam Wilson]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Tweed
I’ve had to go to The Netherlands for work. Usually I take the plane from
Birmingham. This time I experimented with Eurostar. Happily I was booked on
business class, as this allowed me to avoid much of the chaos at St
Pancras. Train was 80 minutes late owing to the late arrival inbound to
StP. The departure area for non business class passengers was filled to
bursting. It’s just not big enough to cope with two train loads of
passengers. What with that and the security scanning they are really trying
hard to emulate the airport experience. Chap at French passports was
efficient enough, though his throughput was limited by the time it takes to
scan each passport. That interface is really too slow.

My recent experience suggests that pipelining helps. There’s a fair bit of
shuffling and inspecting that happens as well as the electronic bit. If
two of you present yourself at the booth at once the second electronic bit
can happen while the first person’s passport is being shuffled and stamped,
so two people can be handled in only one and half times as long as one, and
that doesn’t include the dwell time of one person moving away from the
booth and the next arriving.

The funny thing is, airport design (and yes, hence International station
design, because it's fundamentally the same process on the ground) is
based on the premise that you want to *throttle* rather than *expedite*
the flow of passengers, so that you can spread the people out over a
larger area.
Otherwise you get precisely what's being complained about at St Pancras
(bursting full departure lounges[1]) all the time, not just when trains
are running late.
This was studied by engineers ahead of the introduction of the 747, on
account of the much larger number of passengers each held. The wikipedia
page makes a brief reference to this: "The 747 enjoyed a fairly smooth
introduction into service, overcoming concerns that some airports would
not be able to accommodate an aircraft that large", but his is exactly
the same mis-reading of the situation as those who said "Why all the
fuss about Y2K, nothing bad happened did it".
[1] And inbound, onwards ground transportation being overwhelmed.

Interesting, thank you. And it makes a kind of sense.

Sam