SOUTHAMPTON
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flybe | Summer 2017
Flybe today placed on sale routes from Southampton to; Bastia, Biarritz, Bordeaux, Bergerac, Limoges, La Rochelle, Nantes, Lyons, Perpignan, Rennes and Verona.
According to social media, the remainder of the flying programme will be placed on sale by the end of November.
According to social media, the remainder of the flying programme will be placed on sale by the end of November.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like the route to Ibiza next year will be a scheduled one operated by Volotea from 25/05 every Weds. Imagine Thomson will sell holidays using this flight as they will do with the Palma route.
Southampton Airport launches route to Ibiza with Volotea | Southampton Airport
Southampton Airport launches route to Ibiza with Volotea | Southampton Airport
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Southampton
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I am in IBIZA as I write this and it's my first visit to the island since 1983, sure it's out of season and not a lot going on and although Ibiza old town where we're staying is quite quaint it's nothing special and the trip by taxi from the airport gave it a rather run down look, nothing special especially as I prefer city breaks with Barcelona being my favourite and how I wish Vueling had made a success of their SOU to BCN route.
Sure Ibiza is a very popular destination and I get that for lots of reasons.
Besides that I am pleased that Volotea have faith in SOU and have added Ibiza as a scheduled destination and hopefully we can look at further expansion by the airline at SOU to other destinations with Venice and Milan being examples.
Sure Ibiza is a very popular destination and I get that for lots of reasons.
Besides that I am pleased that Volotea have faith in SOU and have added Ibiza as a scheduled destination and hopefully we can look at further expansion by the airline at SOU to other destinations with Venice and Milan being examples.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Southampton
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RW20
Well Volotea did operate at least one flight with an Airbus 319 over the summer to Palma and with them increasing their fleet with the type so the possibility of seeing them at SOU in the future is rather strong.
Well Volotea did operate at least one flight with an Airbus 319 over the summer to Palma and with them increasing their fleet with the type so the possibility of seeing them at SOU in the future is rather strong.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
W16/17 Schedule
Doubt there will be any more changes this late, so I'll try to put together a summary. Let me know of any inaccuracies and I'll update the post!
Aer Lingus Regional
Cork - 4 weekly AT7
Aurigny
Alderny - 14 weekly D28
BMI Regional
Munich - 12 weekly ER3/4
Eastern Airways
Aberdeen - 10 weekly S20 (Via LBA)
Leeds/Bradford - 18 weekly S20
Flybe
Alicante - 2-3 weekly E95/Q400
Amsterdam - 32 weekly Q400
Belfast City - 19 weekly Q400
Bergerac - 3-7 weekly Q400
Chambery - 3 weekly Q400
Dublin - 25 weekly Q400
Dusseldorf - 7 weekly Q400
Edinburgh - 32 weekly Q400
Faro - 2 weekly E95
Geneva - 3 weekly Q400
Glasgow - 31 weekly Q400
Guernsey - 29 weekly AT4/7 (Blue Islands)
Jersey - 24 weekly AT4/7 (Blue Islands)
La Rochelle - 1-2 weekly (20/12-02/01)
Limoges - 1-2 weekly (17/12-04/01)
Lyon - 7 weekly Q400
Malaga - 3 weekly E95
Manchester - 37 weekly Q400/E95
Munich - 7 weekly Q400
Nantes - 4-7 weekly Q400
Newcastle - 18 weekly Q400
Paris CDG - 7 weekly Q400
Paris Orly - 12 weekly Q400
Rennes - 4 weekly Q400 (16/12-02/01)
KLM Cityhopper
Amsterdam - 12 weekly F70
Ski Charters/Lapland Trips
Chambery - 1 weekly Flybe Q400 Ski Total
Innsbruck - 1 weekly Austrian F70 Inghams (25/02-11/03)
Lapland - (10/12 Transun), (13/12 Santa's Lapland), (20/12 Canterbury Travel)
Overall
Flybe weekly departures: 312-324
Other airlines weekly departures: 60-61
Overall weekly departures: 372-385
Overall average daily departures: 53-55
Aer Lingus Regional
Cork - 4 weekly AT7
Aurigny
Alderny - 14 weekly D28
BMI Regional
Munich - 12 weekly ER3/4
Eastern Airways
Aberdeen - 10 weekly S20 (Via LBA)
Leeds/Bradford - 18 weekly S20
Flybe
Alicante - 2-3 weekly E95/Q400
Amsterdam - 32 weekly Q400
Belfast City - 19 weekly Q400
Bergerac - 3-7 weekly Q400
Chambery - 3 weekly Q400
Dublin - 25 weekly Q400
Dusseldorf - 7 weekly Q400
Edinburgh - 32 weekly Q400
Faro - 2 weekly E95
Geneva - 3 weekly Q400
Glasgow - 31 weekly Q400
Guernsey - 29 weekly AT4/7 (Blue Islands)
Jersey - 24 weekly AT4/7 (Blue Islands)
La Rochelle - 1-2 weekly (20/12-02/01)
Limoges - 1-2 weekly (17/12-04/01)
Lyon - 7 weekly Q400
Malaga - 3 weekly E95
Manchester - 37 weekly Q400/E95
Munich - 7 weekly Q400
Nantes - 4-7 weekly Q400
Newcastle - 18 weekly Q400
Paris CDG - 7 weekly Q400
Paris Orly - 12 weekly Q400
Rennes - 4 weekly Q400 (16/12-02/01)
KLM Cityhopper
Amsterdam - 12 weekly F70
Ski Charters/Lapland Trips
Chambery - 1 weekly Flybe Q400 Ski Total
Innsbruck - 1 weekly Austrian F70 Inghams (25/02-11/03)
Lapland - (10/12 Transun), (13/12 Santa's Lapland), (20/12 Canterbury Travel)
Overall
Flybe weekly departures: 312-324
Other airlines weekly departures: 60-61
Overall weekly departures: 372-385
Overall average daily departures: 53-55
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking at the list it seems a downturn in ski routes from last year,no Germair319?
Obviously Hurns winter programme has some impact!
Can we expect any further routes for Summer 2017?
Obviously Hurns winter programme has some impact!
Can we expect any further routes for Summer 2017?
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is certainly a drop in the ski charters this winter, although I suspect on the whole there is an increase in flights, since last winter was a relatively quiet one. It is also worth noting that Flybe are continuing to operate Lyon daily over the winter, so I imagine this may be a popular choice for those going to hit the slopes, and I would think the abundance of flights to Munich will also appeal to them.
As for Summer 2017, its fairly early days so I guess we'll have to wait and see!
As for Summer 2017, its fairly early days so I guess we'll have to wait and see!
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South
Age: 44
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fog
So yet more cancellations this morning because of fog. When is SOU going to get its act together? Clearly investment is needed airside and none more so than its instrument landing system. I mean it's quite pathetic that BOH has better facilities. All their investment was made without the benefit of large base of airlines. SOU really has no excuse.
FOG
The ILS is relatively new equipment, the Localiser having been upgraded in the past few years. The current ILS is possibly capable of at least CAT 2 standard signals but the runway lighting and obstacle environment, both on the 20 approach and/ or take-off/climb areas, currently prevents upgrading to CAT 2 ops, and the lower minima that would bring.
Lighting could be upgraded to possibly reduce the current RVR minima (800 metres?) down to something nearer the 550metre CAT 1 minima. The obstacles (rail sheds, Townhill Park etc) will need to be taken out of the equation for anything better.
The 20 runway threshold needs to go north into the rail yard and a scorched earth policy adopted up to somewhere near the Eastleigh/Botley rail line to remove approach obstacles, including demolition of some Campbell Road houses. This would then move the take-off/climb (go-around) area away from Townhill Park/Bitterne Park hill. CAT 2 ops would then probably be viable, plus significantly improving take-off distances with the increased business that would result.
As ever it's a case of investment, investment, investment, plus getting planning consent to take the noise closer to Eastleigh - sorry, doubtful it will ever happen!
The ILS is relatively new equipment, the Localiser having been upgraded in the past few years. The current ILS is possibly capable of at least CAT 2 standard signals but the runway lighting and obstacle environment, both on the 20 approach and/ or take-off/climb areas, currently prevents upgrading to CAT 2 ops, and the lower minima that would bring.
Lighting could be upgraded to possibly reduce the current RVR minima (800 metres?) down to something nearer the 550metre CAT 1 minima. The obstacles (rail sheds, Townhill Park etc) will need to be taken out of the equation for anything better.
The 20 runway threshold needs to go north into the rail yard and a scorched earth policy adopted up to somewhere near the Eastleigh/Botley rail line to remove approach obstacles, including demolition of some Campbell Road houses. This would then move the take-off/climb (go-around) area away from Townhill Park/Bitterne Park hill. CAT 2 ops would then probably be viable, plus significantly improving take-off distances with the increased business that would result.
As ever it's a case of investment, investment, investment, plus getting planning consent to take the noise closer to Eastleigh - sorry, doubtful it will ever happen!
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South
Age: 44
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TCAS FAN: An informative post. Please explain why obstacles play any part. Surely it's a case of aircraft (that are already able to land during clear conditions) being able to land with limited visibility I.e rely heavily on a comprehensive ILS. That would just mean investment in a better ILS and maybe lights. Not the removal of buildings?
I think the problem is SOU is owned by a pension fund and the chances of any investment above what is needed to tick it along is unlikely. BOH meanwhile is owned by a company that's business is airports which is why they invested in a new category 3 ILS and terminal of the back of little financial reward. SOU cannot even stretch to a bit of Tarmac to prevent back-tracking on the runway. Pathetic. Never mind, whilst it ticks along making a small but reliable divident to its investors everything is fine.
I think the problem is SOU is owned by a pension fund and the chances of any investment above what is needed to tick it along is unlikely. BOH meanwhile is owned by a company that's business is airports which is why they invested in a new category 3 ILS and terminal of the back of little financial reward. SOU cannot even stretch to a bit of Tarmac to prevent back-tracking on the runway. Pathetic. Never mind, whilst it ticks along making a small but reliable divident to its investors everything is fine.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TCAS and Rivet joint,very good points,but its been obvious for some time the the owners of Saouthampton Airport have no intention of airside development.Simply upgrading rw20 approach lights to full cat 1 ILS specification i e 650 rvr ,would have avoided a lot of diversions to Bournemouth over the last few years,the cost cannot be that much!.Due to the touchdown and approach obstacles I cannot see cat 2 ILS being viable. There is still no decisions on 02 approach aids,with VOR dme shortly to run out!.I'm afraid Southampton is seriously lacking in approach aids for a airport of its status,and to illustrate this, there radar is one of the oldest of regional airports kits!.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Waters edge
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Precision approach capability
This is complex and expensive for the airport, quite apart from aircraft equipage and crew competency. This is not just about the airport.
Airport requirements here (not trivial as already noted):
http://www.icao.int/safety/implementation/library/manual%20aerodrome%20stds.pdf
For an airport like SOU, and the aircraft types using the airport, it is unlikely to make financial sense for many years yet.
The airport has done well to achieve the precision arrival capability that it now has.
FF
Airport requirements here (not trivial as already noted):
http://www.icao.int/safety/implementation/library/manual%20aerodrome%20stds.pdf
For an airport like SOU, and the aircraft types using the airport, it is unlikely to make financial sense for many years yet.
The airport has done well to achieve the precision arrival capability that it now has.
FF
Rivet Joint
The minimum descent altitude ("decision altitude" for a Precision approach) is determined by any obstacles that penetrate through a complex series of 3D protected surfaces on the approach to the runway, either side of it and at the upwind end of it. Unfortunately SOU has many, so much so that they, along with SEN and others, previously they had an "Un categorised" ILS. This was a UK CAA invention. It gave a better minima than a non-precision approach, due to height guidance, but not as low as CAT 1. In SOU's case this resulted in a decision altitude around a 100 FT higher than is now available. This resulted in far more diversions than is now the case.
The CAA dinosaurs that originally called the tune refused to accept ICAO computer based technology, permitted as far back as 20+ years ago. This proved that the obstacles present could safely permit CAT 1 operations. Consequently SOU soldiered on with the decision altitude penalty for around 20 years.
It was only following pressure for the UK to fully comply with ICAO standards was the computer based technology accepted and the height penalty removed.
Whilst somewhere near to the lowest CAT 1 decision altitude is available, those obstacles present will not permit CAT 2 or 3 operations, which additionally also require approach and runway lighting upgrades.
In foggy conditions it is invariably the visibility that determines whether a successful approach and landing can be made. Visibility also determines whether an approach can be started. As has been previously noted, provided sufficient lighting is available (which SOU does not) an RVR at or close to 550 metres will permit a CAT 1 approach to be flow. If my memory is correct 7-800 metre RVR is required at SOU.
In BOH's case I believe it was "simples". FR simply laid it on the line, no CAT 3, no flights!
The minimum descent altitude ("decision altitude" for a Precision approach) is determined by any obstacles that penetrate through a complex series of 3D protected surfaces on the approach to the runway, either side of it and at the upwind end of it. Unfortunately SOU has many, so much so that they, along with SEN and others, previously they had an "Un categorised" ILS. This was a UK CAA invention. It gave a better minima than a non-precision approach, due to height guidance, but not as low as CAT 1. In SOU's case this resulted in a decision altitude around a 100 FT higher than is now available. This resulted in far more diversions than is now the case.
The CAA dinosaurs that originally called the tune refused to accept ICAO computer based technology, permitted as far back as 20+ years ago. This proved that the obstacles present could safely permit CAT 1 operations. Consequently SOU soldiered on with the decision altitude penalty for around 20 years.
It was only following pressure for the UK to fully comply with ICAO standards was the computer based technology accepted and the height penalty removed.
Whilst somewhere near to the lowest CAT 1 decision altitude is available, those obstacles present will not permit CAT 2 or 3 operations, which additionally also require approach and runway lighting upgrades.
In foggy conditions it is invariably the visibility that determines whether a successful approach and landing can be made. Visibility also determines whether an approach can be started. As has been previously noted, provided sufficient lighting is available (which SOU does not) an RVR at or close to 550 metres will permit a CAT 1 approach to be flow. If my memory is correct 7-800 metre RVR is required at SOU.
In BOH's case I believe it was "simples". FR simply laid it on the line, no CAT 3, no flights!
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
June '16 stats
The June CAA stats for SOU are finally visible, showing a healthy 8% increase compared to last year.
Dusseldorf averaged just over 35 passengers, with a 45% load factor. Munich averaged 18.5 passengers for a 38% load factor, but again this is based on a 49 seat E145 only. Cork continues to do well averaging 45 passengers for a 62% load on average.
Dusseldorf averaged just over 35 passengers, with a 45% load factor. Munich averaged 18.5 passengers for a 38% load factor, but again this is based on a 49 seat E145 only. Cork continues to do well averaging 45 passengers for a 62% load on average.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South
Age: 44
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks TCAS FAN, very informative. It does make you wonder why the airlines that use SOU have not kicked up a fuss about the endless cancellations whenever there is the slightest bit of fog. Yes SOU cannot control the weather but clearly they have options to improve the situation. Meanwhile the likes of Spain build airports in the middle of nowhere with no demand with better facilities than SOU.
It does make you wonder why the airlines that use SOU have not kicked up a fuss about the endless cancellations whenever there is the slightest bit of fog
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Waters edge
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://www.caa.co.uk/uploadedFiles/CAA/Content/Standard_Content/Data_and_analysis/Datasets/Airport_stats/Airport_data_2016_01/Table_07_Airport_Landings_Diverted.pdf