Southend -Uncertain future (merged)

[timzsta]

The future for Southend Airport now looks very uncertain following the local councils decision to deny it planning permission to add the Runway End Safety Areas as required by CAA regulations. In addition a new terminal building and a railway station were to be built, with annual passenger figures of around 300,000 expected. The airport is now considering an appeal, possibly taking the issue direct to the Secretary of State.

The airports single runway, 24/06, is 1600m long. Aircraft up to 757 size visit for maintenance and re-spray, but cannot cary passengers due to the absence of RESA's. The runway is bounded at one end by the Southend Victoria - London railway line and at the other end the Church. After the airport completed a detailed study of its options at which engineers stated moving the railway line would cause 3 years disruption to the service, it was decided the only option was to move the church 50 metres north of its present position.

A specialist company was approached who had moved several historic buildings around Europe, and they agreed it would be possible to move the Church, whose congregation stands at about 30 people. The airport also pledged to build a new community centre for the church in its existing grounds, and as part of the moving of the building, it would for the first time in its several hundred year history, have proper foundations. At present the church is already in need of much structural renovation.

But with council elections just a few weeks away and after a strong "no to expansion" campaign from local residents with much misinformation, including that graves were to be "runwayed over", the local council rejected the airports plans. Local residents also voiced concerns over traffic congestion, potential for an accident, "noisy" polluting aircraft and night flights. Southend Council has a history of saying "no" to schemes that would promote investment and jobs , having rejected several plans for a new footbal stadium with associated leisure and sports facilities for the general public, and a marina on the Thames.

Nearly 1600 airport workers now face the very real threat of redundancy, some for the second time in two years following them demise of companies like Heavylift and British World. With several flying clubs on the airfield, several hundred people face no longer being able to continue with their hobby of general aviation and the many ATPL students who visit Southend from the likes of Stapleford, Andrewsfield and the surrounding area to do IR training will face an increase in training costs as they have to go further afield.

More sad news at a difficult time for the industry.

[niknak]

The implementation of the RESAs wouldnt have made any difference to passenger figures, commercial jet op's for IT traffic wouldn't have magically arrived just because of this.

Most operators require at least 1800 to 2000m of actual runway to operate the B757 or A320 on holiday flights, and Southend would never be able to provide this.

The figure of 300K passengers per year going through Southend as a result of the the RESAs being improved is a figment of a very fertile imagination, a brief look at the availability of flights from Stansted, Luton and Gatwick would destroy any credibility that Southends argument may have held.

Southend may be worth far more as real estate than as an airport, but I don't think it will close, it will just bumble on as it always has done, as a convenient G/A and maintenance base.

[panjandrum]

The implementation of RESAs will affect passenger numbers.
Either they go in on the existing length, in which case the distances become well less than 1000m, or new tarmac is laid down to include RESA's on top of the exisiting length.

The former would result in the end of passenger flights from the airport, and the airport would no longer be economically viable, the latter would result in exactly the sort of extra runway capacity needed in the South-East, and sits well with the development of the Thames Gateway regeneration project. The environmental impact of the proposal would also be minimal.

Southend is not trying to be a Stansted/ Gatwick or Heathrow, but just to offer the range of passenger services there is undoubtedly the local demand for, ie: Domestic, European cities and Holiday destinations.

If you think there is no demand for this Niknak, perhaps you could enlighten us all with your undoubted wisdom on the subject, and what you base your biased opinions on!?

[boredcounter]

How sad....................
Having worked at SEN in the 80's I still regard it as an airport with massive potential.

A lot of cash would need to be invested, and the railway line / church will allways hold it back as far as runway expansion is concerned.

I shudder to think how many frequent fliers live nearer to Southend, and are forced to fly from LHR, LGW, LCY, LTN and STN.
I wonder how many frequent flyers into the London airports would fly to/from SEN if the rail interface were there.

Sure, as it stands, big sexy 75's etc could never use the field, but the new generation t/props must be able to (Flybe JER charters). A few well chosen routes and off the airport goes. After all, in my years there, I have seen passenger ops by B737, 1-11, 146 and Caravel jet types.

Given a good rail connection to London, would the Maersk (DM) BLL service have moved to LGW so early.

Both Southend and it's Kentish counterpart, Lydd are super little airports, full of potential. Unlike Lydd, Southend has a very healthy catchment area.

How can the local council be so short-sighted..............................

With the recent demise of BWA and Heavylift, I do hope SEN can once again find a niche and make it work. It will never fly cars again, I do not wish night freight back on it (as it was in my days there) so a way with passenger ops is what it needs, and deserves. Perhaps Flightline, as it's only based carrier I can think of, could concider the branch out into schedules. Perhaps Flybe, having reccommended services to BHX from every regional airport in the country, could start with London Southend to Birmingham.

It would be so sad to see such potential committed to the scrap heap, and yet another housing estate with aviation related road names appear.

Good luck to all at SEN, I do so hope someone sees sense.

Bored

National Airways, 1988-89 SEN

[P.Pilcher]

I don't know how many times I have found myself approaching the S.E. of England, heading for Luton, Gatwick or Stanstead to find them all fogged out - except Southend - it has been a bolt hole for me on several occasions and I certainly wouldn't like to lose it.

[HZ123]

Much of what has been stated is spot on and I must agree with the comments 'as to where these destinations are going to appear from'. I would be interested to know what 'ATC Lashams' future plans are. SEN appears to do well with engineering /resprays and GA etc. Surely SEN has more to offer than Lasham aerodrome being open all hours. SEN could surely do with an increase in concrete as it clearly lacks parking space and more space might mean more work.
Does anyone know who owns HZ123. KODA and 5N-HHH as these are three a/c spaces that have been occupied for a number of years. Surely they will end up under the cutting torch.

[timzsta]

The KODA 707 has been at Southend ever since it was involved in a drugs bust about 2 years ago. For a long time it was impounded but following completion of the court case against those responsible, the aircraft has had work done on it in recent weeks. It may yet be sold either for further use or for scrap/parts.

[HZ123]

Went to Lydd the other day for the first time and it makes SEN look positively first class. So I suppose if the former can survive in its present form then SEN must still have a future if only for GA / services and the splendid bars.

[panjandrum]

Southend airport faces more certain future!

http://www.business-in-essex.co.uk/essex/business/BUSINESS0.html (http://)

:) :ok:

[boredcounter]

page not found, can you please check address for me bud, I do have a genuin soft spot for SEN, and would like to try and stay in touch with her

[Red Four]

B.C.
I think the article PJ is referring to relates to the Council meeting on Wednesday evening where a planning application for a replacement ILS was was addressed.

Like you, I have fond memories of my time at Southend, and really cannot understand why it is so under utilised, especially when there is so much talk of lack of runway capacity in the London area.

4

Edited 27.12.03 to remove URL

[HZ123]

Red four ; You are correct it also included the provision of road barriers to prevent vehicles crossing behind the threshold.

Surely the additional runway at STN will also bring negative pressure on any improvments to the runway length or width.

[EGCC Rwy 24]

Used to live there (Manchester now). In-laws asking what is going on with airport redevelopment.

So far as I can see from translating the local paper, localiser for 24 is being moved across the road into a field (ie at the 06 end). Sounds like a bit more protection of the ILS too - perhaps a better category?

Can someone in the know give me a clue - so I can explain to the in-laws??

Thanks

Nick

[EGCC Rwy 24]

Oops wrong forum! Thanks to whoever moved it!

Any ideas folks??

[83 3708]

From what I hear they have not got the approval to move the church which is stopping them from physically extending the runway.

By moving the localiser they might gain a few more metres on the declared distances. Although I would hardly think it would be financially worthwhile to dig it up and relocate it just for that reason.

The LDA on 06 looks like it could benefit from a few more metres!

Regards

[niknak]

I seem to recall something in the local press about a new ILS being installed, with the localizer being located in the grounds of the church.

This, I think, will give them extra metres on declared distances, but no physical extension to the runway.
The ILS was due for replacement anyway, and will only be certified as Cat 1 due to the runway and approach lighting at Southend, (and possibly other physical factors?).

The end result is a few more metres on the runway figures, but it's not going to be enough to make a significant commercial difference.

[smallpilot]

Under the new plan approved by the council last week...
The Church is NOT being moved or demolished etc
The ILS is indeed to be re-located on the other side of the main road by the 06 threshold.
The road is to have barriers installed to stop the traffic when heavy air traffic movements take place (Some talk that the small embankment at the 06 end to be removed but cant confirm that).
The council has taken a long lease on land in the 06 undershoot area to create a stopway and enable the ILS to be re-sited.
The Airport operator claims this will create a 'safety zone' of some 200-300 m at the end of the r/wy 24 in the current 06 undershoot area.
I'm not sure if the r/wy distances TODA, LDA, etc will be affected by these changes but in the local media the airport operator said this was a good compromise and would enable the airport to continue operating without moving the church accompanied by the usual cr#p about encouraging new pax operators, modelled on LCY etc etc
hope this helps.....

[trevs99uk]

From what i understand the ILS aerials are to be placed on a raised platform. Persumably this is to allow the ILS to still be available whilst vehicles cross the runway end. The Beam being above these.
The offset is for the safety zone side elevation which then means the church does,nt then come in to play. So there will probablt be changes to the approach procedures.
Apparently unless this was done the CAA whould have put alot of restrictions on the airport/runway.
The airport operates on some exemtions but the CAA is now manned by Lawyers and they want to get rid of exemtions.
Trouble is the rules keep changing, wait in a few years EASA will probably come along and change them again.

Some years ago the airport had to put in new hold points when the CAA came down to inspect and sign them off they reportedly told the airport to move them as since they had put them in the rules had changed.

[HZ123]

Slightly aside the airport has been busy and ATC Lasham has generated a good bit of work. The last couple of months has also found Air Livery with a steady stream of respray work. Also a number of the ex BA ATP's have been delivered to SEN for sale and disposal.

[Lite]

I dont really know a lot about Southend so I do apologise if these questions have been answered before, but any info is appreciated.

1) How long do the PPRUNe members reckon it will be before Southend will begin to recieve regular flights?
I know that last year flybe. were using their Dash 8-300s on a couple of flights to Guernsey and Jersey, but for example, do you think that the airport could soon welcome a Boeing 737-300 operator?

2) How big is the existing terminal building in terms of check-in counters, gates, shops, cafés etc.

3) How far is Southend Airport from London?
Are we talking a similar distance to Luton or Gatwick from London or more like Manston?

4) Do you think that there is a good chance of making a success out of Southend - consider for a minute that low cos have made a success out of Luton, Stansted and Hahn!

:ok:

[HOODED]

Lite, I can't see Southend hosting 733s on any serious flights as the runway is only 5200ft/1600m which would severly restrict range/payload in the summer.

[boredcounter]

I worked at SEN in the late 80's, and have fond memories of Orion 732 operating before that. 1-11, Caravelles and 146's of both freight and pax variety operated during my time. I believe the rules have changed somewhat since then. If I run performance (in-house) for my CRJ's the programme tilts and threatens to phone the boss!

FlyBe did indeed operate charters to the CIs from SEN with DHC-8s

I have not been to SEN for about 2 years, and then the terminal was worse than in '89, a real shame.

It is, as an Essex boy, in my opinion, much nearer to London than LHR or LGW. You can clear SEN in 40 paces, not minutes. Alas the nearest station is Rochford, about (guess) two miles and a bit away. DM still grew the BLL-LGW route from SEN with DHC-7s.

There was talk of a rail interchange, any news.

SEN (was) is a cracking field, once I believe the fifth bussiest in the UK, and wasted now, very wasted.

No, it is not an MSE or LYX, it has a fair catchment, that could poach from all the London airports South of BHX,CVT and EMA on a shorthaul basis.

Car parks would have to be (very) multi-level, the runway would have to grow by a great deal, maint facilities would be very limited (as I remember 1 Large and two useable hangars + RFS)
but cracking potential, wasted as a Bizjet hive for London.

Good luck SEN, held back by the council, that once owned you, the A127 and A13 and BR.


Bored

[boredcounter]

Hey, you tease.

Do you have the real link to the Southend Evening Echo?

No, not taking the 'P', honest, but as you force my hand, here goes.

I am a 'Shrimper' (closet) so said thread, is golddust.

All I got was some bussiness in Essex page...............

Need Fix mate, post the real one, please. I can read SUFC web pages till they come out of my ears, need the local media to bring home reality.


Please
Bored

Ps Happy New Year

[Golf Charlie Charlie]

Who even remembers Channel Airways today ?

[Red Four]

BC
The address has moved to 'archives' now, but it does not appear to work as a direct link. Go to the archive page and search Date 19 December 2003, then 'Essex - Business' and the titles appear.


Echo Archive (http://www.thisisessex.co.uk/essex/archive/)

4

[surely not]

I cannot imagine that SEN will rise from the ashes of its past.

Its heyday was too long ago and the economics of operating niche services from SEN just don't stack up.

It doesn't have a significant local business catchment area, therefore it would be looking at London bound passengers and it is not going to be able to compete with LTN, LGW, SOU or even good ol' Biggin on the bump as they all offer the opportunity to operate full loads for 733 and similar with the fares to match. Plus with the exception of Biggin, they all have good links straight to London without having to catch a taxi to a Station a couple of miles away.

LCY is unique and stands alone for convenience and that is why it will be able to operate with premium fares making smaller capacity aircraft viable.

Unless SEN gets a significant runway extension then, IMO, it needs to look to the biz jet and engineering sectors to maintain its viability.

[Lite]

surely not, East Midlands Airport does not have a railway station on-site or in fact it doesn't have a railway station within 20 minutes drive of it.

Similarly, there are plenty of international passengers who use EMA who to get to Derby or Nottingham must put up with an hour bus ride, or a once hourly 20 minute ride to Loughborough Train Station, that only operates between 7am and 7pm.

Surely, if Southend could put everything in place, such as the ILS, the runway extension and organise maybe four buses an hour (if the railway station is 5 minutes away 1 bus could give 4 roundtrips) there would be scope to bring SEN a low-co.

So can anyone answer my earlier questions.

[surely not]

I would think that CVT is a more comparable example than EMA. CVT also suffers from well developed existing airports nearby and a runway that is too short ( though it is some 700 feet longer than SEN).

It has carved out a niche as an airport for mail flights and exec a/c .

The fact is that whilst money could be spent upgrading SEN facilities, it is unlikely that it would be able to generate sufficient extra business to justify the expenditure.

[Lite]

But surely if the owners of Coventry are prepared to upgrade their existing facilities to bring in a new low-cost airline, even if this new airline is only basing three 131-seat Boeing 737-500s, then why should Southend not look at attracting existing or start up low-cost airlines.

There is no way a new airline could effectively establish a base at Stansted now, its becoming congested, and no airline could grow to the same size of Ryanair or EasyJet at Stansted, and its becoming the same way at Luton.

Southend is within such a distance of London to possibly make it an attractive alternative for a low-cost start up.

If anyone could please help me with my earlier questions, again it would be appreciated! :ok:

[**777lover**]

Hi,

I live roughly 3 miles from the threshold of 06 in a town called Hadleigh. Now there are a good hundred thousand people in the area 30 mile radius of Southend that would benefit massivly from an expansion.

To awnser 'lites' question Southends terminal is a tiny thing no bigger than a large hall. It has a neat flight operations area with bar and veiw over the airfield, though this is only avaliable to pilots and staff of the airport. It has a cafe with seating for maybe 60 people (?) and one check in desk. It has toilets and some information on the airport in the entrance. A gate is non existant with passengers and crew just walking out of a door and onto the plane. The whole thing in my opinion is in need of a makeover to make it meet these days passenger requirements.

There are several hangers one owned by air livery and the others i believe owned (or fromally) by Heavylift. Flightline is the only airline known to be based at SEN and this doesn't offer regular passenger flights. The airport has recently had a shopping area built near it and there is some room maybe for expansion but not enough. You would more than likely need to knock down some of the hangers to make room for expansion but i doubt this would ever happen!

At the moment their are several planes stored at southend notably HZ-123 a boeing 707, a 737 TF-ATL belonging to ATA Brazil and also 4 BAE 146s that used to belong to Air China that i think have been sold by Flightline to another carrier. In conclusion SEN seems, only at the moment to allow airlines to bring in their planes to dump or to give a respray. SEN is also the main diversion airport for STN.

I personally think it would be fantastic if SEN could get an expansion and although i understand completely the opinion of the church they are getting a lot for a simple 50m move. This opinion may be coming from an aircraft enthusiast but i do genuinly think it would benefit lots of people.

Thanks Dave 14

[LGS6753]

Go east from SEN and what do you find? - sea.
Go south from SEN and what do you find? - sea.
Go north from SEN and what do you find? - fairly empty countryside.
Only to the west are there any people (potential passengers). Also to the west are STN, LTN, LCY & LHR, of which at least the last three are surrounded on all sides by potential passengers.

Apart from environmental (noise) concerns, there are no advantages in developing coastal airports. By definition their catchment area is limited.
And the access to SEN is, from memory, round a fairly busy urban ring road. Not ideal from an access point of view. On the contrary, STN, LTN, EMA, LGW, BHX, even COV have local motorway access within a couple of miles.
These are issues that a sensible loco will consider before investing its limited resources in a new hub.
Sorry, SEN, the answer's maintenance, flight training, aircraft storage, and servicing the direct catchment area only.

[Lite]

The journey time on an average service from London's Fenchurch Street Station to Southend East Station is admittedly 60 minutes, after taking a bus which will probably take about 10 minutes, however the expected journey time if you want to take a train from Luton involves waiting for a shuttle bus followed by a 30 minute ride by a specially organised service by Thameslink.

If operator C2C saw there to be a benefit in launching non-stop services to Southend East could easily be done in about 30 minutes. I have seen people fly from EMA, wait for the once hourly AirLine Shuttle bus and then take connections of up to 90 minutes for trains to Sheffield, Shrewsbury and Coventry.

Presumably if Ryanair can attract the number of passengers for daily flights to cities like Friedrichshafen and Forli, then there would be a benefit of spending money to establish Southend as an alternative London airport. And, one would think that if Coventry can set it all up so quickly, then so could SEN.

Just a thought. And also, is there a dedicated email address for SEN?

[matspart3]

Lite
Wrong railway line! The Southend/Liverpool St line runs past the Aiport boundary and has a train every 20 minutes throughout the day. The journey time is 45-55 mins. The Airport operator wanted to build a station some years ago and I suspect they're still looking to pursue this option...in the interim, a shuttle service to the existing local stations (Rochford, Prittlewell, Southend Victoria) would be no more than 10 minutes.

The terminal had a facelift about 10 years ago, it's not huge but probably adequate for short haul commuter stuff.

Haven't looked in detail, but I assume moving the localiser and controlling the road in the 06 undershoot may add a few more meters to the declared distances and meet the new RESA requirements....it'll still be longer than LCY.

Bizarrely, a large number of LCY inbounds (all those via CLN)route virtually overhead SEN. The flight time would be 8-10 minutes shorter and the pax could probably be in Central London quicker than on the DLR. In ATC terms, this would also possibly reduce the congestion in the TMA. SEN has an excellent weather record, without the performance/crosswind limitations of LCY. They have Uncategorised ILS (due to lack of Approach Lights I believe?) and Radar, albeit Primary only.

In the 80's and 90's there were various summer IT operators using 737's (Orion, Monarch, Air Malta, Viva?), 1-11's (BIA), Caravelles (Hispania) and Princess Air with their awful pink 146.
Don't know how A320, 734, 757 etc. performance compares, but the catchmentment area for the bucket and spade brigade encompasses a large chunk of Essex and stretches to East London. The A13 and A127 are no worse than the M11, M1 to STN and LTN.

With limited infrastructural investment, surely SEN could be a viable alternative to LCY and serve a section of the charter and loco markets.

Hope it happens!

[TopBunk]

matspart3

I learned to fly at SEN in the mid 80s and well remember the weekly (?) Sunday summer Air Malta 737-200's rotating off 24 just by the last turn off (near Southend Flying Club). Quite a sight they were to a fresh PPL'er.

If I recall correctly tho', they used to only hop across to Manston to refuel for the trip to Malta. Indeed, the direct destinations were quite restrictive due to the runway length. To operate non-stop A320 flights of 2.5 hours to the Med in a 1-class A320 with 180-seats would I would think require lengthening the runway, not just relocating the LLZ aerial.

Commuter flights in a RJ100/146 would obviously be fine.

HNY

[ELondonPax]

Matspart3, I don’t think that your argument, that Southend can complete with LCY, is viable.

The primary market for the carriers using LCY is the City and Canary Wharf area. Users of LCY are much more time sensitive than they are price sensitive. The whole modus operandi at LCY is geared to getting you off the plane and out of the terminal in less than ten minutes - and they do it - and they do it consistently. From the door of the airport you can jump into a cab and be in Canary Wharf in less than ten minutes and the City in less than twenty. You cannot compete with those times by landing at Southend.

Southend may be able to carve a market with the low cost carriers, but no way can it compete with the niche that LCY has.

[Lite]

I don't think that Southend will take passengers away from London City, but I think it can become a viable alternative to other low-cost airports in the London area.

If the airport could expand its runway, expand its terminal building and perhaps make some sort of make-shift parkway for stopping trains (I can't pretend to know how long it takes to build a train station!) to attract a new operator then I think it could do well.

But do people think its viable? I cant even find a SEN website or email address.

:ok:

[surely not]

Lite, there are a lot of ifs, and a lot of cost in your dream. I seriously doubt that the amount of traffic justifies the money being spent at SEN when for the same bucks at LTN or STN they can improve facilities that are already far better.

Topbunk is correct when he says that the operators you mentioned always had a trade off, either restricted load available, or a tech stop not long after take-off at a proper airport to get enough fuel to carry on.

It's a nice dream, but it doesn't work financially.

[Memetic]

Here you go Lite:

http://www.southendairport.net/

Did you really look? 1st result on Google.:D

[James / dunno]

I don't consider Southend like an airport that transports passengers but SEN is very cheap for the mantenience works that airliners require. It is there that the business is running! And I'm pretty sure about that. Of course, that won't be enough to support Southend
Cheers
James