I have mentioned this in a couple of other threads, but I think it's a good idea to start another thread on the subject...

Rumours say there are plans to extend the runway some 1000 mts towards the south. This to accomodate bigger planes and also to facilitate easier landing from the north....

Anybody got any information to share/views ?

Good idea, since they can't move the mountains or alter the wind direction, although I though fitting ILS to assist landing from the North would have a similar effect at less cost. It would also make for slightly less frenetic use of reverse thrust!

It might make things a tad noisier on Matagorda beach.

Mostly the aircraft are Airbus 320 or Boeing 737. Hitting the reverse thrust is mainly to meet the 3rd taxiway ( most convenient) at a nice gently turning speed. There is a fourth taxiway but that means a long trek back to the apron.

True, so landing from the south they can brake more gently and still turn at the taxiway.

Don't real think they will extend, do you? I think the days of grand EEC funds have gone.

Condor, an old Lufthansa affiliate used to drop Boeing 747's (Jumbo jets carrying up to 450 passengers) into Arrecife. The runway is adequate for any aircraft apart from long haul (North/South America, Canada, even though they could land after a direct flight would need to use a longer runway LPA,TFN for a full payload return etc).

There really is no need for any extension. The only problem to solve is the mountain near the Airport. Anyone with Idea's how to remove this?

This also doesn't cause regular problems, so I believe the airport as it stands will be ok. The newest aircraft (which are still to enter service), the Boeing 787 will be able to use the airport with very few restrictions. Also the new Airbus A350AWB will also have very few problems with the terrain presented.

These will also increase the amount of visitors to Lanzarote but will not need an increase in runway length.

As above, ILS at both ends would fix the problem.

does anyone know why there is no ILS from the north. Is there some kind of topography issue with the mountain and picking up the signal from the beacons?

It just seems to me that they must have lost the cost of installing ILS back in December. So there must be an issue beyond the cost of installation?

I think it is just money. You'd have thought ILS would be cheaper than 1000 metres on ruway in the sea, but maybe it's different budget pots!