Thoughts On The Washington National Air Tragedy
I flew light aircraft for over twenty years as a hobby and to get about on business. I flew mainly in the UK, but flew for perhaps fifty to a hundred hours in Australia, France, Ireland, Italy and the United States. I flew planes on to islands like the Scillies in the UK, the Lido in Venice and the Barrier Reef in Australia. It was great fun and I enjoyed it immensely.
I had a friend, who had been an RAF Air Traffic Controller, who would be horrified at Trump’s remarks on diversity, as although he was white, he had been born in Tobago and had many ATC colleagues who were not white.
Flying around the world, most ATC personnel, try to smooth you on your way, even in France and Italy. But American ATC seems to work under unnecessary pressure because they allow planes to where British, French and Australian ATC wouldn’t.
I was told in the 1970s, that aviation experts, wanted to close National Airport, but the politicians wouldn’t allow it.
If I was Trump, I would bring in outside experts from somewhere like Australia, where in my opinion, they do ATC so much better than the Americans.
Is British Airways Getting A Boost From The Lizzie Line?
This article in The Times is entitled Everyone Bashes It But BA Is Surging Ahead …What’s Its Secret?
Various managerial reasons are given, but the Lizzie Line is not mentioned.
live in Dalston and for Heathrow, I take a twenty minute bus-ride and then use the Lizzie Line from Moorgate.
Before Lizzie, I used to take a variety of much slower routes.
If you get on a Lizzie Line train to or from Heathrow in Central London, it’s often very crowded, showing how popular it is with knowledgeable passengers.
London’s new line has made it easier, quicker and more affordable to get to Heathrow by train for many people in England.
So are passengers flying from Heathrow more?
And who’s the dominant carrier at Heathrow? BA!
Putin Apologises Over Plane Crash, Without Saying Russia At Fault
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on the BBC.
This is the sub-heading.
Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has apologised to the president of neighbouring Azerbaijan over the downing of a commercial airliner in Russian airspace, in which 38 people were killed – but stopped short of saying Russia was responsible.
These three paragraphs give more details on the crash.
In his first comments on the Christmas Day crash, Putin said the “tragic incident” had occurred when Russian air defence systems were repelling Ukrainian drones.
Ukraine’s President Volodymr Zelensky said Russia must “stop spreading disinformation” about the strike.
The plane is believed to have come under fire from Russian air defence as it tried to land in the Russian region of Chechnya – forcing it to divert across the Caspian Sea.
Who do you think you are kidding Mr. Putin?
UK Investment Summit Latest: Starmer Announces £1.1bn Expansion Of Stansted Airport
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on The Times.
The Times has this sub-heading about Stansted
Analysis: Stansted Deal Prioritises Growth Over Climate
There are four paragraphs of analysis.
Over the weekend, Sir Keir Starmer made clear that his commitments to boost workers’ rights would not get in the way of his desire to bring in cash from the owners of P&O. As ministers now trumpet a deal to upgrade Stansted airport, it seems that growth and jobs also trump concerns about emissions.
Louise Haigh, the transport secretary who prompted the row with DP World by calling P&O a “rogue operator”, praised the Stansted deal as a “clear signal that Britain is open for business”. She argued that Stansted could be upgraded “while also meeting our existing environment obligations”, with the airport promising a new solar farm to generate electricity. But environmentalists will be dismayed by the prospect of more plane journeys and associated emissions.
The deal also raises fresh questions about a third runway at Heathrow after years of dithering under the Conservatives. No 10 has previously said it is “not opposed” to expansion if it can meet tests on emissions, climate change, noise pollution — and growth.
Starmer has said he will not duck decisions because they are “too difficult”. A decision on Heathrow offers a very clear test of that promise.
Is Hydrogen The Reason For The Choice Of Stansted?
I wonder if the choice of Stansted for expansion is down to the likelihood, that East Anglia will be a big centre for the generation of zero-carbon green and pink hydrogen, with gigawatts of offshore wind farms for the green and nuclear at Sizewell for the pink.
Aircraft of the future will surely need hydrogen for flying to their destinations.
Already, the massive construction of Sizewell C is going to be performed using zero-construction methods involving electricity and hydrogen, as far as is possible.
Large construction at Stansted Airport could be done in a similar manner, using perhaps a hydrogen pipeline between Sizewell and Stansted running along the A 14. This would probably be built anyway, so that East Anglia’s large numbers of heavy trucks could be converted to hydrogen.
Already the hydrogen buses to bring workers to the Sizewell C site have been ordered from Wrightbus in Ballymena.
Airbus, are planning to have their hydrogen-powered Boeing 737/A 320-size airliner in service by the mid-2030s. From visualisations released by Airbus, the Zeroe hydrogen Turbofan looks very much like a redesigned version of the current A320 neo, with two hydrogen turbofans (hopefully with RR on the side!) Converting an existing proven airliner, only means that the new parts need to be certified, so this would bring the plane into service quicker.
Airbus’s infographic shows the Zeroe hydrogen Turbofan will seat up to 200 passengers and have a range of 2,000 nautical miles or 3,700 km.
Discover the three zero-emission concept aircraft known as ZEROe in this infographic. These turbofan, turboprop, and blended-wing-body configurations are all hydrogen hybrid aircraft.
A typical A 320 neo will fly 165 passengers up to 3,500 nautical miles or 6.500 km.
A few distances from Stansted include.
- Athens – 2,400 km.
- Berlin – 905 km.
- Cairo – 3514 km.
- Copenhagen 913 km.
- Dublin – 470 km.
- Edinburgh – 509 km.
- Gander 3,800 km
- Geneva – 760 km.
- Glasgow – 540 km.
- Istanbul – 2480 km.
- Madrid – 1300 km.
- Milan – 960 km.
- Munich – 909 km.
- Palma de Mallorca – 1,400 km.
- Reykjavík – 1870 km.
- Rome – 1,442 km.
- Stockholm – 1,400 km.
- Tel-Aviv – 3,564 km.
- Tenerife North – 2944 km.
- Tenerife South – 2999 km.
- Warsaw 1,412 km.
These distances would mean, a lot of current European destinations could be reached, if the plane were filled at both airports, but a surprising number of popular places could be reached by only refuelling at Stansted.
It also appears to me, that with refuelling in Iceland and perhaps a stopover, in that delightful and different country, zero-carbon flights across the Atlantic would be possible.
If a hydrogen-powered aircraft has the 3,700 km. range that Airbus are promising, it will be an aircraft with a lot of possibilities!
Short Flights
- Amsterdam – 541 km.
- Cardiff – 253 km.
- Exeter – 284 km.
- Jersey – 344 km.
- Liverpool – 264 km.
- Newcastle – 373 km.
- Newquay – 399 km.
- Ronaldsway – 408 km.
- Southampton – 151 km.
Some of these flights would be competing with trains.
Flights Around The British Isles
One of the longest flights around the British Isles would be between Stansted and Sumburgh Airport in the Shetland Isles.
But this is only 894 kilometres, so a return trip would be possible.
I also feel that arranging hydrogen refuelling on Shetland will not be a difficult task, as the islands are likely to have copious supplies of green hydrogen.
Flights From Stansted To Europe
Applying a ten percent reserve probably means a safe one-way range of around 1,700 km.
This would mean that.
- Amsterdam – 541 km.
- Berlin – 905 km.
- Copenhagen – 913 km.
- Madrid – 1300 km.
- Milan – 960 km.
- Munich – 909 km.
- Palma de Mallorca – 1,400 km.
- Rome – 1,442 km.
- Stockholm – 1,400 km.
- Warsaw 1,412 km.
Should all be in range. of an out-and-back flight, after fully fuelling the plane at Stansted Airport.
Others like.
- Athens – 2,400 km.
- Bucharest – 2070 km.
- Cairo – 3514 km.
- Istanbul – 2480 km.
- Lisbon – 1630 km.
- Malta – 2107 km.
- Marrakech – 2350. km.
- Sofia – 2010 km.
- Tel-Aviv – 3,564 km.
- Tenerife North – 2944 km.
- Tenerife South – 2999 km.
Could be handled by refuelling at the destination.
Hopping Across The Atlantic
Consider.
- My great aunt Beatrice used to fly the Atlantic in the 1950s, although it was usually a succession of small hops between Heathrow Shannon and Gander Airports. I think she regularly used ships like the Queen Mary and Elizabeth, as she found them less stressful.
- Icelandair offer short stopovers in Reykjavik and I suspect they will offer this with hydrogen-fuelled aircraft.
- British Airways used to offer a London City Airport to New York flight via Shannon using an Airbus A 318.
I would certainly be interested to hop across from Stansted to New York in a hydrogen-powered aircraft, and I suspect others would do it for the environmental brownie points.
Legs could be.
- Stansted and Reykjavík – 1870 km.
- Reykjavík and Gander – 2568 km
- Gander and New York – 1767 km.
A stop could possibly be squeezed in at Boston.
It could be an interesting way to cross the Atlantic.
Hydrogen Production In East Anglia
I said earlier that East Anglia could produce a lot of zero-carbon green and prink hydrogen from wind and nuclear and this would be used for the following.
- Aviation out of Stansted and Southend Airports.
- Shipping out of the Port of Felixstowe, London Gateway and other smaller ports.
- Providing energy for heavy transport in East Anglia.
- Providing energy for Freeport East at Felixstowe and Harwich.
- Refuelling passing shipping.
- Supplying off-grid energy to rural properties and businesses in the East of England, which I wrote about in Developing A Rural Hydrogen Network.
Any spare hydrogen could always be sold to the Germans.
Decarbonisation Of The Railways In East Anglia
Undoubtedly, some hydrogen will be used to decarbonise some parts of East Anglia’s railways.
Many passenger trains are electrified, but some rural and cross-country services still use diesel. However, the Class 745 trains, that were built by Stadler for these services could be converted to hydrogen or battery-electric.
Similarly, locomotives that haul the freight trains out of the ports of East Anglia will be replaced with hydrogen or battery-electric locomotives.
I am fairly certain, that by 2040, all railways in East Anglia will be zero-carbon.
The East-West Rail Link
It is not known yet, whether the current government will continue to build the East West Rail Link, but it could be invaluable in connecting Stansted Airport to the West of England.
Connecting Stansted Airport To The North Of England and Scotland By Rail
If Stansted is developed as a zero-carbon airport, based on the new hydrogen-powered aircraft, travellers between say the North of England and Scotland, will surely want to travel to Stansted in a carbon-free manner.
So would it be sensible to run rail electric services between the North and Stansted?
Conclusion
Stansted could develop into the UK’s zero-carbon airport.
City Airport May Help Others To Take Flight
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on The Times.
This is the sub-heading.
The government’s decision to lift the cap on permitted passengers at London City airport is a compromise that could be a template for future growth
These are the first two paragraphs.
Planning decisions always upset someone. Still, credit to housing secretary Angela Rayner and the transport supremo Louise Haigh for annoying all sides with one of the first from the new Labour government: allowing London City airport to lift its cap on permitted passengers a year to nine million from the present 6.5 million.
Their verdict hacked off Newham council, which has long opposed the airport’s expansion, leaving it “deeply concerned” over the noise impact on local residents. It angered environmental campaigners, with Greenpeace saying it’d “undermine the UK’s climate leadership”. And it even “disappointed” the airport’s boss, Alison FitzGerald, who wanted an end to the 24-hour flight curfew from 12.30pm on Saturday but failed to get it pushed out to 6.30pm.
The government seem to have chosen a good compromise that has annoyed several parties.
The article goes on to argue, that we should make the best use of the thirty regional airports in the UK.
So shouldn’t the priority be to utilise regional capacity better, via airline and airport incentives if necessary, to minimise journey times to airports and spread the noise and air pollution around? Only then should ministers consider big new projects.
That seems very sensible to me.
Consider.
- Technology will bring us quieter and more environmentally-friendly aircraft, that will benefit those near the airport.
- Electric aircraft are closer to service entry than you think.
- Good public transport links to an airport, would surely cut car usage for both passengers and employees.
- Bus networks to many airports could be improved and made more attractive to passengers, by using modern electric or hydrogen buses. Even Gatwick is taking this route!
- Cranbrook station and Exeter Airport were supposed to have a bus link, but nothing has happened.
- Several airports are near main railway lines and it would be possible to build a station. It will be interesting to see how passenger traffic at the new Inverness station develops.
- East Midlands, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Leeds/Bradford and Liverpool Airports are larger regional airports, that are close, but not directly connected to the rail network.
- Carlisle and Exeter Airports don’t have the best of websites. Humberside sets a good standard.
- Doncaster Sheffield Airport has everything except a rail link and scheduled services.
Some of these improvements are not major and would surely be worthwhile, especially with a small amount of compromise.
Bidders Circle ‘Elvis Airport’ A Decade After The SNP Bought It For £1
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article in The Times.
This is the sub-heading.
Prestwick has cost taxpayers millions since it was nationalised by the SNP in 2013. A consortium plans a bid, but can the Nats let go of Sturgeon-era stateism?
These are the first two paragraphs.
It was always going to be difficult keeping a lid on the arrival of Elvis Presley at a US military base in Prestwick, Ayrshire. “Where am I?” he asked as he stepped off the plane and into the biting wind that whipped off the Firth of Clyde.
March 3, 1960 was a momentous day for the screaming youngsters who engulfed the American singer as he set foot on British soil for the first and only time. For Presley, it was his last stop on his return from Germany after two years of military service. For Prestwick, it meant being immortalised in British trivia for its brief flirtation with The King.
But now it appears that a consortium has a plan for the airport and has made a bid.
These are my thoughts.
Prestwick Airport
Prestwick Airport, which is 32 miles SouthWest of Glasgow, is an airport that has seen busier times.
This OpenRailwayMap shows the Airport.
Note.
- The airport has two runways at right angles.
- The longer runway is 3,000 metres long.
- The red line is the electrified Ayrshire Coast Line, which runs between Glasgow Central and Ayr.
- There is a station at the airport.
- The black line going across the map is an unelectrified railway line, which eventually leads to the West Coast Main Line.
The airport does have four very useful assets.
- A very long runway capable of handling the largest and heaviest aircraft.
- A railway station.
- Plenty of space.
- The airport has plenty of available landing and take-off slots.
I also suspect that a rail connection could be developed to the West Coast Main Line.
Prestwick As A Cargo Airport
Someone commenting in The Times, suggested that Prestwick could become a cargo airport.
- The main runway could accommodate the largest and heaviest cargo aircraft.
- There is space for stands for large aircraft and warehouses.
- A rail link to the electrified West Coast Main Line could be built.
The airport could have a very high capacity.
A Rail Connection To The West Coast Main Line
This could be very beneficial for air-cargo at Prestwick.
- It would be less than ninety miles to the West Coast Main Line.
- It is only single-track as British Rail removed the second track.
- Cargo Services could be run all over the UK mainland.
- There could even be an airport service from Carlisle.
A zero-carbon rail service for freight, passengers and staff from both Glasgow and Carlisle would enhance the green credentials of the airport.
Where Would Planes Fly?
It looks like a modern freighter aircraft like a Boeing 747-8F could fly at maximum weight to nearly all the USA.
But because Prestwick Airport is further North, It does possibly have a wider range of airports, it can reach.
What Is The Closest Airport In North America?
The two airports on Newfoundland; Gander and St. John’s are probably the two closest being about 2,000 miles from Prestwick.
- Both airports have long runways.
- I suspect a rail terminal could be arranged at the airport to take cargo through the Chunnel to Europe.
- Could USAF Galaxies even be used to bring over American tanks and guns for Ukraine? The range of a Galaxy at maximum weight is 2,600 miles.
- They could be delivered by rail to Ukraine.
I suspect there will be times, where the shorter routes could be useful.
Could Cargo Change Planes At Prestwick?
On some routes like perhaps New York and India, might it be more efficient to change planes at Prestwick.
Could Cargo Planes Refuel At Prestwick?
Planes can only fly so far and is Prestwick in the right place to refuel a long flight?
Prestwick Could Be A Viable Cargo Airport For North America?
I am convinced that Prestwick and North American could be a viable air cargo route.
Zero-Carbon Air Cargo
In the next few years, Scotland will have much more electricity, than it needs, due to all the wind farms in the seas around the country and much of the spare electricity could be converted into hydrogen.
So does a cargo operator plan to run zero-carbon aircraft powered by hydrogen between North America and Prestwick?
- Remember it’s only 2,000 miles between St. John’s or Gander and Prestwick.
- The ideal aircraft to convert to hydrogen, must surely be an Airbus A 380, as there’s a lot of space in the fuselage for a hydrogen tank.
- Cargo could be brought to Prestwick in zero-carbon trains from all over the UK.
Amazon might like the idea of zero-carbon parcels across the pond!
Could An Airbus A380 Be Converted To Hydrogen?
This article on Simple Flying is entitled Airbus Plans A380 Hydrogen Flights In 2026 After Successful Power On Of ZEROe Engine.
The header picture shows a visualisation of an Airbus A 380, with a fifth engine with a propeller mounted on the top of the fuselage. The A 380 will be testing this electric engine, so that it can be fitted in the ZEROe Turboprop sometime around 2030.
This is a visualisation of the ZEROe Turboprop.
Note,
- The hydrogen tank will probably be behind the passenger compartment.
- The A 380, that will be testing the engine is no ordinary A 380. It is the very first and Airbus use it as a flying laboratory for new technology.
- I wouldn’t bet against one of its next jobs, is to test turbofan engines running on hydrogen.
I wouldn’t be surprised that in a few years, Airbus demonstrate an A 380 flying between Europe and North America on hydrogen.
A Zero-Carbon Air Bridge Between Europe And North America
Or does Westjet fancy a zero-carbon shuttle service, which would appeal to the Gretas of this world?
It has been rumoured, that the possible buyers of Prestwick are linked to Westjet.
As soon, as someone announces, a flight like this across the Atlantic, I’ll be signing up!
If the worse should happen, which I think would be unlikely, it would surely be a less painful death, than that of my wife’s from a rare cancer.
Conclusion
There are certainly, possibilities at Prestwick.
Heathrow Third Runway Shelved As Airport Seeks To Be ‘Better Not Bigger’
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article in The Times.
This is the sub-heading.
Chief executive Thomas Woldbye exploring how to squeeze millions more passengers through the airport without expanding its footprint
These are the first two paragraphs.
Heathrow’s third runway has been shelved as leaked details of the airport’s “better not bigger” strategy can be revealed.
New chief executive Thomas Woldbye is understood to have begun disbanding Heathrow’s third runway team in favour of exploring how to squeeze millions more passengers through the airport without expanding its footprint.
Various strategies to increase the capacity are suggested.
- More buses to transport passengers from the terminal to the aircraft. This allows planes to be parked further from the terminal.
- More efficient use of the runway so that planes could take off and land closer together.
- Increasing the flight cap by five percent, if the Government agrees.
This paragraph indicates the number of passengers, Heathrow will be planning for.
Leaked details of the plans reveal that annual passenger numbers could hit 96 million by 2036, up from the record 80.9 million it welcomed in 2019, if all of its initiatives can be realised. A “core” case is understood to forecast a rise to 86 million passengers.
If the figure of 96 million passengers is correct, that would be a nearly twenty percent increase in passengers in just seventeen years.
The Anonymous Widower 