Talk:London Gatwick Airport

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Aviation, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles related to aviation. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.	Aviation Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (comments)
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Airports WikiProject

Contents 1 Gatwick airport transit 2 External links 3 Record Shop 4 Runways 5 Transit link 6 Open Skies

[edit] Gatwick airport transit

I am proposing the merge Frelke 13:16, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

• YES PLEASE !! -- User:195.93.21.2 12:26, 29 April 2006
• Agree. -- Chris j wood 14:49, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
• Do it -- Break 18:56, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
• 'SUPPORT' -- As I have already moved all the text from Gatwick Airport Transit to the Airport page ! MilborneOne 19:08, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] External links

The Gatwick Airport Consultative Committee link seems to be very unpopular. I have just replaced it for the second time. Is there any particular reason why it should be removed ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Frelke (talk • contribs) 2006-07-25 22:05:42 (UTC)

Personally I've not removed it and I think it's an interesting site. Rather than an external link contributors to this article should take note of the site - it could be used as a reference for some of the claims. Thanks/~@wangi 21:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

it seems a resonable link in itself but i question its worth as a standalone link in terms of the Wiki guidlines.. Thundernlightning 19:38, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Can you link to whichever guidelines you are referring to, so that we can all engage in the discussion? Ta. Frelke 09:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

WP:EL is the main guideline with reference to external links. Thanks/wangi 22:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

And which particular part of WP:EL could not be considered a standalone link in terms of the Wiki guidlines. I just don't see why it would not be suitable for inclusion. It doesn't fit any of the criteria for links to be avoided, IMHO. Frelke 06:30, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Record Shop

I recently flew from Gatwick South Terminal, and there still is a Virgin Reocrd shop, if I remember rightly. Can anyone confirm this?

[edit] Runways

The infobox cites 2 runways- but most media onyl quotes one runway for Gatwick- see for example [1] - "Gatwick became the busiest single runway airport in the world, the second largest airport in the UK and the world's sixth busiest international airport. " Astrotrain 13:25, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Officially the airport only has one runway 26L/08R, the other 'runway' 26R/08L is really only a taxiway that can be used as an emergency runway. It is certified for use but does not have the same clearance limits and standards as the main runway. It has been used at nights when maintenance work is required on the main and of course in emergency. MilborneOne 13:51, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

We really shouldn't have the "2nd runway" in the infobox. Thanks/wangi 14:36, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I think it should stay in the infobox just needs an explanation in the article MilborneOne 21:16, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Can both runways be used simultaniously? This may be the difference between single and multiple runwayed airports.195.92.168.170 16:22, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Having read the official airfield information from the National Air Traffic Services website I have put the second runway back in. I have moved the statements in the intro down into a Runways paragraph. Please read the new words on the article page for clarification but in summary it has two runways but can only use one at a time, hence the term busiest single runway operation. MilborneOne 19:10, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Despite the comments above User:GENET has removed the second runway for the second time - I have put it back in as per previous discussions. Please do not delete the second runway. MilborneOne 19:30, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

We should not list the "2nd runway" in the infobox simply because it is not a second runway. It is a taxiway which can be used as a runway in exceptional circumstances when the runway is getting work done. Thanks/wangi 19:38, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

In the aerodrome chart (AD 2-EGKK-2-1) it is shown as a runway, as opposed to "Taxiway J" which runs parallel to it on the north side. In Taxiway Holding Points (AD 2-EGKK-2-3) it is called "northern runway" and 26L/08R is called "main runway". In the "Aerodrome Geographical and Administrative Data" (AD 2-EGKK-1-1) all references to it as are a runway. However the AG&AD does say the same as London Gatwick Airport#Runways. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:14, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Yep, I landed on the 'other' runway late one night on an Easyjet 737 from AMS. It was not an emergency, but because of maintenance, although the Captain referred to it as 'the emergency runway', and warned us to be ready for plenty of brakes and reverse thrust. We were not disappointed :-) ChrisRed

[edit] Transit link

I have changed the frequency at peak times from every 2 to every 3 minutes; this is supported by personal experience and all web links I have found (such as [2]). The units have a journey time of 116 seconds, then approx. 1 minute of dwell time at the terminal before setting off again. Hassocks5489 20:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Open Skies

Shouldn't there be changes now that more trans Atlantic flights will be heading into LHR? BA already has service from Houston to LHR and Continental is already working on it as well.

In reply to the unsigned comment - when information is publically available in citable sources then it can be added. At the moment all changes are just rumour. Not sure what BA flying Houston to LHR has to do with gatwick though!!. MilborneOne 11:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)