Speaking of which, when do we have EF's first fly-in? I suggest Gruyères, centrally located and amazing fondue

We'd be there. We're in a group co-owning Pilatus P2 HB-RAZ. Wanted to go out to the new Bressaucourt airfield opening up in the Jura this weekend, but we need to complete some minor engine maintenance.

http://www.aerojura.ch/

Bressaucourt is cool. A bit tricky when windy.

October 1st? (in Gruyères I mean - lunch options are far better).

Have you flown into Bressaucourt already then?

Yup.

(this message would be too short otherwise).

that, and the belief that good solutions can be had on the cheap.

All this talk about the Germans being upset with the Swiss flights. Considering a large % of the total flights are Swiss Air maybe they should be complaining to Lufthansa. As the airport only opens for flights at 6am and stops at 11pm the noise can be tolerated.
I agree Zurich is bar far the easiest airport to use. I can arrive 35 minutes before a flight and still make the gate before it closes (checked in on-line). Just have a go at that in London, Paris, New York, Dubai.

Sure. If you relocate this air-route north, you will have to shift intra-German airtraffic further north as well, and into the landing approach areas zones of Echterdingen. You cannot move anything farther north from Stuttgart as that would affect Frankfurt-am-Main which is of a far higher priority. But the option I described only become effective once Switzerland starts the "shortened landing approach" into Zurich-Airport which for some political reasons is delayed. The "shortened landing approach" does not need ANY changes to runways etc at ZRH but some additional lightings north-west and west of ZRH. THIS is what those in charge are shrinking from, at least until after the elections.

Sorry but your comparison is strange, to put it mildly. ZRH can be compared to AMS, but only is about 30% of LHR,. while at the other hand being clearly larger than STN or LTN. Sure, LGW in the early 70ies was smaller than ZRH, but now is twice the size. MUC was smaller but is now clearly ahead. And the combination of MIL and MXP was similar to ZRH but within a short time will be about three times as large (in spite of the Consigliere and the financial problems of Italy) ---- not least as after the opening of the new Gotthard-Tunnel, ZRH/HB will only be 2 hours away from MXP where the plains of the Bad Thinking (translate MALpensa ) have vast reserves !

just a link

http://www.aerojura.ch/

and here Gruyères

http://www.aerodrome-gruyere.ch/restaurant.htm
http://www.aerodrome-gruyere.ch/rest.../carte-ete.pdf

looks really nice.

None of which affects landing capacity at EDSS, at worst it makes a flight into Stuttgart a bit longer. Thank you for correcting yourself


Really Wolli, why are you posting this nonsense?

If (as I don't think you are) you're talking about physical size and facilities, you need to go visit AMS sometime and have a wander round.

If, as the 30% you refer to seems to indicate, you're talking about passengers handled you need to do some research before saying such silly things. AMS handled 45million passengers last year, with ZRH way behind with 23million.
(2010 figures quoted; for comparison, LHR handled 66 million people.)

******************************

Since you forgot to include them while multi quoting weejeem

Gruyères you can actually walk up into the old town (15 minute walk). Beats Bressaucourt by miles.

Easily do-able at LCY (London City), one of the reasons I pay the extra to fly there rather than Heathrow.

PRNAV approaches are not delayed for political reasons.

Will the Cisalpino be stopping at Malapensa? It could be you're right but it's the first I'm hearing of it.

Umm, we are now pretty off-topic, no? How about we get back to the initial discussion?

These narrow minded people should all go to italy!! (I can say that, I am italian)

I in fact DID visit Schiphol several times. I in view of the figures however have to correct the comparison from ZRH-AMS to ZRH-BRU/DUS. It used to be ZRH-MUC/MIL(mxp+lin) but since them both haven risen quite considerably this also no longer works.

Longer approach-times for an airport are deadly. You can argue, as you do, that such things do not directly reduce the landing-capacities, accepted, but ARE negative for an airport. The Lufthansa-Group will go to considerable lengths to find productive solutions. To be clear about it, I have far more trust in the LH folks than in the CH politicians in this regard.

Sorry guys - I might be a bit slow on this but where is the detail or plan that is being objected to?
thx