London’s most restricted airport may soon see service from larger jets, and it could have significant implications…
London City Airport hopes for A320neo service approval
London has six airports — Heathrow (LHR), Gatwick (LGW), Luton (LTN), Stansted (STN), City (LCY), and Southend (SEN). London City Airport is unique, as it’s by far the closest airport to central London. The catch is that the airport is heavily restricted, both in terms of the hours it can operate, and in terms of the types of aircraft it can accommodate.
Currently, London City Airport primarily sees service from Airbus A220s and Embraer E-Jets, as these are the two biggest types of aircraft that can serve the airport. This is due to a combination of the runway length, plus the complicated approach to the airport.
Well, the airport is trying to greatly increase capacity, without actually increasing the number of aircraft movements. The airport has submitted an application to the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), to enable the Airbus A320neo to operate to the airport.
The application is specifically asking the CAA to approve a new flight procedure (RNP AR), which would alter the approach angle for this aircraft at each runway end. The current approach angle limits the type of aircraft that use the airport, and requires a steep approach.
Here’s how Alison FitzGerald, CEO of London City Airport, describes this:
“The potential introduction of the A320neo aircraft at London City Airport is incredibly exciting. It would broaden the range of leisure destinations for our passengers, enable growth without increasing the number of flight movements, deliver much needed economic growth and accelerate refleeting to cleaner, quieter, new generation aircraft.”
It remains to be seen if this gets approved or not…
This would allow the airport to grow without more flights
In August 2024, the government approved London City Airport’s plan to increase the annual passenger cap from 6.5 million to 9.0 million by 2031, as a driver of economic growth. That’s a nearly 40% increase in the number of passengers, though the catch is that this approval included no increase to the permitted number of annual flights, and no new infrastructure.
So airport executives see the introduction of the A320neo as the key to building traffic at the airport. The aircraft can carry up to 180 passengers, significantly more than any other aircraft currently flying to the airport.
The catch is that the flights would be heavily weight restricted, so would have a range of at most 1,000km (around 620 miles), while traveling with a full cabin. That’s because the runway in London City is only 1,500 meters (around 4,950 feet) long. Still, that covers a lot of destinations currently served from the airport, as well as a lot of other potential destinations.
This really shows you the slim margins with which this would be possible. The A320ceo presumably doesn’t have the engine power to operate here, while the A321neo would be too big.
Executives at the airport argue that the A320neo is more fuel efficient and quieter than most aircraft currently flying to the airport, so it’s a win-win, since it would have less impact on the area. I’d agree, though at the same time, without any additional infrastructure investments, I do have some concerns about the passenger experience.
Bottom line
London City Airport has been approved for a higher passenger cap, though the limit on actual flight movements isn’t increasing. As a result, the airport is hoping to get creative, and have Airbus A320neo service at the airport. This requires a new approach course to be approved, which requires permission from the Civil Aviation Authority.
The A320neo is significantly bigger than any plane that currently flies to the airport. The plane could operate as far as 1,000km with a full load, so the range would be limited. But still, that covers most of the routes currently operated from the airport, and would allow a significant boost in capacity.
What do you make of the prospect of the A320neo flying to London City Airport?
I'm flabbergasted they don't push for the A220-300 instead. The -100 is already certified, it's a quiet and pleasant plane to fly and there are plenty in Europe with AF, LX, Air Baltic, ITA and so on. The catch is that BA or OW for that matter has not ordered any and has stuck to the E190. This announcement indicates they have to plan to change that stance but would love to get rid of...
I'm flabbergasted they don't push for the A220-300 instead. The -100 is already certified, it's a quiet and pleasant plane to fly and there are plenty in Europe with AF, LX, Air Baltic, ITA and so on. The catch is that BA or OW for that matter has not ordered any and has stuck to the E190. This announcement indicates they have to plan to change that stance but would love to get rid of the gas guzzling E190s.
So while the more reasonable move to increase capacity appears to be to work on A220-300 certification that would favour mostly BA's competitors. I don't know how useful a 320neo would be with such payload restrictions...
As always the juicy bit in those PR stunts is in what's not said...
If you have been in the terminal on a weekday morning, there is no lounge, coffee shops are swamped, the space is hot, cramped, and basically a scrum. Preferable for a short hop business flight over trekking out to LHR, but LCY is not super fun. Putting 50% more passengers through that building without improving it borders on impossibility in this frequent LCY flier's opinion.
It beats LHR for short business hops, but leisure...
If you have been in the terminal on a weekday morning, there is no lounge, coffee shops are swamped, the space is hot, cramped, and basically a scrum. Preferable for a short hop business flight over trekking out to LHR, but LCY is not super fun. Putting 50% more passengers through that building without improving it borders on impossibility in this frequent LCY flier's opinion.
It beats LHR for short business hops, but leisure destinations and leisure travel with larger aircraft without redoing or expanding the terminal is questionable to me. BA if you are reading this please build an LCY lounge....
The idea is that you're not supposed to spend a lot of time at the airport, it's meant to be like the good old days when you arrived at the airport and went straight to the plane. Not so long ago, the check-in deadline was 20 mins before departure (now it's 30 minutes). I can leave my hotel by ExCel one hour before take off, leisurely walk to the airport and still make it. Who cares about a lounge or bars when you can do that.
Authorities publish recommended minimum runway lengths for aircraft over 60,000 pounds & given an airport's operating environment. Aside from that, there are an aircraft's specifications. The airport's current runway length is within the NEO's specs for landing. Assuming maximum takeoff weight, the NEO's balanced field length is 6900 feet. Lighter fuel load, as is done for Florence's 5000-foot runway, would work but would limit range.
Departing LCY is such a thrill. Even the smaller planes have to gun the engines with the brakes on and then let 'er rip.
I can't see this happening. And it the terminal wouldn't be able to handle it, it's tiny - trying to load 200 passengers on one flight from it would be hell.
And a major announcement being made in Parliament tomorrow on the 3rd runway at LHR which is rumoured to be given the green light if planning applications are submitted.
Good. They also need to approve the 2nd runway at Gatwick. Long overdue.
Agreed and I think the Luton Rising project will get the green light.
Now, if Parliament would only approve a project to improve roadway access from central London to the motorways. It's a slog from Hyde Park to Fulham. And, access to Gatwick is insane.
I wish they would use the scar that HS2 is carving through London and the 3 counties and turn it into a motorway!
Right, bulldoze some more inner neighborhoods so that you can get to the airport 2-5 minutes faster, if that.
Meanwhile, trains to Heathrow exist and are likely faster than driving from central London.
What about flying the a319neo? It requires far shorter runway right
It doesn't have higher capacity than the A220 which already flies there.
I’d love to see the return of JFK-LCY on an all business class A320NEO.
Came for this comment. @Roberto, do you remember what plane was used on that flight before?
BA operated two A318 in an all J configuration. But even the baby bus required a fuel stop at SNN due to take off weight restriction. This was used for US Pre Clearance, but it was actually because of the take off weight limit from LCY.
They need an Airbus A220XLR :)
Electricwireles: That’s a Brilliant Idea but lengthen the cabin!