SOUTHAMPTON
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 76
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BOH soaking up all the diversions? Well, 2 diversions from Southampton actually ( 1 x Flybe and 1 x KLM). A couple of inbound Flybe flights actually arrived early. It is, as you say, foggy. What do you expect SOU to do with any new investment? Buy some magic fog dispensers? 50 miles up the road a much bigger and busier operation is seeing approx 10% of flight cancellations and lots of delays (up to 80% of departures are delayed). And the fog up there was not as bad as it was in Hampshire.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Granada, Spain
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seem to recall a time not too many years ago when Bath Travel, later Palmair, contracted Princess Air with a 146 to fly Sunshine routes out of SOU and even that aircraft had problems in 'hot' weather taking off with a full fuel load and full complement of pax... I can recall at least one occasions when the aircraft departed with 50% fuel and 50% pax, flew down to BOH where it boarded the rest of the pax who had been bussed down, and topped off the fuel...
Also seem to recall that that happened a couple of time last year with the Embraers on the Spain routes...
Southampton was, is and always will be limited by its runway length.
BOH will always be limited by the narrow mindedness of the various councils in the area and the airlines... It's a Catch 22 situation the councils will not improve the road / rail transportation links until it is justified by an increase in air traffic... and the airlines will not increase their routes and services until the transportation links are improved...
Getting back toSouthampton though... why is there no direct public transport link from Southampton Airport to Portsmouth... currently the only direct route is private car or taxi... no buses, no trains, Nada...
Also seem to recall that that happened a couple of time last year with the Embraers on the Spain routes...
Southampton was, is and always will be limited by its runway length.
BOH will always be limited by the narrow mindedness of the various councils in the area and the airlines... It's a Catch 22 situation the councils will not improve the road / rail transportation links until it is justified by an increase in air traffic... and the airlines will not increase their routes and services until the transportation links are improved...
Getting back toSouthampton though... why is there no direct public transport link from Southampton Airport to Portsmouth... currently the only direct route is private car or taxi... no buses, no trains, Nada...
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Winchester
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SOU
SOU is susceptible to fog simply because of its location in the Hampshire Basin. It is almost at sea level (02 threshold 33 feet AMSL), and it has the River Itchen running alongside it. This morning the RVR was 125 meters.
Investment will not fix this.
As for the point about airlines not being able to run the sunshine routes with larger equipment, as I have said before A319 and A320 aircraft are entirely suitable for operation out of SOU to Spain and Majorca, as they have proven in the past.
Investment will not fix this.
As for the point about airlines not being able to run the sunshine routes with larger equipment, as I have said before A319 and A320 aircraft are entirely suitable for operation out of SOU to Spain and Majorca, as they have proven in the past.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South
Age: 43
Posts: 766
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All valid points but flawed reasoning. Investment may not solve the problem but it will improve it. I suspect the airside at SOU has not seen any significant investment since the airport was Established back at the start of the 90s. That's over 15 years of neglect, the CAA are going to stop supporting their ILS in the not too distant future! How embarrassing is that? It's like someone still operating Microsoft Windows 3.0! It's very simple, sort out out a new ILS (prefarably one that features technology from this decade 
), install new landing lights, build the extended runway runoff area to the north (this can be done within the airport's existing boundary), build the taxiways that will stop aircraft having to backtrack every time they land (even third world airports don't have such nonsense). Before anyone brings up the expense, a certain airport spent £40mil (yes £40mil 
) on new infrastructure and there was no real carrot on the end of a stick to make them do it. I would argue SOU does have that carrot on the stick, in fact they paint their planes the same colour.
), install new landing lights, build the extended runway runoff area to the north (this can be done within the airport's existing boundary), build the taxiways that will stop aircraft having to backtrack every time they land (even third world airports don't have such nonsense). Before anyone brings up the expense, a certain airport spent £40mil (yes £40mil ) on new infrastructure and there was no real carrot on the end of a stick to make them do it. I would argue SOU does have that carrot on the stick, in fact they paint their planes the same colour.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Waters edge
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Physics not Finance
The better comparison for SOU is LCY which routinely loses multiple flights each year through fog with many delays, cancellations and diversions. CAA stats tell a sorry tale.
The constraint issue at SOU and LCY is similar, the runway length and the local terrain and obstruction characteristics (hills & buildings) prevent use of more sophisticated precision approach aids. This is primarilly a physical not a financial constraint.
The proportion of flights cancelled at SOU due fog over a year is tiny. The cost to the airport is very small.
Any investment made at the airport would far better go to a parallel taxiway and more stands, than improved approach aids. This would partly address the bigger business issue; south of England airport capacity during summer.
However, investment near term is highly unlikely. Glasgow not SOU is the jewel in the airport owners crown.
FF
The constraint issue at SOU and LCY is similar, the runway length and the local terrain and obstruction characteristics (hills & buildings) prevent use of more sophisticated precision approach aids. This is primarilly a physical not a financial constraint.
The proportion of flights cancelled at SOU due fog over a year is tiny. The cost to the airport is very small.
Any investment made at the airport would far better go to a parallel taxiway and more stands, than improved approach aids. This would partly address the bigger business issue; south of England airport capacity during summer.
However, investment near term is highly unlikely. Glasgow not SOU is the jewel in the airport owners crown.
FF
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: southampton
Age: 51
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Be Alc cancellation
Anyone know why yesterday's Alc flight was cancelled?
The Man inbound to Sou diverted to Bournemouth due fog.
My auntie was due to be going back to Spain on this so I had a little look on flight radar around lunch time,to see that it was well on its way.
I assumed she was on it,only to today find out that pax were put up overnight at Ext and flown out today! She's ex BA so went Lhr-Mad-Alc.
So question is did BE fly it down empty from Bournemouth?
The Man inbound to Sou diverted to Bournemouth due fog.
My auntie was due to be going back to Spain on this so I had a little look on flight radar around lunch time,to see that it was well on its way.
I assumed she was on it,only to today find out that pax were put up overnight at Ext and flown out today! She's ex BA so went Lhr-Mad-Alc.
So question is did BE fly it down empty from Bournemouth?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reason for the circling Aircraft at Sou
is Fog. RVR 900m runway 20
See FR24 for details Vis 2000 Metres at 19:50 UTC.
CAT III
See FR24 for details Vis 2000 Metres at 19:50 UTC.
CAT III
Last edited by Guest 112233; 11th Dec 2016 at 19:25. Reason: corrected RVR
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Winchester
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aircraft Holding
The RVR has been up and down all evening, between 450 and 1500. Some flights getting in at 1st, 2nd, or 3rd attempt. Two flights diverted to Birmingham. As I write this there are 3 flights awaiting the next improvement.
As I write this there are 3 flights awaiting the next improvement.
One suspects that with a proper even CAT 1 ILS they would have probably got in eventually, and many people (pax, crews, and the folks who stayed on at SOU after usual closing) would not have been inconvenienced. Not to mention aircraft being out of place for this morning's first departures.
I love flying from SOU (and will be again in Jan), but it needs more resilience.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAA stats for Sep/Oct
Passengers were up an impressive 15% in September and 16% in October. Whilst there is no longer a rolling year figure included in the CAA stats I would hazard a guess that it is now above last year. Domestic routes seem to mostly show some fair growth, although Leeds and Aberdeen are down quite a bit on last year, I presume Eastern have reduced the frequency of their flights compared to last year?
Not sure exactly when Toulon/Biarritz finished in September so I won't try and estimate the loads on them but the numbers seem reasonable.
Route - Sep/Oct
Cork - 39 pax 54%/36 pax 50% (Based on 5 weekly flights, seems to have performed consistently pretty well)
Dusseldorf - 47 pax 60%/51 pax 65% (Seems to have finally picked up nicely!)
Lyon - 24pax 30%/29 pax 37% (Imagine the regional air subsidy is compensating for these loads in part)
Munich - 31 pax/26 pax (Flybe started 01/09, figures suggest 2 carriers is probably too much for this route)
Paris CDG - 42 pax 54%/48 pax 61% (Increasing to double daily next summer)
Not sure exactly when Toulon/Biarritz finished in September so I won't try and estimate the loads on them but the numbers seem reasonable.
Route - Sep/Oct
Cork - 39 pax 54%/36 pax 50% (Based on 5 weekly flights, seems to have performed consistently pretty well)
Dusseldorf - 47 pax 60%/51 pax 65% (Seems to have finally picked up nicely!)
Lyon - 24pax 30%/29 pax 37% (Imagine the regional air subsidy is compensating for these loads in part)
Munich - 31 pax/26 pax (Flybe started 01/09, figures suggest 2 carriers is probably too much for this route)
Paris CDG - 42 pax 54%/48 pax 61% (Increasing to double daily next summer)
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good find stweyb! I would guess that we will see just over 1.9 million passengers over the whole year based on that, and in the interview below with the MD, he seems to think that numbers will pass 2 million next year.
Link for anyone interested: Flying high in the Solent
Link for anyone interested: Flying high in the Solent
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South
Age: 43
Posts: 766
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The same grinning goon who has overseen a total lack of investment in the airport. Seems like he has been there a long time now. Anyone think it's time he is replaced with someone with some ambition?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 479
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
River Joint you never seem to have a good thing to say about anybody or anything. Southampton appears to be doing quite well. Is it envy that makes you want you see a man lose his job?
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South
Age: 43
Posts: 766
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vectisman: That is simply not true, in fact I am a vocal supporter of SOU and believe it to be an untapped goldmine. If I blow of some steam at the frustration that SOU could have EZY operating a small base serving some useful destinations if some long overdue investment was finally forthcoming then that is understandable.
My personal view (not to mention of others on this forum):
- There is room to extend runway to the north (within the airport's existing demise). If I was a truly ambitious MD then I would be looking to buy the railway works and extend further but no just a little bit extra within the existing demise.
- More stands are needed to accommodate numerous larger aircraft to be in at the same time (this can be achieved in many different ways). Buy the RM depot? Relocate that ridiculously placed car park? Build some stands on the land to the North West?
- Planes having to backtrack down the runway is not only an unnecessary constraint on operations but also dangerous (not to mention embarrassing). A strip of tarmac is not expensive. Spain builds whole airports in the middle of deserts for no good reason. Are we less ambitious than them? BOH had 40mil ploughed into it. Again is SOU less ambitious than them? We are talking about some bloody tarmac.
- The ILS is so ancient that it’s no longer being managed by the aviation governing body (we are not talking about Apple here, bloody NATS who themselves are hardly at the forefront of technology) Apparently this year. Has it been turned off?
- The runway lights are crap. You get the picture and all these points have been talked to death.
Seeing as my opinions (supported by other people) are too honest for you Vectisman, let me highlight a pertinent (and quite hilarious) extract from the article: -
"before taking up the planning and development director role at Southampton Airport, which was based around completing the airport’s master plan. Nine years on, he has never looked back".
Anyone who has studied the master plan will tell you that not a single element of their master plan has ever been implemented and now it all makes sense why (he was in charge). I think it would have been more appropriate for the writer to have said "Nine years on, he has never looked forward". There are numerous other gems in the article as well, such as him claiming credit for investment in the highways and the railway station. Like I said a few pages ago, the only meaningful investment has been in the retail element and the parking (i.e the two things that fleece the passengers). I am more than happy to be convinced otherwise
My personal view (not to mention of others on this forum):
- There is room to extend runway to the north (within the airport's existing demise). If I was a truly ambitious MD then I would be looking to buy the railway works and extend further but no just a little bit extra within the existing demise.
- More stands are needed to accommodate numerous larger aircraft to be in at the same time (this can be achieved in many different ways). Buy the RM depot? Relocate that ridiculously placed car park? Build some stands on the land to the North West?
- Planes having to backtrack down the runway is not only an unnecessary constraint on operations but also dangerous (not to mention embarrassing). A strip of tarmac is not expensive. Spain builds whole airports in the middle of deserts for no good reason. Are we less ambitious than them? BOH had 40mil ploughed into it. Again is SOU less ambitious than them? We are talking about some bloody tarmac.
- The ILS is so ancient that it’s no longer being managed by the aviation governing body (we are not talking about Apple here, bloody NATS who themselves are hardly at the forefront of technology) Apparently this year. Has it been turned off?
- The runway lights are crap. You get the picture and all these points have been talked to death.
Seeing as my opinions (supported by other people) are too honest for you Vectisman, let me highlight a pertinent (and quite hilarious) extract from the article: -
"before taking up the planning and development director role at Southampton Airport, which was based around completing the airport’s master plan. Nine years on, he has never looked back".
Anyone who has studied the master plan will tell you that not a single element of their master plan has ever been implemented and now it all makes sense why (he was in charge). I think it would have been more appropriate for the writer to have said "Nine years on, he has never looked forward". There are numerous other gems in the article as well, such as him claiming credit for investment in the highways and the railway station. Like I said a few pages ago, the only meaningful investment has been in the retail element and the parking (i.e the two things that fleece the passengers). I am more than happy to be convinced otherwise