Airport Consolidation Needed!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Durham
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airport Consolidation Needed!
I attach link to article suggesting UK requires only 8 Regional Airports!
UK?s Regional Airports in Fight for Viability | Aviation International News
Airport Consolidation Needed
“He also claims that the UK–whose land area roughly equals that of California–has too many regional airports outside London and could better do with just eight: Bristol, Manchester, Newcastle and Southampton (in England): Aberdeen, Edinburgh and Glasgow (Scotland, excluding highland/island airports that enjoy public-service status); and Belfast (Northern Ireland). “
UK?s Regional Airports in Fight for Viability | Aviation International News
Airport Consolidation Needed
“He also claims that the UK–whose land area roughly equals that of California–has too many regional airports outside London and could better do with just eight: Bristol, Manchester, Newcastle and Southampton (in England): Aberdeen, Edinburgh and Glasgow (Scotland, excluding highland/island airports that enjoy public-service status); and Belfast (Northern Ireland). “
Am I reading the article correctly ?
The quote above, suggesting that the only regional airports the UK needs are Bristol, Manchester, Newcastle, Southampton, Aberdeen, Edinburgh, Glasgow and Belfast, is attributed to the CEO of Birmingham Airport.
Does he have some kind of a death-wish, or is this just typically sloppy journalism ?
Fascinating, though, to read about the lunatic proposal for a Severn Estuary island airport ...
The quote above, suggesting that the only regional airports the UK needs are Bristol, Manchester, Newcastle, Southampton, Aberdeen, Edinburgh, Glasgow and Belfast, is attributed to the CEO of Birmingham Airport.
Does he have some kind of a death-wish, or is this just typically sloppy journalism ?
Fascinating, though, to read about the lunatic proposal for a Severn Estuary island airport ...
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Edinburgh
Age: 43
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think I must be misreading the article or did the boss of BHX just claim that the need for his own airport is redundant? I didn't see it on the list of UK regional airports he is reported to consider has a future!!
It seems a bit pointless to complain about the number of UK regional airports. The market has developed that way. Those airports that have a business case to grow their route networks will do so, and others will remain small scale [but still have a place of some description in the market].
It seems a bit pointless to complain about the number of UK regional airports. The market has developed that way. Those airports that have a business case to grow their route networks will do so, and others will remain small scale [but still have a place of some description in the market].
Last edited by Bartek; 6th May 2013 at 07:32.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite Right.
The CEO at BHX (for how long ?) did quite rightly omit BHX from the list because if you look at that central band of "Middle England" you have BHX,EMA, BRS,LUT, Norwich to the east, with the likes of COV and Cambridge and Gloucester with perhaps Oxford too.
Last but not least Manchester, a fully developed major airport by any measure that serves the whole of the UK in reality.
This has been done to death in the past - At last a modicum of rationality creeping in 50 years too late.
How many Airports in the UK close to habitation and occupying desperately needed land for housing could be closed ?
[Edit: Bartek - Its not markets, but a legacy of "Councillor Bigwig" needed somewhere to park the daughter's Tiger moth in 1950.... East Bruminghamshire on Avon must have an airport.]
Last but not least Manchester, a fully developed major airport by any measure that serves the whole of the UK in reality.
This has been done to death in the past - At last a modicum of rationality creeping in 50 years too late.
How many Airports in the UK close to habitation and occupying desperately needed land for housing could be closed ?
[Edit: Bartek - Its not markets, but a legacy of "Councillor Bigwig" needed somewhere to park the daughter's Tiger moth in 1950.... East Bruminghamshire on Avon must have an airport.]
Last edited by Guest 112233; 6th May 2013 at 08:19.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In transit
Age: 70
Posts: 3,052
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BHX is ideally situated to become a major hub. It is currently under capacity, and has good links to its massive catchment area.
I believe the main problem with its expansion is that there is not a lot of open land around it, and it is close to some pricey real estate. They should have built it on the other side, near Wolverhampton!
I believe the main problem with its expansion is that there is not a lot of open land around it, and it is close to some pricey real estate. They should have built it on the other side, near Wolverhampton!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capetonian you are nearly right
The problem with say locating a major hub at say the site occupied by Half Penny Green, would have been providing road infrastructure to the place.
There would have been ferocious opposition from the local populace in green and pleasant South Staffs.
It did have a number of Runways, one in in excess of 2000 Yards. (from memory very hazy).
As for envelopment of the former V Bomber base at Gaydon nr Warwick a 9000 ft runway ? that's another matter.
There would have been ferocious opposition from the local populace in green and pleasant South Staffs.
It did have a number of Runways, one in in excess of 2000 Yards. (from memory very hazy).
As for envelopment of the former V Bomber base at Gaydon nr Warwick a 9000 ft runway ? that's another matter.
Last edited by Guest 112233; 6th May 2013 at 08:38.
The last time I checked, outside San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego metropolitan areas, very large swathes of California have a very low population density. There is a reason why commercial passenger flights are infrequent to areas of low population density.
You could build one big airport in the South West where the M5 joins the M4 and the railway runs right alongside to negate the need for Cardiff, Bristol, Exeter, etc..... call it something like Filton perhaps?
The secret of success of a regional airport is not to rely on flights only, added value like maintenance facilities, training, storage,leisure facilities anything you want but lots of successful airfields out there with no commercial traffic at all.
The secret of success of a regional airport is not to rely on flights only, added value like maintenance facilities, training, storage,leisure facilities anything you want but lots of successful airfields out there with no commercial traffic at all.
How many Airports in the UK close to habitation and occupying desperately needed land for housing could be closed ?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect (but may be wrong) that he has been misquoted BUT If I was in marketing at BXH I would have been onto the site ASAP to get the quote changed !
That said all the airports mentioned are actually viable for their own market in terms of charter OR low cost BUT...long haul ?
It's interesting to see the huffing and puffing in this regard but in reality there is only one major contender and like it or loathe it that is Manchester.
It is at the epicentre of an area which has the highest population outside London, namely Liverpool, Leeds, and Sheffield. Even for people in Birmingham it is an easier commute to MAN from the Northern suburbs than it is using the M6 to cross the centre !
It already has critical mass in terms of demand for International long haul services.
It has large domestic feed across 17 domestic points right across the UK from Newquay to Southampton, Norwich to Inverness as well as NI.
That level of connectivity is 50% higher than LHR/LGW !
In terms of European services you can reach all the major Capitals of Europe at least twice and sometime multiple times a day.
It actually serves more destinations than LHR (over 200) , although even I would concede that say Almeria does not quite compete with Bangkok !
Transport links are superb M56, M60, M6, M62, M63 all within 30 minutes AND it has a railway station which DIRECTLY connects to a number of other
cities across the UK !
Sermon over.....
In terms of "industry comment" it will be interesting to see what industry commentators such as Anna.aero and RoutesOnline have to say, the Anna.aero editor is a former BHX man and continually champions BHX mostly using fiction over actuality !
That said all the airports mentioned are actually viable for their own market in terms of charter OR low cost BUT...long haul ?
It's interesting to see the huffing and puffing in this regard but in reality there is only one major contender and like it or loathe it that is Manchester.
It is at the epicentre of an area which has the highest population outside London, namely Liverpool, Leeds, and Sheffield. Even for people in Birmingham it is an easier commute to MAN from the Northern suburbs than it is using the M6 to cross the centre !
It already has critical mass in terms of demand for International long haul services.
It has large domestic feed across 17 domestic points right across the UK from Newquay to Southampton, Norwich to Inverness as well as NI.
That level of connectivity is 50% higher than LHR/LGW !
In terms of European services you can reach all the major Capitals of Europe at least twice and sometime multiple times a day.
It actually serves more destinations than LHR (over 200) , although even I would concede that say Almeria does not quite compete with Bangkok !
Transport links are superb M56, M60, M6, M62, M63 all within 30 minutes AND it has a railway station which DIRECTLY connects to a number of other
cities across the UK !
Sermon over.....
In terms of "industry comment" it will be interesting to see what industry commentators such as Anna.aero and RoutesOnline have to say, the Anna.aero editor is a former BHX man and continually champions BHX mostly using fiction over actuality !
Last edited by Bagso; 6th May 2013 at 10:48.
Paul Kehoe had a piece in (I think) the Times in late March/early April and looks like that has been used to pad this out (unless he's in the habit of repeating himself)
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The M77...
Age: 41
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't speak for airports in England, but the subject of airport consloidation priodically pops up in the world of Scottish Aviation. The thinking (on average) seems to be Scotland could use one central belt hub airport with a combination of business, long-haul and some leisure routes with smaller regional airports supplying the bucket and spade routes and regional connections to better served hubs.
It has been done to death on many a thread, with it usually descending into an East (EDI)vs West (GLA and PIK) pie fight.
In my opinion there is merit in it, but the cost would be astronomical, not to mention the thorny issue of where to put such a large development. So it's not likely to happen and Scotland will continue to have three airports fighting for a finite amount of business.
It has been done to death on many a thread, with it usually descending into an East (EDI)vs West (GLA and PIK) pie fight.
In my opinion there is merit in it, but the cost would be astronomical, not to mention the thorny issue of where to put such a large development. So it's not likely to happen and Scotland will continue to have three airports fighting for a finite amount of business.
Last edited by The Hypnoboon; 6th May 2013 at 14:15. Reason: shoddy spelling
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 2,782
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airport Consolidation is becoming a much more relevant topic, since the world went into recession mode, airports that were sustainable in the 'good times' have been hit hard since disposable income has been lessened, and more people are unemployed.
That said parallel to this is the consolidation in the airline industry, far fewer airlines and these will consolidate at major gateways. hence smaller regional airports with lower levels of traffic may well suffer.
Airports like Blackpool, Teesside (Durham Tees), Cardiff etc are feeling the pinch. This situation can only intensify as the number of carriers reduces and pressures like fuel cost and the strenght of the bigger carriers make smaller carriers avoid risk taking and entering new markets.
The whole issue is one of sustainability. Give it five years of lower activity when major infrastructural investment is needed, there will be no business case for this in many of the airports, the question as to whether many are a going concern will be questioned. Unless a small gateway has a strategic partner/owner and itself is of strategic value, we may well see the demise of many smaller airports in favour of the larger neighbouring airports.
Take NI for example, the question of 2 for Belfast has been debated to high heavens on here. With a customer v sustainability arguement well played. If we consider greater Manchester as already mentioned, it has a population as great as the whole Island of Ireland and it has one airport (yes it has neighbouring airports), Belfast has 2!!!
This illustates that in order to be in a position to reinvest, improve and continue to grow airports need adequate levels of business to manage for the long term, hence the split in a business between 2 in a small city is hardly ideal, for the long term.
That said parallel to this is the consolidation in the airline industry, far fewer airlines and these will consolidate at major gateways. hence smaller regional airports with lower levels of traffic may well suffer.
Airports like Blackpool, Teesside (Durham Tees), Cardiff etc are feeling the pinch. This situation can only intensify as the number of carriers reduces and pressures like fuel cost and the strenght of the bigger carriers make smaller carriers avoid risk taking and entering new markets.
The whole issue is one of sustainability. Give it five years of lower activity when major infrastructural investment is needed, there will be no business case for this in many of the airports, the question as to whether many are a going concern will be questioned. Unless a small gateway has a strategic partner/owner and itself is of strategic value, we may well see the demise of many smaller airports in favour of the larger neighbouring airports.
Take NI for example, the question of 2 for Belfast has been debated to high heavens on here. With a customer v sustainability arguement well played. If we consider greater Manchester as already mentioned, it has a population as great as the whole Island of Ireland and it has one airport (yes it has neighbouring airports), Belfast has 2!!!
This illustates that in order to be in a position to reinvest, improve and continue to grow airports need adequate levels of business to manage for the long term, hence the split in a business between 2 in a small city is hardly ideal, for the long term.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airport Consolidation Needed!
UK aviation and airports are in the private sector, so the market will decide. Of course there is government interference and involvement, and it could help the industry in general by scrapping or severely reducing APD. Air services to/from LHR would also help struggling local airports, but that won't happen unless and until LHR is expanded. The government could help by allowing it, and soon.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Durham
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bristol, Manchester, Newcastle and Southampton (in England): Aberdeen, Edinburgh and Glasgow (Scotland, excluding highland/island airports that enjoy public-service status); and Belfast (Northern Ireland). “
What he has missed is Birmingham ( consolidating with EMA)
- I can't see this working as all airports are privately owned and will continue to operate as long as they are viable.
Paxing All Over The World
The astounding thing is that a UK CEO (of anything, leave alone an airport) should confuse California and the UK!!
Firstly: In CA, the distances are great, the population spread out and roads between the centres (not local city traffic) is usually very low. One of the main reasons that the UK regional market has developed so strongly is the traffic congestion getting from, say, Luton to Birmingham. When I was living in a town on the same railway line as BHX, I never found a time when the fares (road or rail + air) justified using BHX and always drove the 15 miles to LTN.
Secondly: The Heathrow situation has driven the regional market to develop in a way that it would not otherwise have done.
Thirdly: The USA does not have Continental Europe on it's doorstep where a one/two hour hop can take you a long way and three/four a very great way! Folks do not want to drive/train to BHX in order to take a one hour hop to Paris - if the market can take them there directly. Numerous other examples will be obvious.
Fourthly: The USA does not have AMS, FRA, CDG, MUC on it's doorstep, nor the M.E. market offering long thin routes to major hubs!
Therefore, this bloke is talking out his nose. But it is all a waste of time as no one has any power to change the UK airport config - since the govt is not going to nationalise it all, or change their stupid APD.
Time for a cup of tea and to forget this waste of paper nonsense. If I was an employee of his, or his manager, I'd be very pi$$ed off at such huge the waste of time and money. It looks as if it was a self-aggrandising event to show himself in a good light. Perhaps he wants a job in the M.E.?
Firstly: In CA, the distances are great, the population spread out and roads between the centres (not local city traffic) is usually very low. One of the main reasons that the UK regional market has developed so strongly is the traffic congestion getting from, say, Luton to Birmingham. When I was living in a town on the same railway line as BHX, I never found a time when the fares (road or rail + air) justified using BHX and always drove the 15 miles to LTN.
Secondly: The Heathrow situation has driven the regional market to develop in a way that it would not otherwise have done.
Thirdly: The USA does not have Continental Europe on it's doorstep where a one/two hour hop can take you a long way and three/four a very great way! Folks do not want to drive/train to BHX in order to take a one hour hop to Paris - if the market can take them there directly. Numerous other examples will be obvious.
Fourthly: The USA does not have AMS, FRA, CDG, MUC on it's doorstep, nor the M.E. market offering long thin routes to major hubs!
Therefore, this bloke is talking out his nose. But it is all a waste of time as no one has any power to change the UK airport config - since the govt is not going to nationalise it all, or change their stupid APD.
Time for a cup of tea and to forget this waste of paper nonsense. If I was an employee of his, or his manager, I'd be very pi$$ed off at such huge the waste of time and money. It looks as if it was a self-aggrandising event to show himself in a good light. Perhaps he wants a job in the M.E.?
DTV development
DTV has more open land and potential than newcastle..logically developing DTV would be better and more cost effective than developing newcastle dont you think?