MANCHESTER - 7

[Bagso]

Manchester to Ban Shuttles ?

Apparently Maplc are so upset at losing their UK based long haul network they have been having discussions about massive retaliation !

Rumours suggest that a high level meeting took place last week whereby they have looked at the legality and therefore the possibility of withdrawing landing rights to both BA and BMI shuttles thereby causing a hammer blow to both airlines profitability given the large volumes of traffic carried on both routes into Heathrow. The belief is that they could cause a groundswell of opinion that might make BA and BMI reverse their decision. No-one however it seems, is quite sure at this stage whether this could be enforced !

The more general view is that it is simply posturing in order to bring the centralisation of ALL British based airlines into Heathrow to the knowledge of the travelling public, business MPs, and the media ,at a time when a decision about another runway at LHR is due to be made.

Clearly something is in the wind as they have looked at the serious possibility that the airlines would retaliate themselves and tfr service to Liverpool and also the impact and adverse publicity of the travelling public whose travel plans would be thrown into chaos.

The airport disputes BA and BMIs own figures suggesting that yields are poor and are incensed.

They believe that Lufthansa might change their mind if there was a sufficient groundswell of opinion against them.

It would certainly be a bold step given MANplcs previous p***poor performance in marketing, spin etc.

BUT If it were true would it not be counter productive given MANplc own profitability ?

Does anybody know whether this is actually enforceable ?

Also do we know the total number of figures for pax carried on both routes and the impact this might have on both airlines Balance Sheet and indeed
Manchester !

[Ametyst1]

I would have thought that the move to ban shuttles would be illegal under EU law which allows for the free movement of persons within the union. If Manchester Airport singled out BA and BMI then surely they should take similar actions against KLM, Air France and Lufthansa "shuttles" which provide the same service at Manchester as the London services linking in the the airline's main hubs.

It would nice to see BA back at Liverpool though :)

[ETOPS]

These so called "shuttles" are, in reality, domestic scheduled air services. No different to (say) BMIBaby flights to Belfast or Eastern Airlines to Stansted. I think MA Plc would have a hard time justifying such action in court.......

[One Sixty until 4.]

Some of the more legislation proficient members will advise, but the law regarding free movement of EU citizens concerns the unhindered access to EU states for nationals of another EU member state - rather than modes of transport.

MAplc are not obliged to take the traffic as this is a commercial concern, only the law of contracts applies here?

It could be criticised as a bit childish though in pulling up the drawbridge in this way, as it will force the poor travelling public to find another way to get to London as the big UK airlines won't be coming back regardless of MAplcs brinkmanship (assuming it is serious).

As was pointed out, the loss of the shuttles can only benefit other Euro hubs. Hmmm, but then again, BA/BD justified their tactical withdrawal by saying the MAN originating traffic wasn't profitable - so it couldn't be a real loss to them then if the travellers are routed via CDG/FRA/AMS could it?

BA has long siphoned off the business traveller via LHR (both those which could have originated via MAN and overseas customers going to MAN) rather than aim for a developing a robust regional service. Perhaps someone in the know can supply figures of London business transit pax with a point of origin that made MAN more convenient?

So in conclusion - ban the shuttles? Yes MAN will lose pax nd revenue - but it might deflect to other EU mainland airports, strengthen US operators yields or attract other operators.

Ryanair operate a tit-for-tat strategy and it hasn't hurt them. So give it a go MAN. Kick BA/BD in the bal-ance sheet.:E

[TartinTon]

Hahahahahaha!!! That's one of the funniest posts I've read in ages!!!

They cannot stop anyone flying intra EU under the EU treaty.

It would be funny to see them try!

[IB4138]

Wonder if this idea might have come from Sir Richard, as it would have a wonderful effect on Virgin Trains passenger numbers?

As for Ametyst dreams of seeing BA back at Liverpool, he has two hopes........

Bob and No.

[Gonzo]

Apparently Maplc are so upset at losing their UK based long haul network

What network would that be exactly?

[Mouser]

Could MAN make it awkward for said airlines to operate,e.g. ground handling delays, ****e stands, move slot times, although am I right in assuming that slots are set in stone.

[frontcheck]

bmi have never operated shuttle services, they may operate high frequency services on some routes but never shuttles.
The shuttle was a brand name used by BA when they operated their walkon/off domestic trunk services, but that stopped many years ago.

[Guest 112233]

Gonzo.He speekith with a potential professional interest.. If they can legally retaliate against Airlines that pack up and Go , let them. - This would mean a new era of stability of service levels and less profits for Airline shareholders.

Is it legal - I doubt It - but great if MAN try.

CAT III

[eggc]

They must be very p*ssed off to even discuss such things.

MAN are obvioulsy now trying to offer BA & BMI the commitment they have both shown to have for MAN.

Although, it must be around 3 miliion pax p.a. fly between MAN - London, which would be a huge loss of revenue for MAN. I can't help thinking that sometimes sour grapes cuts noses off and that can be counter productive !

[Mouser]

Of that 3 million lost pax how many would just route through Europe with KLM and AIR FRANCE for example.

[mickyman]

I know this is a rumour site but Im wondering
why no-one has questioned Bagso as to his
sources/references.He could be a spotty
teenager who gets a thrill out of people
actually taking him on!
Some people it seems dont have the capacity
to question anything on here and immediately
take up the baton and run.

I have read over the last few weeks, numorous
posts exposing peoples annoyance with airlines
decisions over routes etc - which is all very
understandable - but is it possible to have
some uninvented info - ie facts!

There are so many ways in which this thread is
wrong and I think that Bagso should appologise
for his starting it.

MM

[eggc]

Of that 3 million lost pax how many would just route through Europe with KLM and AIR FRANCE for example.

Maybe MAN expects a little more from BA & BMI, seeing as they are our national carriers. Inlight of the recent vote of confidence shown in MAN by BA & BMI, MAN probably would prefer to connect peeps thru FRA/CDG & AMS rather than line coffers of the 2 UK carriers, that MAN feels wee'd in its bed !

Petty, but understandable.

[sharpclassic]

Maybe if Manchester Airport Group spent more time, effort and money on providing passengers with an airport and not a shopping mall, maybe more passengers and airlines would be inclined to use Manchester?

I know shops are needed to make money to reinvest, but surely start with the basics?

1. Leaking roofs - walking down Pier B, not one rainy day goes by without seeing at least one bucket catching leaks from the roof. The record is 7 buckets in a stretch of no more than 50m

2. Moving walkways - Has anyone ever seen any of these all working? MAG claim that they are 2 years ols and they can't get the replacement parts for them. So why not rip them out and put new ones in?!

3. Continual building work of new shops - the other week, they had so intelligently blocked off an area of the departure lounge for 'commercial redevelopment' that there was only a 2m wide gap through which ALL passengers trying to get to the gate had to pass.

4. Total lack of sufficient seating - yes, I know they don't like passengers sitting down as it means they are not shopping, but there is only so much aimless wansdering that can be done.

5. P**s poor aircraft facilities. Go to most places in Europe, there is laser guided equipemt to position the aircraft on stand. Manchester provide a mirror. Which fogs up.

MAG wouldn't dare ban the BA shuttles as they are a major link to the Long Haul services out of Heathrow at Gatwick. Lose the shuttles and lose a massive number of passengers from the NW who want to get on these services.

[Gonzo]

CATIII-NDB

Leaving insults aside, it's a genuine question. How many UK based long haul flights a day out of EGCC were there?

[eggc]

As far as MAG are concerned more than there will be come April 09 !

I wonder could MAG play the eco card as part of their "rumoured" case to scrap flights to LHR.

[Guest 112233]

Thank you Gonzo - It was not an insult, ( I remembered the context of your prev postings on PPRUNE) - What about Virgin ? and the Hols flights (all year round). I wish I could give an exact figure. It does matter in economic terms. - In the light of the current economic situation, a pull out by any airline is going to cost jobs. - Every thing is becoming "London Centric" and there is a cost. The thread my be a deliberate leg pull - Lets see if the gaps in MAN's Long Haul are filled by US /European / Asian Carriers.
I know this is just hearsay, but look at the response to the BA and now BMI cessation - The Idea that a "Shuttle blocker" is even being talked about, shows the depth of the reaction.

CAT III

[steve wilson]

If MAPLC are really keen to exact revenge on BA/BMI then surely the best way for them to do this would be to offer well-timed slots at a discounted price to the likes of Cathay, United, Delta et al to that pax are no longer relying upon BA and BMI for longhauls through Heathrow. Ensure that facitities are up to standard and keep the prices for airlines to operate out of MAN competative in the long-term.

Steve

[Egerton Flyer]

Sharpclassic

How many people from the Manchester area have NO choice, but to fly via LHR or LGW.
Try to book a package deal to the far east and all you get is flights via London, even if the flights are available from Manchester.:ugh:
I refuse to be told to fly via London and now book my flights direct with the airline from Manchester.

E.F.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Well I know I was tired, but I didn't think I'd slept through to April 1st until I read this thread.

Banning LHR flights is entirely impractical, so if there is any truth at all in this proposal I hope it is no more than a PR stunt. With flights to LHR unavailable, the majority of passengers using those services would be lost to MAN completely. Some would reroute via other hubs, yes, but many others would use surface transport to London instead (and I would expect an upsurge in alternative rail/coach/limo services if this market was abandoned by MAplc). Many passengers using LHR flights are actually traveling into (and not beyond) London anyway. They would in most cases be lost completely; customers choose their London gateway based upon which part of the city they wish to visit (LCY and STN are not great for West London etc.). And Gatwick is great for Brighton and the South Coast! Or perhaps they suggest banning LGW flights too - they are currently operated by British Airways?

As another poster has said, this idea smacks of cutting off the nose to spite the face. If MAplc are genuinely considering this, then step back quickly - these are tough times as it is. Such a plan has the makings of the biggest howler since MA refused to negotiate with no-frills carriers some ten years ago. "It takes two to tango," said one no-frills boss back then. MAN has never recovered from the hubris-laden idiocy of the era when MAplc's marketing department shunned the no-frills carriers; its been a sad effort at catch-up ever since. So no more picking and choosing which carriers you would like to exclude right now, please. MAN needs all the traffic it can get, and the region will suffer economically if we don't back our existing business partners 100%.

As an aside, if MAplc were to seek some sort of "retaliation" against BMI, would there not be the small matter of counter-retaliation regarding upto five based BMI Baby B733's and the BMI Regional operation? Or is there bad news coming from them too under the new ownership? Just a thought ...

Let's all be careful what we wish for. My own earlier posting regarding BA Shuttles was a plea to BA to return to the values of good service and reliability which they once offered. I want an enhanced service which I can trust, not a withdrawn one. Perhaps MAplc and BA could put that on their agendas in place of "retaliation." An empty airport won't help any of us.

SHED.

[sharpclassic]

E.F.

What's your point?

Shed on a Pole expressed my point perfectly. If there are no direct Long Haul services from MAN, people will have to find their way to airports from where they CAN get these Long Haul flights. Whether they chose to drive/train to Heathrow or fly to AMS/CDG, they will do so.

By cutting the BA shuttle flights, MAG will be driving BA customers out of their beloved shops in the terminals and into trains and car to LHR or LGW.

[eggc]

...or get them flying on anyone else but BA/BMI, and there are lots of other options ex MAN - AF/KL/LH/QR/EK/SQ/AA/DL/TK to name a few who can provide as many connections as LHR.

Not may northern folk are that loyal to BA, and wont mind connecting elsewhere should it be more convienient than the train / car to London to get on the UK carriers...so maybe not so many air passengers would be actually be lost, and the carriers that remain at MAN would gain reward in extra revenue by filling all their seats, at BA/BMI's expense. As someone said in a previous post that would be a serious body blow to BMI, but more so BA.

[Ametyst1]

You would be surprised eggc, a lot of Northern folk are very loyal to BA!

3 Million passengers on the Shuttles from Manchester? Half it and take some off again. In 2007 a total of 1,383,380 (1,558,884 in 2006) scheduled passengers travelled between Manchester and London (Gatwick and Heathrow). The figure for 2008 is expected to decrease further finishing at about 1,250,000 at the year end for both routes. So the two routes will have lost 300,00 passengers since January 2006

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Fellow PPRUNERS,

Let's all stick with the real world here. I'm sure some folks would dearly love the joy of shouting "Shove your flights!" to BA and BMI ... for about a day. Oh, the relief of all that anger and frustration. But then there would just be the small matters of reality and consequences to deal with.

If MAplc were to "retaliate" against BMI, what that actually means today is hacking off their new owners Lufthansa (a key Manchester partner) and by extension souring relations with Star Alliance. BMI Group itself remains a large operator at MAN (for now) even stripped of the long-hauls. The Star Alliance group of companies is one of MAN's best remaining avenues for successful growth going forward; how great an idea would it be declare hostilities against them now? Even BA/Oneworld still have some presence at MAN which the airport would be well advised to nurture. Short-term revenge measures will scupper any prospects for long-term business development with these partners in the future.

MAN needs to woo the remaining big players in our great industry. Groups such as Star Alliance must have the assurance that MAplc is a competent and professional partner upon which they can rely for support of their business. Then we may see growth initiatives in the future when economic conditions improve. If MAplc were now to make the mistake of throwing tantrums with their customers, years of goodwill and respect for the airport amongst airline professionals would be forfeited. I assure you that if MAplc chose to take on the Alliances in an adversarial stance, the airport would not emerge a long-term winner. MAN needs their business.

MAN has never fully recovered from the calamity ten years ago when they considered themselves too grand to work with no-frills carriers. If these rumours about London flight bans have any truth to them, then a mistake of similar magnitude is brewing now.

To the industry professionals: stop and THINK. To those who seek "retaliation": be careful what you wish for - you might get it. To the "chuck 'em out" cheerleaders: grow up - alot of good folks livelihoods are sacrificed based on crusades like this.

How about some constructive thinking instead? Lufthansa-backed BMI has decided that the A332's are needed at LHR. Sad, but tough. It's happened. But Lufthansa also own Swiss and a large slice of Brussels Airlines. Perhaps MAplc should make a case for a BRU-MAN-ORD service, or a ZRH-MAN-LAS service in the future? If Lufthansa buy into SAS, further opportunities could be proposed. Impress Lufthansa and Star Alliance with positive ideas for mutual benefit, not a knife in the back.

Cheers, SHED.

[LHR27C]

...or get them flying on anyone else but BA/BMI, and there are lots of other options ex MAN - AF/KL/LH

What possible grounds could there be to refuse to let BA/BMI route pax via their hubs, but permit AF/KL/LH to do the same? Absolutely none. The proposal is completely illegal and will never happen.

[Skipness One Echo]

OK this has to stop. It's time to be grown up and get some perspective. I don't think for a moment there is substantial truth in the original post of throwing the toys from the pram. However all this talk of BMI Shuttles and BA and BMI being "national carriers" simply shows how little posters know of the airline business.
I genuinely think this thread has gone a little bit mental, in that some people show signs of having a greviance driven agenda.
It's just comedy now to suggest that we're going to have a Northern uprising. Really silly post.

Perhaps MAplc should make a case for a BRU-MAN-ORD service, or a ZRH-MAN-LAS
Incidentally is there a single legacy carrier in Europe who does long haul routing like this? Do the Belgians and the Swiss somehow not mind having to stop on the way but God forbid Mancunians change at Heathrow?

[wiccan]

I can fly MAN-AMS-JKF or MAN-CDG-JFK cheaper than MAN-JFK with BA.
bb

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Skipness -

Your question is a reasonable one. The regulatory environment which would permit this kind of operation is relatively new. I suggested a route such as ZRH-MAN-LAS to illustrate a service which may not be considered attractive or viable from either city in isolation. I am sure that the Swiss would not appreciate calling in at MAN on the way to JFK, for example, but en route to Las Vegas the alternative is likely to be no service at all. Note that I did not suggest making a case for FRA-MAN-JFK ! With respect to the BRU example, I accept that the airport would likely support more than one daily frequency; the example shows how an additional service can be accommodated to the benefit of both cities and the airline operator alike.

My point is that applying the grey matter to potentially positive solutions is better than calls for retaliation and bans on certain carriers. I don't want to see a "grievance driven agenda" any more than you.

Cheers, SHED.

[Skipness One Echo]

Yes lateral thinking is a good plan in these tough days. Even LHR is not immune as NWA are suspending SEA-LHR, the third open skies route to fall after DEN-LHR on United and LHR-LAX on Air France.

[Vuelo]

LS will base 4x752s and 2x733s at MAN this summer - confirmed.

[pwalhx]

Skipness can I ask you a question?

On the Manchester 6 thread more than once you said if the BA route to JFK was viable why hadn't BMI or Virgin stepped in to operate.

Then when it was suggested on the BMI thread that VS may take over the LAS service when BD leave, you say they dont have the aircraft available.

Isnt that contradictory? Or have I missed something?

[Skipness One Echo]

JFK needs a daily service with a good business offering.
LAS is a leisure route, and is operated from LGW by the same "beach fleet" of B747-400s that operate the current MAN-MCO and BGI. So MAN-LAS would be a good fit for the current model, not sure if the B744 is too big though. I don't see it as daily though. The LAS market is there and has no competition.

JFK is a different animal, up against CO and DL they'd have to run daily. The 744 is I think too big, as is the A346 which leave the A343.

Virgin actually said they'd fly GLA-JFK if BA ever left. ( Virgin say a lot ). Until the 787s arrive, they are focused on LHR. Hope that makes sense.

[Ringwayman]

Does LH operate to ORD ex-DUS? If they don't I wonder how feasible it would be for a DUS-MAN-ORD run with 1 less local DUS-MAN service. Two secondary markets linked to a hub, with the prospect of delinking them in the future.

Back in the 1980s, BR and SN though it worthwhile to combine service into a BRU-LGW-ATL service, and in the 1990s when BA talked to KL and SN, part of the plan was for MAN to be used for transatlantic.

[eggc]

LH do fly DUS to ORD, MIA & EWR all on 343's.

[zfw]

Just looking at the loads on the BMI longhauls for the last 7 days, i know theres a lot about yields but look at the loads.

There is not one flight that has departed with a figure less than 196 and the top fig is 206, which doesn't seem bad to me on a 218 seater.

Thats an awful lot of people to be travelling on the "shuttles" everyday.

I suspect that AA will benefit greatly on the Ord service and with these figures it will be sold out everyday there appears to be double the pax wishing to travel over the current AA 767 on this route.
Virgin will be looking at the Las/Bgi flights as about 80% of the bags are labelled Virgin holidays.

zfw

[pwalhx]

Thank you Skipness makes perfect sense.

[Playamar2]

The withdrawl of the BMI long-haul flights (except ORD) has left Virgin Holidays with a problem, as they were a major factor on the services operating in the first place - 80% as quoted by zfw.

It wouldn't surpise me to see a leased aircraft arrive next year to fill the gap. As Skipness said the B744 is too big, and they probably don't have the spare capacity. A few years ago didn't VS operate a MPH B763 on the MCO run for a few months? A leased B763 would do nicely for LAS and the Carribean routes. I remember how hard Virgin Holidays fought the Airline to introduce the MCO flight, so I don't think all is lost yet.

Playamar2

[Bagso]

We have got ever so slightly off track here and once again degenerated into a debate about BA !

Surely BA (..and to a lesser extent BMI), cannot be blamed for centralising on Heathrow , it is a cash cow, a simple case of economics and there are now at least a sprinkling of other options to avoid BA if you so wish.

Criticism is however totally justified when one considers the numerous number of licence objections that BA objected to in the 70s,80s, 90s. Whilst it “might” seem ridiculous to be looking that far back, it could be argued that that preventing the free market from operating at that time has led to the dominance of Heathrow now ! We will never know.

If this rumour is true and I suspect as I indicated that it is just spin, it does raise a number of other questions. Is the airport now desparate and belatedly embarking on a new strategy which is more about raising the profile of the debate on a 3rd runway at Heathrow, this would play well into that argument that Manchester maybe more than other airports has much more to lose.

A few years back Manchester saw itself as best placed to exploit the demand for any “additional” expansion of service out the South East, by exploiting both its own demand AND also some of that which that originated in the regions,with changes in aircraft technology and airline strategy we now have seen a remarkable shift, as well as the increase in European feed we now even have regional long haul hubbing from airports such as Bristol to Newark and even Newcastle to Dubai. Who could have predicted that a few years back ?

In effect CO and EK have changed the rules of the game. The re-distribution of market share and the dynamics of the market have changed.

That leaves Manchester with a problem, they invested very heavily in a second runway before these dynamics came into play, at a time when they saw themselves rightly or wrongly as the only major player outside of the South East. When capacity was at some stage almost certainly going to reach saturation Manchester felt that it would finally reach full potential.
There is little doubt therefore that the airport management are very worried indeed, Manchester appears to have suffered more proportionally in the current downturn than other UK airports, but not only have they seen a decline of numbers they are witnessing a major shift of strategy, whereas pax at say Birmingham might ebb and flo based on the economy, the decline of traffic at Manchester is more fundamental. With the introduction of the BMI network they at last saw a major challenge to BAs dominance and an opportunity to partner with an airline that would eventually expand and create a major worldwide network from the North of England, that has now evaporated !

If this rumour is true a ”possible threat” to potentially cut off the 3m pax from Manchester who are currently contributing to demands for additional capacity at Heathrow , “might “in the eyes of the airport management ( and I only say “might”), play well with regional MPS and the media in the same way that forces were mobilised in the 80s, when the airport was fighting for access by SIA and AA and latterly the expansion of Stansted.

[Flightrider]

Although Virgin's existing aircraft fleet is heavily committed, there would be every possibility of it cutting back MAN/MCO slightly (from 9 per week to 7) and freeing up a couple of days per week to take over MAN/LAS. Although the aircraft may be much larger than bmi's A330, it has to be remembered that Virgin Holidays makes a substantial profit out of the sale of the holiday package as a whole, rather than just the flight out of which bmi had to make a living.

[ATNotts]

Rinwayman,

The problem is you can't compare the German market with the UK market. The UK is a non-federal country, where as a consequence, the world begins and ends in London.

Not so Germany, Each state has a main city, - Nordrheinwestfalen has Düsseldorf, Bavaria Munich; Niedersachsen Hannover, Hessen has Frankfurt; Baden Würtemburg has Stuttgart. The state governments all demand decent air services, so there are many more direct services from what you would call "secondary airports" than there are say, from airports in France, the UK or Italy which are very centralised politically.

As far as routing a Düssedorf transatlantic via a UK airport, I don't believe the German travelling public would wear it, when in the time it takes to transit a UK airport would be only a few minutes less than taking the ICE train to Frankfurt, then flying direct!

[mickyman]

Bagso

Having poured scorn on your thread opener,I find myself
after having read your last post#39,to be much more
satisfied with your effort.

Even though it still appears that this idea might just of
been 'invented' by yourself,the construction is much better
and is of more interest.

The premiss of your first post is so illegal/idiotic that to even
contemplate it made me wonder about the management skill
level at MAplc - however thinking of some of their decisions
over the last decade perhaps you may have a point!

MM

[DAr19]

Hahahahahaha!!! That's one of the funniest posts I've read in ages!!!

They cannot stop anyone flying intra EU under the EU treaty.

It would be funny to see them try!

That's strange, never heard of that one myself. Certainly there is a treaty backed by a directive that bans governments from restricting intra-union travel. MAG is not a government. If the Manchester Airports Group wants to refuse a particular customer that is their domain. If the Dept for Transport in the UK decided to ban any travel between London and Manchester we would have a problem.

Please don't comment on laws you don't understand, EU laws don't ban transport companies from withdrawing intra-EU services of any kind. By your logic if SNCF withdrew service from Paris to Lyon they would be in breach of EU regulations.

[DAr19]

What possible grounds could there be to refuse to let BA/BMI route pax via their hubs, but permit AF/KL/LH to do the same?
Absolutely none. The proposal is completely illegal and will never happen.

They don't need grounds if they actually wanted to do it. It's a commercial decision governed only by contract. Commercially viable? That's a whole other matter.

[TartinTon]

DAr19...if MAG wanted to ban BA/BMI for a reason then they probably could. However, since the legitimacy of such an action would be against the EUs restraint of trade rules it seems unlikely that MAG have deep enough pockets to fund the court case and subsequent compensation claim.

Since 1993 the EU has operated as a free market for travel so an airport cannot ban travel between 2 airports unless there is a genuine reason.

Not really sure what you're babbling about with your SNCF example as you're talking about something completely different.

Bit less time in the sun, my old son.

[DAr19]

No what you were saying was that if MAN refused to serve BA it would be in breach of the free travel agreements which apply only to governments. There are probably other restrictions in terms of commercial law but the particular rules you mentioned with regard to intra-union travel don't apply to that situation, simply because they aren't restricting intra-EU travel (because they don't have the power to do that). I hope I'm being clear I have a tendency to talk around the issue. Put simply, companies can't be reprimanded under free travel agreements, EU commercial law is another matter of which I have zero knowledge.

Like I said, I was under the impression you were speaking of free travel agreements which ban any restriction of EU travel by goverments rather than free trade agreements. I hope you see my misunderstanding.

[Michael SWS]

Having poured scorn on your thread opener,I find myself
after having read your last post#39,to be much more
satisfied with your effort.

Even though it still appears that this idea might just of
been 'invented' by yourself, the construction is much better
and is of more interest.

The premiss of your first post is so illegal/idiotic that to even
contemplate it made me wonder about the management skill
level at MAplc - however thinking of some of their decisions
over the last decade perhaps you may have a point!Are you a teacher, mickyman?

Whatever your profession, it should be possible to offer an alternative point of view without being so patronising. Please let's not turn this valuable resource into just yet another internet forum.

(I guess you're not a teacher, though, or you would know that the correct grammatical construction is might have, not might of. And you might have spelt premise correctly.)

[eggc]

I dont think any of us on here are qualified enough to know the legalities of such a move. One thing for sure is that MAG will, as too will the Airlines involved.

My view is this, if this story is even true, is just a public sympathy generating exercise with the intention of putting pressure of BA / BMI to reverse their decisions. MAG might be barking loud but I doubt it would bite.

[Mr A Tis]

I would imagine, that even if there had been meetings between BA, BD & MAG it is more likely to be about moving them out of T3, the new lo co terminal.

[Ringwayman]

Most of the pax going to LHR ex-MAN are transiting. Pretty sure Willie Walsh said it was in the region of 75%.

Thanks eggc for the info - I knew about the EWR and MIA services; will have to think of alternate xxx-MAN-ORD; those with historical books about MAN may have recognised my favoured routing as part of a route that actually happened with Lufthansa.

The best prospect for a domininant British airline offering long-haul ex-MAN would have to have a sufficient number in the based fleet that it could be run as a stand-alone sub-fleet in a conifiguration that might be more appropriate for ops here (just J + Y classes with no Y+ class to be seen). This is where VS 787s might be useful - perhaps as many as 5 based operating the existing VS programme (including the soon to be dropped St Lucia link), tagging in the leisure routes of BD, and add in the likes of JFK with some destinations such as BOM, HKG and JNB. Otherwise, MAN is going to at the whim of airlines that will fly here only if they are serving other destinations that can also support J and Y class operations.

[Higher Archie]

All the posts suggesting that MAN is about to 'throw its toys out of the pram', 'draw up the drawbridge' etc are, although well intended, are pipe-dreams.

Whilst airports are commercial businesses, and on the face of it, free to choose who they trade with, are regulated by international, European and national legislation.

The cornerstone of international aviation is the 1944 Chicago Convention. Article 15 sets out that 'Every airport ... which is open to public use shall be open to uniform conditions'. This Article was intended to allow the development of international aviation, although was amended for US/UK traffic by Bermuda 2.

In Europe, clearly there is EU Restraint of Trade legislation.

In the UK, MAN operates under a CAA Public Use Licence. This requires that 'the aerodrome must be available to all persons (users) permitted to use it on equal terms and conditions.'

In short, as an international airport, MAN would not be able to restrict access to particular carriers. Why would it look to close access to BA/BMI and then see the routes disappear to LPL? More likely, promote through its marketing activity, the alternatives to LHR. And that's what they've started to do, and expect to see more.

[roverman]

SHUTTLES -
I do not believe for one moment than MAN will attempt to ban, block or disrupt the existing air links to London, for all the well-argued reasons in this thread.

LOCOs-

Shed-on-a Pole. I think most of your posts are spot-on, but regarding MAN's strategy on Lo-cos, consider this:

In the mid-nineties as Lo-Co's began to emerge, MAN had healthy traffic growth, an enviable schedule of direct flights into most major EU cities by the primary flag-carriers, a strong BA base, a decent spread of long-haul schedules with big name carriers, and a large charter operation with the big names in the IT business. Furthermore, the airport had consistently made a profit, despite price regulation introduced in 1991 by the Monopolies & Mergers report.

Does it not seem a reasoned business decision then, to avoid risking this position by opening the doors to LoCos? At that time there was no guarantee that these carriers would survive, they were not offering any destinations which weren't already served by other carriers out of MAN, and at the fees they expected to pay, there would be no profit for the airport. Does that make business sense?

The fact than MANs traffic has now suffered from erosion by LOCos, amongst other factors, does not make the 1990's position wrong. LoCos have been spectacularly successful, so far. But those others airports which welcomed in LoCos - LPL, LBA, EMA, LTN, had very little to lose at the time - it was a no-brainer. However MAN was in a unique position.
Liverpool has only just turned in a meagre profit after 10 years of EZY and RYR. MAN has to make an operating profit to survive, unlike Peel who are a real-estate outfit for whom airports add value to the portfolio - different business model entirely.

How long the LoCO boom will continue is not yet clear. In the longer term I feel that the UK is too small to support all these fragmented operations we're seeing right now, and the novelty of getting pissed in Prague drys up. What has just happened at CVT may be the start of the retrenchment back to the traditional centres of flight operations. Let's see what happens in the next five years.

[TSR2]

Absolutely spot on roverman.

I remember a presentation in the late 90's given by John Spooner (MD at the time) who made a very strong case that MAN would continue to develop the international scheduled and charter services whilst EMA (owned by MAPLC) would develop lo-co services for the very reasons you site.

[Momentary Lapse]

John Spooner did say that, but for clarity, he didn't join MAPLC from EMA until some time mid-2000. Before then, he was only MD of EMA and BOH and thus not interested in, nor paid to speak about, MAN.

Once again, btw, I raise my hat to Shed's excellent posts. It worries me that it's happened again :O

[Rockwell]

In the UK the government, via the CAA, grants each airport a Public Use Licence to operate. It is a requirement of the issuance of that Licence, that the airport is available to all users without hindrance. The fact that the aircraft owner (I'm thinking of GA aviation here) can be priced out, by any airport authority, is for another debate. I have not seen the Licence for some years, but it is a requirement that a copy has to be on public display as a statement of UK Government Law.


It is for this very reason that GA light aircraft can not be banned from MAN, as officers of MAplc wanted in the mid-1990s, when R2 was under discussion; the resident GA community and business aircraft users threatened to invoke their Licence Right to Access, as what the airport authority was proposing would have been discrimination against a sector of aviation. Should the government withdraw Licence approval, then all flying activities would have to cease forthwith, leaving only the feathered variety flying.


P.S. - just noted that Higher Archie has now posted along similar lines.

P.P.S. - Shed: well written posts, esp # 485 on Manchester-6.

[MAN777]

So how come GA has all but gone from LHR, could a Tomahawk insist on using the place ? If the Owner of said Tomahawk insisted, LHR would have to accept using this right of access law ?


Not trying to be confrontational, just curious.

[Bagso]

"....Having poured scorn on your thread opener,I find myself
after having read your last post#39,to be much more
satisfied with your effort.

Even though it still appears that this idea might just of
been 'invented' by yourself,the construction is much better
and is of more interest "


many thanks mickyman....

...why on earth I would invent such a bizarre story quite frankly beggars belief, i felt it was an interesting "take" on a major story and believing it might just be of interest to fellow ppruners passed it on in good faith as indeed other readers do, I did qualify the post by suggesting that it might be merely spin. If you reread the original piece I was simply asking the question as to whether it was enforceable and if it was, what was the likely impact
commercially ?

My second post simply speculated on why such a story "might" have legs ?

.....however your consent to my contribution is by definition, both an honour and dare I say a privilege, may all of us on this forum bow our heads, kneel and prostitute ourselves to your greater understanding, I trust Christmas will bring you its traditional mix of good food and violent stomach cramp

ps Micheal SWS ...it appears we are not worthy !

[Skipness One Echo]

I saw a PA-31 yesterday landing on 27L at Heathrow. Slots are really pricey, as are charges. No in their right mind would want to use it for real GA. The light stuff that gets in is often medical or crew taxis.

[virgin_cc_wannabe]

Annnnyyyywaaaayyyy........

On to something else that isnt going to happen:

Has anyone seen an air syhlet aircraft yet? its due into MAN this month and as of yet, i still aint seen an aircraft in their colours? Pushing it a bit fine arnt they?

[mickyman]

Bagso

There you go again..............

Why do you presume that I am a Christian !!

MM

[LHR27C]

So how come GA has all but gone from LHR, could a Tomahawk insist on using the place ? If the Owner of said Tomahawk insisted, LHR would have to accept using this right of access law ?

Single engine aircraft are banned at LHR.

[BDLBOS]

But they let BA 777 Gliders in:)

[eggc]

I read on another rumour site (so it must be true!) that PK are considering their future at MAN, and possibly relocating to the LBA . Anyone else heard this, or should I go grad a pinch of salt or two ?

[OltonPete]

eggc

I have seen that post as well and to say that individual is hit and miss
would be an understatement. I am sure it has been repeated from his/her
place of work in good faith but that is as good as it gets.

The rumour seems to have started after the announcement of BMI
pulling their long-haul ops from Manchester and a post by what could
be best described as a credible source (as much as anything is credible from that site) claiming that one other operator was reviewing four routes
from it's home base and their Manchester service was one of those four.

The poster did not give any other hint as to who it may be but clearly stated that nothing had been decided.

2+2 = 5?

Pete

[Higher Archie]

A PIA relocation to LBA, is in my opinion, unlikely, unless they are prepared for a major reduction in capacity.

MAN has field availability that is quite superior to LBA, easilly able to take B777's. 2 runways @ 3,048m, 3,198 on request and RFF Cat 9, Cat 10 on request. In comparison, LBA offer 2,250m (TORA 2,113m (14) and 2,190m (32). RFF Cat7, 8-9 on request. MAN offers Cat 3 ILS on 23R and 05R.

The LBA field will give serious performance (pax and freight load) on B777 ops. A300's can operate, probably at the margins of economically, B777's cant.

I seriously doubt that LBA has any potential whatsoever to take the PIA MAN hub, and that they won't follow BA / BMI to LHR. LBA may however take some additional A300 ops.

[MUFC_fan]

Try getting a 77W to JFK with a full load from LBA.

If you could...you'd make a fortune at RR.

[Skipness One Echo]

Try getting a 77W to JFK with a full load from LBA.
If you could...you'd make a fortune at RR.

Er...77W has an exclusive GE offering.

A300's can operate, probably at the margins of economically, B777's cant.
PIA don't fly A300s and the B777 is a more powerful beast.
The real question is whether they are interested in maintaining the US routes ex MAN as with the 77L they no longer need the stop.
Air India has just pulled BHX-YYZ as well. We shall see.

[MUFC_fan]

Er...77W has an exclusive GE offering.


Exactly. If you could prove to Boeing that you could get a fully loaded 77W off the LBA runway with a new series of RR engines I am sure they would reconsider their position with GE!

Anyway, I would be surprised if LBA got MAN's services to Pakistan. I don't know what the passenger figures are from MAN-Pakistan but surely they can hold A310s at least from both MAN and LBA.

Also, EK operate the 77W non-stop from DXB to JFK, can PIA not do the same with theirs or is the few '000 mile difference too big a difference?

[Skipness One Echo]

Alas it's not that Rolls Royce couldn't deliver the engine, it's just that due to the contract with GE giving them exclusivity on the 77W that they're not ALLOWED to even offer one. The same goes for the the 747-8.

GE is a risk sharing partner in both programs.

[Suzeman]

Also, EK operate the 77W non-stop from DXB to JFK, can PIA not do the same with theirs or is the few '000 mile difference too big a difference?

Is this not something to do with the US authorities not allowing non-stop flights into the USA from Pakistan because of security concerns? This was certainly the case a few years ago. All transit pax on the PK US flights through MAN must clear security at MAN so the Yanks know they are cleared to UK standards which they accept.

Suzeman

[comet 4b623PW]

Going back several years ago, I seem to recall in a newspaper interview with a former Chief executive those name I cannot be certain off but it may have been Gil Thompson. In this interview it was mentioned that the airport board had looked into the possibility of setting up it's own presumably Manchester based airline. From what I remember, know reasons were given in the interview as to why the airport board did not pursue this idea any further.

I bring this up because in view of recent airline decisions I wonder weather it may be appropriate to look at the issue again. Would it not be better for the rate payers of Manchester and it's ten boroughs to invest in it's own airline rather than trying to buy all or part of Gatwick.

[DAr19]

On the PIA issue: I have been told MAN passengers can buy ticket on MAN-JFK with Pakistan Airlines. Is it true that PIA only stop in MAN eastbound and not westbound?

[Ex-RN]

From a mere SLF observer, are we northerners going to be permanently without a direct route to ANU??? :sad: Have Virgin Holidays (who regularly block booked BD seats ) had anything to say regarding the route?
MAN-ANU-UVF-MAN from VS would surely be viable wouldn't it?

[Momentary Lapse]

Reference a MAPLC airline, I'll quote Branson here, when he was asked how to make a million in the airline business: "start with £2m".

Perhaps Geoff could stump up the £2m out of his salary, bonuses and local authority inflation-proof pension that he's built up over the last 15 years.

BTW, Rowena got out just in time, eh? Good girl.

[Skipness One Echo]

are we northerners going to be permanently without a direct route to ANU

BMI ran it for a while and it made so much money they stopped. Oh wait that's the reason they stop flying every route from Manchester.........

[edmond64]

BMI ran it for a while and it made so much money they stopped. Oh wait that's the reason they stop flying every route from Manchester.........

That was helpfull now go and finish your shandy......

[Tom the Tenor]

Can a kind person reconfirm just how many PIA flights go through Manchester and to where both west and eastbound? Thanks.

Was there not a rumour a few months ago on a.net that PIA were keen enough to start a service to Dublin once they sorted out some capacity for a new Barcelona flight? If PIA were really eager to try Dublin I guess it might be relatively easy to take a pair of flights out of Manchester and transfer it over to Dublin and see how it goes?

There is certainly plenty of enthusiasm even amongst the Pakistani community in the Cork and surrounding areas for an Ireland - Pakistan link. I am all up for an Air Blue A321 flight myself to Cork! Got to at least think +ve!

[Suzeman]

From UK Airport News

Jet2 has announced that it will base another 229-seat Boeing 757 at Manchester Airport to meet growing demand, in addition to helping ease capacity issues following the demise of XL Airways. It will create 25 new jobs as a result of the expansion.

The budget airline has confirmed that its ninth 757 would be stationed at Manchester Airport.It will be used to increase capacity on its newly launched Dalaman and Sharm el Sheikh routes, which have seen strong sales, as well as filling the void left by the loss of flights from XL Airways, notably on Tenerife and Heraklion services.

Philip Meeson, Jet2.com boss said: ‘At a time when many of our competitors are cutting back services and reducing capacity, we are increasing ours. We are not just taking advantage of gaps left by others, but expanding the capacity on our own popular routes.'

‘For example, since we launched Dalaman in Turkey, sales have been so strong that we are doubling the frequency for this route. Excellent sales and customer demand on our Sharm el Sheikh service have also prompted us to make this route all year round.’

[eggc]

Tom , here's PK's MAN timetable for Nov...

PK701 13:40 17:30 M* T - T F* - Su A310 ISB (*B77W)
PK709 15:00 17:00 - - W - F - - B77W LHE
PK711 09:20 11:20 - - - - - Sa - B772 KHI>JFK
PK712 07:30 09:30 - - - - - - Su B772 JFK>KHI
PK721 10:25 12:20 - - W - - - - B77W KHI>JFK
PK722 07:30 09:30 - - - T - - - B77W JFK>KHI

Unless I've missed owt, or I can't count, then that makes just 11 flights per week. I didnt realise they had reduced so much already...November 2006 they had 24 per week, and I think they may have had more that that at some point.

[mmeteesside]

Seems that you can't count, looks like 11 to me! :}

[14 loop]

In a word....No! There is some evidence that PIA were considering an increase in frequency on their ops from LBA this winter, however nothing materialised. However there is no chance of them leaving MAN as to do so would be to forget the whole band of Pakistani origined communities in Lancashire etc. Likewise all the points re MAN operational capabilities for the 777 are valid; however for the A310, LBA is just about right, but don't mention LVPs!

[Simplestuff]

Flying ams-man on 1 January and man-anu 2 January, staying overnight at the Radisson Sas what is the best way to get to T3 as I understand that the skylink is gone.

Any info would be welcome, thanks in advance,
Simplestuff

[Mr A Tis]

Walk from the Radisson in the Skylink to "The Station" Train & Bus station, go down to the groundfloor & exit at the front of the station,there is an MA bus that will take you directly to T3. It only runs every 15 minutes though.

[Simplestuff]

Thanks Mr A Tis it is much appreciated.

Simplestuff

[Tom the Tenor]

Thanks, EGGC, for the update. I seem to recall that there used to be some PIA flights to Canada refuelling at Manchester as well up to a few years ago - they must fly non-stop now from Pakistan if those flights are still around?

Otherwise, two 777-200 and two 777-300 flights from Karachi to JFK. What do you think - will those flights continue to be safe or could PIA be persuaded to send a 777-200 to Dublin first and clear US Immigration?

I'd still prefer the Air Blue A321 coming to Cork from Pakistan and doing that refuelling in Turkey!

[philbky]

Don't forget PIA left SNN for MAN

[EC-ILS]

Is there an airside transfer facility in terminal 2? Apart from the airbridge gates how many other gates are there in T2 ie bus gates?

[jojo82]

Yes manchester has a transfer facility in T2, Gates from 202-215 are bridged, gate 201 has no bridge. Busing gates: there are 4 and are labled as gate 300A,B,C+D.

[Suzeman]

From UK Airport News

BA is reducing daily domestic services from Gatwick - Manchester from seven to five for Summer 2009. They are also reducing LGW -Edinburgh from six to four and LGW -Glasgow from five to four.

Suzeman

[bermudatriangle]

i feel the demise of so many manchester based flights,ie BA's MAN-JFK,BMI relocating it's longhaul routes to heathrow.perhaps now is the time to re-launch manchester airport.as the competition seems to be liverpools john lennon airport,with no frills operations the main source of revenue.how about manchester's "noel gallagher" international airport.the infrequent flight announcements could be made in a real "mancy" accent over the tannoy.possibly a bronze statue of the oasis singer could be positioned in the check-in area of terminal 1 ?....any suggestions.

[wingeel]

How about Steven Patrick Morrissey International ? Steve Coogan ? Caroline Aherne ? ( she's from Wythenshawe)

[steve wilson]

Stop all this nonsence about the re-branding and relaunch of Manchester with all this talk of minor celebs.

Everyone knows that if the airport does re-launch it would be called 'Frank Sidebottom - Timperley International'. All retail outlets would be closed to free up room in the terminals apart from one shop 'Mr Lakes Sky-Lard Emporuim'.

Steve

[one post only!]

If it’s going to be re-named why not go all the way! Was briefly toying with the idea of David Beckham regional hub but I just thought this was too 1990s so I have decided on the obvious choice:

"Jack and Vera Duckworth mega national hyper market (with 2 runways)".

A shrine to all Corrie actors past and present could be set-up in the airport, the passing trade from flocking fans alone would keep the airport going!

We could even re-name all the SID's/STAR's. The Deirdre Rachid 1A would be a particular favourite of mine!!!

[Richard Taylor]

Would landing aircraft have to carry out a DME Arc approach, thus they too could "Bend It Like Beckham".

You could buy all your perfume & fashion at the Vicky B Duty-Free.

Oh, plus an hourly shuttle to LA...& (at the mo) Milan.

:ooh:

[Betablockeruk]

Well done Suzeman for posting some news :D

Even a 50/50 rumour would be appreciated on this "rumour network" but all this msn/facebook type chat is mind numbing.

[DAr19]

...perhaps now is the time to re-launch manchester airport.as the competition seems to be liverpools john lennon airport,with no frills operations the main source of revenue...

Though most of your post was unhelpful, bermudatriangle, I think you may be on to something. There is a reason BA/BMI can't make as much money outside London and that reason is that they are too expensive for most economy passengers and need to be cross-subsidised on Long Haul by business fares. It says something of BA and BMI's operating structure if they are too incompetent to turn a profit outside of the world's largest business centre (and please nobody bring up the fact that Heathrow is a hub, these two airlines are extremely dependent on London based passengers).

The fact is that Jet2 and FlyBE can make a profit at Manchester because they offer what the public wants whereas BA/BMI are old airlines that offer the public what they "should" want. That mentality is now dead in Europe and it is why BA struggle to cope outside of their comfort zone. As a non-British person I have no pride in Manchester although it is a lovely city where I attend many meetings so this post is nothing to do with a pro-MAN bias.

To sum up what I am saying: yes BA/BMI pulled MAN because they couldn't make money but that isn't a fault with MAN and its passenger base, it's a fault with BA/BMI.

Low-cost is the future in Europe, why can't people embrace it as a fantastic commercial opportunity? Why whine for the legacy carriers to return when Low cost can do the job? Even on long haul a relatively low cost model could work if it was done right (i.e not Zoom).

[Vuelo]

I can give you 2 50/50 rumours from within the walls of Olympic House...Mexicana and Royal Brunei.

We shall see....

[virgin_cc_wannabe]

Royal brunei have expressed interest in MAN on a 4x weekly basis, but have no aircraft at the moment.
Mexicana, id say no. They have only just announced London and I doubt there would be a demand for MAN-MEX markets

[Vuelo]

Who said anything about MAN-MEX....there are certainly two more profitable destinations in Mexico...CUN/ACA for example.

[DAr19]

Who said anything about MAN-MEX....there are certainly two more profitable destinations in Mexico...CUN/ACA for example.

Neither of which are Mexicana international bases

[Betablockeruk]

That's more like it :ok:

What's the latest on the Air China Beijing service, scheduled to start "March 09". I know the whole financial world has changed, since the announcement of the CAAC expansion plans on 11/09/07, but are we still on their radar?

[MAN777]

Any official news on the ex BA hangar at MAN, there were 2 Monarch airbuses in it last night, have they taken it on ?

[bigMANofMAN]

MAN777 wrote....

Any official news on the ex BA hangar at MAN, there were 2 Monarch airbuses in it last night, have they taken it on ?

The (Ex) BA Hangar is owned by Manchester Airport, hangar space is rented out to anyone wanting to use it.
The 2 Monarch a/c in there at present are 757's G-MONB and G-MONE which are leaving the fleet and are in there while they undergo Return Off Lease checks and work.

Cheers, bigMAN

[MAN777]

Whoops, must practice my aircraft identification skills !!:O

[DAr19]

I second betablocker's question re: Air China. Surely their plans are on hold I don't expect them to come to Manchester in March?

[Skipness One Echo]

yes BA/BMI pulled MAN because they couldn't make money but that isn't a fault with MAN and its passenger base, it's a fault with BA/BMI.
Low-cost is the future in Europe,

I sure as HELL don't want to be flying on business low cost. I don't mind using them out of my own pocket but for frequent fliers who do a shed load of miles, they really need a genuine legacy offering. If the firm is sending me Ryanair I'm job hunting...... The future in Europe outside the South East IS low cost but the recent BA / BMI reductions were long haul and the legacy carriers remain serving their off shore hubs. They are the BAs and BMIs of the US etc.

If your argument held up, there would be a genuine low cost long haul replacement in the wings to take up the slack.

[one post only!]

Sorry for being mind numbing betablocker, we were just trying to lighten the mood!!

Sorry to use valuable server space!!! Will let you get back to the oh so serious business of discussing rumours!

[Rob Courtney]

Well Skipness given the current climate I would suggest you dust off the old CV. I work for a major multinational and have been told IF I have to travel to keep costs as low as possible including using budget airlines.

We had a directive a while back telling us to use LH instead of BA for international travel because we can get better deals via Munich rather than Heathrow, not tried it (yet) but I guess there goes my BA Exec card!!!

Rob

[DAr19]

Certainly Skipness I'm not disagreeing with what you said, all I'm saying is that there is little opportunity outside of the South East for legacy carriers, I wasn't suggesting that Long Haul Locos would be an obvious success. What I was trying to get at was: why are some people at Manchester and other areas complaining about losing traditional carriers when clearly those are not what the market desire, the airport makes money out of Low cost flights doesn't it? Don't they pay the same fees?

I do firmly believe though that if it was run well a low fares long haul airline could work in the right economic climate so long as it didn't compromise too much on service. Regular business travellers are not stupid, they won't refuse to use an airline just because it has been labelled "low cost" by industry critics (as long as a good level of service is maintained by the airline in question). Just look at Jet2, there are many companies in Yorkshire with which I have had dealings that have no problem using Jet2 for business travel needs short haul.

[spannersatcx]

What's the latest on the Air China Beijing service, scheduled to start "March 09". Never scheduled for March 09. Possible earliest date is Sept 09.

[Skipness One Echo]

Low cost flights doesn't it? Don't they pay the same fees?

No.......not always (!) Indeed some pay no fees at all. The market does support legacy long haul but struggles on British registered legacy short haul. Though last time I looked MAN still have Air France, Lufthansa, KLM, CSA etc etc.

[bmi expat]

The market does support legacy long haul but struggles on British registered legacy short haul. Though last time I looked MAN still have Air France, Lufthansa, KLM, CSA etc etc.

The whole point though is that AF, KL, LH, CZ etc.... are all serving their main hubs from MAN.... as is BA and to a lesser extent bmi. A British registered legacy carrier operating short haul flights ex MAN would be relying mainly on point to point traffic, up against non British legacy carriers having the advantage of operating to their hubs.

[Rob Courtney]

But the problem as I see it is having to transit through LHR which even at the best of times can be chellenging. As well as long haul I use the shuttles pretty often and if I can avoid LHR and go through LGW.

I like flying BA having never had a problem with them (other than being late) but flatly refuse to have the heathrow experience again. even T5 is no better.

[DAr19]

People seem to be misunderstanding what I am saying. Of course I understand that Air France, Continental etc are operating via their hubs. My point over the last few posts has been that with the fares those airlines are charging hub operations are the only way forward.

Any destination (within reason) would work if it was cheap enough hence my belief that Low cost carriers are the future for Manchester.

[MUFC_fan]

Airlines like Virgin are the airlines for MAN.

Get 20 787/A350s and you are flying! Literally!

[DAr19]

Never scheduled for March 09. Possible earliest date is Sept 09.

The source most people are getting this from clearly states March 09 Bloomberg.com: Canada (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601082&sid=ayKziNsynIMw&refer=canada)

That is about the only one I can find.

[Railgun]

"Ian Curtis International Airport"

[LHR27C]

I like flying BA having never had a problem with them (other than being late) but flatly refuse to have the heathrow experience again. even T5 is no better.

That's very subjective. Most people I know find T5 an absolute dream compared to the other terminals at LHR. The transfer experience versus a place like CDG is also much better.

Also in terms of being late, BA have vastly improved their punctuality levels since the move to T5. Baggage performance in terms of lost bags/1000 pax is better now than AF or KL.

My point over the last few posts has been that with the fares those airlines are charging hub operations are the only way forward.

Well, is that a criticism of BA/BMI or not? Certainly in the case of BA, trying to function as a legacy carrier and a loco at the same time is not going to work - they have a very strong position at LHR and will continue to make most of their money out of premium travel. Even in this economic climate there is a clear argument that BA are better protected focused around LHR than a low cost airline operating from the regions - at least they are posting a profit, compared to the likes of FR etc who are expecting to make losses.

You are absolutely right that the future for point to point services at MAN is low cost, as it is with most of the UK regions. Hence you won't see BA taking much part in it. But that shouldn't be a criticism of BA, they just operate a different business model.

[Skipness One Echo]

Get 20 787/A350s and you are flying! Literally!

I wouldn't bet on it. By the time these aircraft are rolling into LHR they may just have three runways to play with.... Virgin Atlantic's presence outside Heathrow does look restricted to leisure routes. I guess they might try LAS or similar but they have a MASSIVE investment in gaining and retaining premium traffic. Look at the money going into facilities at Terminal 3 Heathrow. Last time I looked they were even refusing to pay for airbridges at Manchester. Don't set yourself up for a fall hoping for a based fleet serving New York / Los Angeles etc.

You know where that amount of capital expenditure is going to start paying its way and realistically it's NOT Manchester.

[parky747]

I wouldn't bet on it. By the time these aircraft are rolling into LHR they may just have three runways to play with....

There wont be a 3rd Runway @ LHR, it will for sure be shelved.

[one post only!]

But LHR27C I thought the big LOCO's were also posting a profit at the moment?? They are expecting to lose money next year but then so are BA. Both totally different business models are struggling at the moment! Like all others BA are doing what they need to do to survive and as you say, you certainly can’t blame them. Batten down the hatches, go to were you make the most money (LHR for LH) or in this environment lose the least. Wait for the other airlines to haemorrhage money quicker, go bust and then expand out afterwards.

Do you ever think MAN could in the future be a big base for a couple of big loco's, the remaining charters and then find some (British registered) LH returning? Or do you think that the withdrawal to LHR will be so complete they will never move back?

[AUTOGLIDE]

Aside from the loss of jobs issue for those unfortunately involved, does anyone really care if they come back? The only loss really is BMI simply because they are a good longhaul airline and better to fly with to ORD than AAL (in my opinion) but it's hardly the end of the world. BA is no loss, they're a joke, like the Barnum and Bailey of the sky. If you want to go the the US get on one of the numerous US carriers, for Europe get on one of the even more numerous European carriers or a low-co. For the East/Mid-East get on one of the numerous excellent Asian/Middle Eastern carriers. If you're after a charter, then book on one of the numerous charter companies. See the pattern...
Now, anything else going on apart from this boring old toss and some posters from the deep south with some kind of MAN forum obsession?

[Vuelo]

VS looking at upping BGI service, announcement due soon. Obviously linked to BD pull-out.

VS Holidays were very reliant on BD Caribbean services.

[spannersatcx]

Quote:
Originally Posted by spannersatcx
Never scheduled for March 09. Possible earliest date is Sept 09.

The source most people are getting this from clearly states March 09 Bloomberg.com: Canada


I spoke to someone in Air China and he told me maybe September. We shall see.:ok:

[spannersatcx]

VS looking at upping BGI service, announcement due soon. Obviously linked to BD pull-out.

VS Holidays were very reliant on BD Caribbean services.

VS are withdrawing one of their services from March I believe, this is to allow rolling D checks on the 744, so 1 less a/c in the fleet for a while, each check is around 6 weeks, no spare capacity.:{

[Vuelo]

They can lease a/c, you know. The 744 is too big for the MAN BGI market anyway.

[StoneyBridge Radar]

They can lease a/c, you know. The 744 is too big for the MAN BGI market anyway.

...and do you remember the furore it created when they put a Martinair 767 on the MCO run. The only thing close to the Virgin brand was the name on the fin.

I'm not sure VS would want to go and tarnish their reputation in the regions a second time by going down that route again; but funnier things have happened recently, so who knows....

[jubilee]

Just slightly different. Looking for 2 flight seats LHR/MAN---PMI
12 August 2009, 14 days. BMI from LHR. £138.00. 32" seat pitch, no bag charge, no check in charge.

BMI BABY from MAN £164.88. 29" seat pitch, bags and check in charge £26.96,
seat £6.96 each way.
Who says loco does not pay.
Jubilee

[DAr19]

Perhaps I am mistaken, but I believe that there are several airlines operating this route that could be consulted if one was trying to find the lowest price.

[Ringwayman]

I don't think Martinair's operation caused too much of a flutter, given that it only operated for 1 winter only. THe consternation was caused around 2001 when VS pulled their own aircraft out of MAN and replaced it with an Air Atlanta 747-300 without telling travel agents what they were doing; the travel agents were trying to flog amenties on board an aircraft which was never destined to operate on the route for the whole of the peak summer period.

As for VS 787s, I can't see them effectively operating stretched out W patterns out of LGW as they currently do with the 747; the news that they are seeking interim lift of 12 aircraft also came again with the notion that they are intending to operate them out of LHR, LGW and MAN. LGW may have some purely on the "thinner" leisure routes with the 744s (and their replacements) operating the bulk of the LGW services, A340-300 routes out of LHR will probably go the way of the 787. MAN is more suited for having 787s based operating the pulled BD leisure routes and affording a greater degree of profitabilty to MCO (with perhaps greater frequency?). I would like to think VS would also consider the prospects of non-bucket and spade routes as I'm sure if they offer the right config (unlike certain airlines), they'd get themselves onto a winner.

[Skipness One Echo]

I would like to think VS would also consider the prospects of non-bucket and spade routes as I'm sure if they offer the right config (unlike certain airlines), they'd get themselves onto a winner.

The A330 and the B767-300 have been on the market for years. One has to ask WHY they haven't already done this in good times and would do so as the UK heads into full blown recession. Perhaps BA and BMI were making too much money (!)

[DAr19]

True Skipness, but the BA BMI model was somewhat different to how VS might operate.

[Ringwayman]

If we consider that a two class aircraft with no fancy dan Y+ offering was making profits* then perhaps Skipness we might be able to suggest that only clowns would change a "winning" formula, especially considering the lack of prominence the route was given. Should the 787 come in as advertised with much better fuel consumption that the 763 or A330 then I would suggest that however marginal a route is at present, it's profitability would in theory be increased. Yes the long-haul routes on offer are predominantly going to hubs but notice how few offer J, Y+ and Y. Whatever revenue accrued from poorly patronised Y+ would be beaten by not having that offering but with a couple of extra rows of "ordinary" Y.

* At least we can safely say it was making profits given the mantra over that route's withdrawal that BA is not a charity!

[bermudatriangle]

my travel flew to barbados,full of cheap seats and look what happened to them.BMI moving the aircraft to london proves that making money from manchester is very difficult.i find it worrying that the only growth seems to be locost operators.hardly a recipe for long term profit.just don't think that the passengers will keep the tills ringing in the manchester airport shopping mall.

[hammerb32]

I don't understand why you think the future is lo-co only?

BA have operated a point to point service from MAN - JFK and couldn't make it work, AA fly a point to hub service, this is the key difference. There is still massive potential for other long haul operators to offer a point to hub service around the world. It's natural in an economic downturn that airlines will cut their thin routes and retreat to tried and tested fomulas. It doesn't mean there's not money to be made.

[dollydaydream]

Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that BA and possibly BMI don't want to make it work.

[jubilee]

DAr19,
What I was trying to highlight was the difference in fares,by what is to all intentions the same airline, all be it in a different guise, and the fact that the full fare division of the same group appears to offer better value.

Also booking flights to Barbados in March from Manchester in business, Ba shuttle to LGW, BA on to BGI £1455.60.
BA shuttle to LHR,Virgin on to BGI £2234
BMI direct from Manchester £3264.

As an aside I believe that one of the routes the A330 is to be put upon is Cairo, Business fare £946.
The BGI fares are from Expedia. Cairo from BMI site.

This also hi-lights the supplements we have to pay to fly direct from Manchester,and also with regards to the Cairo flight,the aircraft will have to be utilised more, if possible, to gain revenue,even allowing for extra fuel and crew costs, when deployed from Manchester.
Jubilee

[hammerb32]

Perhaps, but if there was money to be made on the routes then they would carry on, neither airline strike me as the sort to cut their nose off to spite their faces. I know there's a conspiracy theory but I really do feel it's a little far fetched.

[Ian Brooks]

BA have no interest in the regions other than to feed to London, the shuttles do not make money as many of the passengers are only using as an add on to their
flights ex LHR/LGW.The fares charged on the shuttles do not reflect the real cost to operate the route as they are trying to get pax to use them rather than travelling with other operators either direct from MAN or via other hubs, they are in fact a loss leader in effect

What I must do is check fares from LHR and from MAN via LHR and see if there is a difference in favour of MAN just to get to travel via LHR but too busy at present
so it will have to wait

Ian

[trumptonville]

Since the winter schedule change PK are operating terminating flights PK701 5 times a week (non op Wed/Sat) and 709 twice a week.The only transit flights now left are the 711 and 721, both westbound only A

[Skipness One Echo]

The days of Cathay, South African, QANTAS, Air Canada and all are not going to come back because each of these airlines can offer a codeshare through a STAR ALLIANCE or ONEWORLD hub without fragmenting the UK market by offering service outside London. Hence Cathay and QANTAS are sold connecting on the BA Shuttle and South African and United sell seats on the BMI route over Heathrow. Why would any legacy airline in the Alliance structure serve Manchester when every effort is being put into making Heathrow work as the Alliances UK gateway.

United aren't interested, Cathay balked, South African couldn't do it, Air India lost money. Look at who's left. Non alliance members and strong connections over a US hub with a US airline. Who's left on the wish list?

[HZ123]

The question may be just how much longer will there be services to LHR / LGW via BMI or BA?

[DAr19]

Yes Heathrow is to be Britain's main alliance hub, but it is a very unpleasant airport. All I can say is that I hope Heathrow's improvements are good!

Having said that it's not difficult to avoid Heathrow and usual with better flight times, when I was working for a previous employer in Damascus I would fly in to Stansted via Istanbul with Turkish and it was often less expensive, I even convinced my company to do the same. It is easy for Manchester travellers to transit Newark, Atlanta, Paris, Dubai, Frankfurt, Abu Dhabi, Singapore, Istanbul which brings us to the stumbling point for a lot of the alliance airlines:

Why on earth would UK regional passengers make TWO connections (e.g down to Heathrow on BMI, Chicago on United and then on to your final US destination) when they could go to Newark and make the short regional flight from there. A lot of passengers search on price so in order to entice passengers through Heathrow instead of EWR or CDG those had better be low.

[bermudatriangle]

as soon as a fast train link is available between manchester and heathrow/gatwick i am sure BA will dump the shuttles without delay.still feeds the connecting traffic to longhaul routes and appeases the enviromental campaigners by greatly reducing the number of UK internal flights.the sooner we get a fast train link to heathrow T5 the better.as a regular user of T5,i must say it is now a delight to travel through.it leaves every other terminal in the Uk way,way behind.and before you say it,the flights arrive and depart pretty much ontime and my luggage has always arrived and pretty quickly as well.

[DAr19]

The train idea.. that would work very well if they got something going like Air France have with the TGV (a train-air codeshare).

Although this is a very interesting subject I should probably not discuss train-air codesharing on the Manchester airport forum!

Anyway BA wouldn't drop Manchester-Heathrow if only for the point to point domestic travellers, some people just prefer to fly domestic than train.

[Ringwayman]

United aren't interested, Cathay balked, South African couldn't do it, Air India lost money

UA don't have too many aircraft spare, CX can't get the route authority they want (and admitted that they didn't advertise the MAN link that much as soon as they codeshared with BA), SA had much bigger fish to fry once they had rights to land in practically most of the world granted again and AI was at the wrong airport (BHX would have been better, and were hampered by the bilaterals).

Put the boot on the other foot, and if MAN was the major airport with the econmic powerhouse up here and London was just an "ordinary" town, how would you feel if you were told that "sorry, the interests of passenger convenience aren't paramount and you must route through MAN at all times"?

I'm all in favour of the "fast train link" provided those who want it fund it; I doubt it would make that much of an impact on the longer domestic route into LHR- what did BA say, just 3% of the total number of flights would go in the event of MAN and LBA flight being scrapped, and they'd be replaced by other flights.

DAr19 hits the nail on the head when why would anyone want to route 2 stop to somewhere when it's possible to do it 1 stop. Having alliances should make it easier for the regional cities to have non-stop links with the world...how can focusing in one airport only be of benefit to any alliance?

Strangely enough, QF's subsidiary Jetstar makes plenty of noises about coming to MAN. Might not be "mainline" but at least they realise that by not serving the bulk of the country, they're just handing over money to those airlines that do and therefore will attempt to do something about it.

[parky747]

What a laugh, if anyone thinks there is gonna to be a train link to LHR/LGW from MAN, you are in cloud cuckoo land. Anyway, even if there was such a service, MAN pax who are connecting onto L/Haul would for sure use other routes eg AMS, DBX......... MAN pax don’t want to mess at LHR no matter how good T5 is. BA, BMI and who ever chose to focus there business in the south east do at there peril as oversees airlines will only gain from MAN and other UK regional airports.[/font]

[Pizzaro]

Well said Parky, most people want to fly direct, who want's to make connections unless they have to ????? There's more to the UK than just the South East, hence sensible airlines have bases all around the country.

P

[davidjohnson6]

There's already a direct train (i.e. no changes) 4 times per weekday between Manchester Piccadilly and Gatwick stopping at Birmingham on the way. BA might face rather more competition if the train took a bit less than 4h 45

[wingeel]

The Manchester - Birmingham - Gatwick train will be withdrawn by Cross Country from the December timetable. Usually quicker to go cross - London ( Euston- Victoria) anyway.

[IB4138]

It's actually quicker to change train at Watford Junction than go into London for Gatwick.

[eggc]

Totally off topic, but...

Has anyone ever wondered why is the MAN thread sooooooo popular ?

The number of posts goes up like the UK national debt ! No other thread comes close - ever !

We talk about allsorts of nonsense on here, not seen, or cared about, on other Airport threads ! Nevermind some of the rumours that surface....

Posters also seem to care a lot about MAN, as if it were supporting a football team, which I am not knocking - I'm as bad as the next man, I'm just commenting that MAN has more than its fair share of interest and supporters, which seems a bit odd to me, as I cant think of a particular reason why !!

[mickyman]

egcc

'Has anyone ever wondered why is the MAN thread sooooooo popular ?

The number of posts goes up like the UK national debt ! No other thread comes close - ever !

We talk about allsorts of nonsense on here, not seen, or cared about, on other Airport threads ! Nevermind some of the rumours that surface....

Posters also seem to care a lot about MAN, as if it were supporting a football team, which I am not knocking - I'm as bad as the next man, I'm just commenting that MAN has more than its fair share of interest and supporters, which seems a bit odd to me, as I cant think of a particular reason why !!'

Its because ALL northeners have a 'chip' on their shoulder

MM

[Daza]

In the BHX thread StoneyBridge Radar wrote,
I was told today that Turkish are far from happy with advance bookings for the BHX and the performance of the 2nd MAN service.

Is this going to be another example of consolidation and reduction?

Strange this was only posted on the BHX tread yet it apparently involves MAN too?
Lets hope that yet another airline is struggling at MAN? Regional flying is having a hard time at the moment
Daza

[philbky]

If they do have a chip on their shoulder, it's because the South East of England is seen as the only important area of the UK - especially by those who live in the South East.

Historically, the North of England has produced by far the greater percentage the inventions, material, products and many of the people that made Britain into Great Britain yet the wealth has always been sucked to that small corner of the UK called the South East.

Geographically, the North of England has just as large a population as the South East yet is seen by those in power as not important - basically because those in power are based in London and are only interested in themselves.

When Manchester twice bid for the Olympics, very little support came from the South East - I was living in Sussex at the time - and the bids were almost an object of derision and were firmly kept as "Manchester's bids" in the public mind by government and media alike. Yet when a run down area of east London was decided upon as the venue for a London bid for the games, not only was the country as a whole urged to rally behind the bid, we were told in no uncertain terms just how important the accompanying regeneration of the area was for the country - rather strange that, when for decades, the South has maintained the North is a run down, dirty, post industrial wasteland that needs help the country can't really afford.

Of course the Commonwealth Games in 2002 showed just how well the "thick" Northerners can run something on an international scale, and a great number of the medals gained by team GB at the 2008 Olympics were generated in the swimming pools around Manchester and at the Manchester Velodrome.

As someone who spent a great deal of his working life promoting the Manchester area for incoming business travel and development, who was in regular close contact with government department policy makers at a high level and had an input to the development of the airport, and who saw at first hand how BEA/BOAC/BA tried to block every opportunity for Manchester Airport to develop its own services (which goes back well before my time), I have a close and detailed knowledge of just how the levers have been pulled to put London above, not just the North but anywhere else in the UK, whilst expecting support for London and the South East to be given by the whole country.

In the case of air travel from Manchester, just research how BEA objected to every Eagle/Cunard Eagle/British Eagle licence application from Manchester to Europe in the 1950s and 1960s, was mostly successful in doing so yet refused to offer more than a few token services themselves. Check back on how BOAC drove SABENA off the New York route 11 years after the Belgians, who had faith in Manchester where London didn't, had pioneered and made a success of their operation. The same applies to BEA's work in persuading the government to deny Aer Lingus's long held and profitable fifth freedom rights through Manchester in the late 1960s.

To the proponents of Heathrow and Heathrow Airways, if you want to know just how much not just the North, but the rest of the UK would gladly be without Heathrow, just look at the success of flights from the UK to Amsterdam - many taken by people for whom Amsterdam is in the wrong direction to their final destination.

As a retired CEO I'm well aware of the need for profitable operation. Manchester will not generate volume high fare traffic for many reasons but one particular reason is the way BA and its partners and the other alliances sell their tickets to companies, either direct or through in house travel agents, with an emphasis on ensuring London departures are maintained with as large a volume of first/business class seats as possible. This includes heavy discounting of fares on connecting flights, the loading of fares on direct flights from the provinces and the offer of massive discounts on hotel rooms if an overnight is necessary in London.

As most business travellers have neither the time nor the authority to make their own arrangements and as the bottom line outcome of the deals on offer can be shown to be of financial benefit, the practice of putting as much as possible through Heathrow has been embraced by companies all over the UK. The wear and tear on the traveller due to having to make connections, miss flights or their own free time due to delays, wholesale cancellations (BA are the experts) or journey times hours longer than would be necessary on direct flights is overlooked as long as the bottom line looks OK.

In my view - now from 400 miles from Manchester - the reason this thread is always well subscribed is that people in the North, and Manchester in particular, CARE about their services. The airport company is still owned by the local authorities, rather than an unapproachable, unaccountable Spanish entity so the council tax payers are involved and want their say. They also get sick of the patronising attitude of Southerners withl little or no knowledge of the area, its history, geography or demographics who assume that all in the South is clean, tidy and comfortable and all in the North is dirty, post industrial and verging on a wasteland.

[TBirdFrank]

Hear, hear Philkby

I have far better things to do with my time than hang around that overcrowded inconvenient slum just off the M4.

Any airline that takes me direct will get my custom in favour of LHR, LGW etc.

We have hardly ever used it without concomitant factors such as hotel stops, luggage missing connections, etc, etc, becoming involved.

Operators and their bean counters may wish us onto their flights that artificially boost the "need" for bigger south east airports, but in the end the market itself will win out - and as a certain market orientated leaderene said - you can't buck it.

[BYALPHAINDIA]

But what makes me 'laugh' about the difference between LHR & MAN, Is not many people actually enjoy travelling thru LHR?

So why do they or their companies use it?

Maybe they don't think about MAN?

I think BA & BMI are partly to blame for taking the business away from MAN, Flying over a dozen flights a day down to LHR.

You have to be honest and say there are too many LHR flights from MAN.

Maybe if there was about 7 flights a day by both BA & BMI, Then it would give MAN the chance to send it's pax direct on other potential flights?

BA & BMI are not the only carriers taking pax away, AF, KL also fly alot of daily flights to their hubs.

A no win situation for MAN it seems?

[206cc_jim]

I don't know why so many people complain about LHR. I have used T5/T3 and T2 just last week. I was on the M25 within 30 minutes of landing.

Couldn't ask any more of any airline or airport.

[Skipness One Echo]

Oh get real. BA screwed PIK in the 1960s and 1970s, and similar in MAN objecting to every application from competitors. This is 2008.

BA have almost gone and MAN now has better options to connect to the world with the US carriers and the Middle East airlines. Who exactly do you guys expect to operate into MAN that you don't already have? You have all the major long haul you're going to get I think, a fine network it is too.

BMI never wanted to fly long haul from MAN, they made the best of a bad deal when they lost the chance to base them at LHR and had 3 A330s and nowhere to fly them.
The last new jet BA brought to MAN would be BAC111 G-BGKG in the early 1980s!! Everything since has been second hand or a LHR hand me down.

Maybe if there was about 7 flights a day by both BA & BMI, Then it would give MAN the chance to send it's pax direct on other potential flights

A lot of business travellers fly BA for the BA Miles, BMI users are STAR Aliiance customers who have loyalty cards a lot of the time. Removing that option is your idea of boosting business from MAN?

[al446]

B*gger LHR, I'd rather overnight via AMS anytime. UK airports are the pits.

[Manchester Exile]

Despite being a gold-card holder with One World, I've decided to boycott the bastards and have booked myself onto Etihad for a MAN-SYD journey later this month. I'll avoid that hell-hole called LHR, and I won't miss it one bit. And the fares were very attractive too - QF, CX, BA and JAL were all quoting GBP5,500-ish for a 1-way J-class fare; Etihad from Manchester charged me GBP 2,400-ish and I also get a limousine at each end to get me to/from the airport.

Last time I flew to SYD in February, I booked onto QF2 from LHR with a BA shuttle from MAN. What happened? The shuttle was delayed for 4 hours and I missed my flight. BA didn't care a fig and if it wasn't for my One World status I'd have been left floundering.

Incidentally, I flew on the BA MAN-JFK service in May in J class, and there were 5 empty seats in the cabin. In World Traveller Plus there were two empty seats, which suggests that premium ticket sales weren't as disastrous as is being made out. In fact, World Traveller Plus would have been full except for my parent's failure to make the flight - they had booked onto the same flight in order to accompany my wife and I to New York, but a family emergency meant they had to cancel at the last minute. BA decided not to refund their fares, so there's a few more quid in their coffers.

I won't be connecting via LHR again when it comes to long-haul travel. I might miss out on some One World points, but I'm going to start building them up with other airlines.

[Centre cities]

Perhaps the above post proves the point againast MAN/BHX etc.

Why are they charging such high fares at LHR. That is where the pax are and the money made.

A non S/E poster but facing facts.


Centre cities

[philbky]

Skipness, you get real. I was dealing with the problems generated by the attitude of BA and its predecessors long before your daddy knew what a twinkle in his eye was, let alone dreamt of you.

BA did not screw Prestwick. The airport is 30 miles from its population centre and lost a great deal of relevance once the range of transatlantic aircraft increased and more when Abbotsinch was able to handle long range traffic.

As far as Manchester is concerned, the airport is 10 miles from the city and in the heart of a region with as many people within a 75 mile radius of the city centre as within 75 miles of Charing Cross (2001 census). The region is quite capable of generating long range traffic as can be seen by the healthy use of Amsterdam, Paris, Frankfurt, Dubai and Qatar as transit points.

No-one can blame foreign airlines, which provide direct services from MAN to their hub, for looking for connecting passengers. At least they have the sense to realise there is both point to point and transit traffic.

What BA, which still claims to be Britain's premier airline when it promotes itself around the world, has done is to follow in the footsteps of its constituent antecedents. It has decided not just to treat the provinces as foreign territory from which to feed its hub and ignore the potential to compete for long haul and European direct services, it has deliberately put pressure on its alliance partners to reduce Manchester and other non Heathrow airports' services - e.g. AA no longer serves Dallas - Manchester which in the 1990s had an MD11 service, and has reduced a daily MAN-ORD service - twice a day in summer - to 5 days a week this winter.

Worse, QANTAS, which had excellent VFR traffic and operated over a number of European points to MAN during the period of its service was, as soon as BA took a large shareholding, forced to fly one Sydney service a day on from LHR to MAN instead of the flight over a European point. This looked good at the time for MAN as the airline stated that the reason was it was cheaper to keep the aircraft on the ground at MAN than LHR - thus more revenue for MAN.

What they didn't say was that the Sydney -London service used was the busiest of the day, few Manchester passengers could get a booking as the computer gave the London pax priority and the sector to/from MAN often had less than 50 pax, compared to the 150-170 generated regularly when the service was flown over a European point and the computer did not discriminate against MAN bookings.

Of course the BA bean counters soon pointed to the poor performance ex MAN and pulled the service.

The MAN pax, denied access to the service when it was operating, quickly learned that SIA, Emirates and others offered not only another way to travel but often offered better on board service.

Thus MAN can now support Emirates, Qatar and Etihad, on which a good percentage of the passengers are heading down under.

But it doesn't end there. BA stil has enormous influence in the corridors of power. Its input into discussions on bilateral arrangements and access to the UK is listened to and often acted upon. There is still a great deal of left over belief in Whitehall and Westminster that BA is still the chosen instrument of British civil air transport regardless of the fact that it has been a private company for over 20 years and should have no more or less weight given by government to its needs and opinions as, say, Highland Airways.

Having said all that, BA aren't the only culprits when it comes to screwing Manchester - and other provincial - passengers. Over the last 3 decades I've repeatedly tried to have airline and holiday company CEOs and marketeers explain why Manchester inclusive tour passengers are surcharged on flights to North America compared to Gatwick, when the distances involved are the same or less - with the Gatwick aircraft often overflying MAN on their direct flights.

Manchester as a city has changed beyond recognition in the last 30 years -particularly since the IRA bomb.

Over the next decade there will be a continuation of the growth in the migration of companies and institutions to the North for many reasons - a growth which will pervade through and beyond the current economic difficulties.

It will be very interesting to see just how long it will take the likes of BA to get the message - or how long before they miss out big style.

Looking back 40 years and more the Southern wiseacres postulated that airports like Manchester would never prosper or support anything more than a handful of services. Even a Labour Minister in Wilson's government, who should have known better, told a Manchester Airport Committee meeting in 1968 that the airport couldn't expect much growth over the coming 20 years as there would be no demand from Northerners to travel.

So, before advising those of us who've been there, done it all and got the t-shirt, having sat through days of meetings, heard every argument and who, against all the odds, have succeeded in developing travel to/from MAN, to "get real" you might just think that some people know a great deal more of the background to the reality than you and have years of experience of watching the fiddling of figures, the twisting of arguments and the straightforward statement that Heathrow comes first, middle and last, regardless of the wishes of a vast proportion of the UK travelling public

[TURIN]

Its because ALL northeners have a 'chip' on their shoulder

Good point.

Unlike the shandy drinkin southern jessies who with a chip on both shoulders have a much more well balanced personality.

Anyway enough of the name calling.

AA are to bring forward their resumption of daily flights. :ok:

[Skipness One Echo]

booked onto QF2 from LHR with a BA shuttle from MAN
As this is presumably a BA code share, what did they offer you when your connecting service was delayed?

My point about PIK was that BA prevented anyone else setting up at PIK forced SAS and KLM out and then left the airport for dead in Spring 1982 when they left themselves.

Skipness, you get real. I was dealing with the problems generated by the attitude of BA and its predecessors long before your daddy knew what a twinkle in his eye was, let alone dreamt of you.
OK I get it. You're very old and wise. Actually you do make good points. As an aside, it is looking rather likely that the BA LGW services are soon going to be dropped or operated by flybe.

[philbky]

Old, well late middle aged(!). Wise, well wise enough to have got out of the rat race but any wisdom I do have is more in terms of knowledge and hard won experience.

I firmly believe that BA will eventually withdraw totally from Sussex Regional aka Gatwick. The reasons are myriad if you look closely at BA's philosophy.

As for Prestwick, I don't understand your premise. SAS, KLM,TCA/Air Canada, BA, Pan American only needed PIK (and SNN for that matter) when they needed to refuel.

I don't recall SAS and KLM having fifth freedom rights ex PIK - though AC and PA did.

[eggc]

Shops, Shops, Shops....MAN is as bad as my missus !

Story from UK Airport News...

"Manchester Airport is running a Christmas themed online game to increase awareness of its retail outlets following a £80m investment...."

...story continued but I lost the will to read !

[aeulad]

Dallas from Manchester didn't last long, and never had an MD11 on it.

Manchester was, however, the first european airport to see AA MD11 service, from Chicago.

Regards

Mike

[Skipness One Echo]

I don't recall SAS and KLM having fifth freedom rights ex PIK - though AC and PA did.

I'm sure SAS did as the flight was moved to GLA and operated with a DC9. They have long and bitter memories in Ayrshire. I agree that most of BA at Gatwick has little future. Ahhh I remember the MD11s on the AA54 / 55.
Do we know if the ORD flight is going to 2 x B757s for certain next summer?

[MUFC_fan]

AA still got it as a daily 763 on their website.

[philbky]

Aeulad,

You are quite right about the MD 11s - my screw up whilst editing prior to posting.

The line should read:

e.g. AA no longer serves Dallas - Manchester and has reduced a daily MAN-ORD service - which in the 1990s had an MD11 service, twice a day in summer (2nd flight a 767) - to 5 days a week this winter.

BTW the Dallas flight operated for a couple of years and AA also were pressured by BA into dropping MAN - JFK which benefitted CO.

[steve wilson]

Was there any reason in particular for the row of BMI Airbuses parked up by the freight sheds on friday evening? I have never seen them parked here before.

Just to chuck my hat into the poor treatment of the Airport by BA debate.......

We are flying out to Faro with friends in Feb 09. They are travelling up from Portsmouth so we decided to look at booking a LOCO from the London Area. We found to our suprise that BA from Gatwick were the cheapest available at just £55 return (RYR were the cheapest based just on a fare but then throw in the extras :()

After finding this great fare we looked at booking MAN - LGW. To our amazement it came in at £85 each way per person, £170 return.

This was four months ago. I was amazed at how much the 45 minute domestic sector was compared to the two and a half hour flight to Faro from Gatwick.

Were now driving down and staying overnight at LGW. Damm ripoff London Airways.

Steve

[virgin_cc_wannabe]

is there any truth in the rumour that DL are to start BOS-SNN/MAN?

Would be a great addition to the T2 line up, and obviously has the feed into the NW network at BOS.
NW did want to launch MAN-BOS when they were independant but never got round to it, so could this be the start?

[BDLBOS]

I would be surprised at BOS-SNN/MAN from DL. They have just announced their long haul updates and MAN did not get anything yet.

There is really no hubbing carriers at BOS. DL/NW merger may make them biggest (not 100%), but it is certainly not a hub as we would call it.

I would think that up gauging aircraft into MAN maybe next, to pick up some PAX affected by BA/BMI, and hopefully a DTW-MAN leg.

Just my 2 cents from this side.

[Skipness One Echo]

The only long haul from either airline is BOS-AMS on NWA ( and that's a recent KLM replacement I think.) I would say no, especially via Shannon (!) Who told you that one?

[virgin_cc_wannabe]

Heard it through the grapevine. It wouldnt be via SNN, there would be 1x daily SNN and 1xdaily MAN?

[philbky]

I live 35 miles from SNN as the 757 flies and the loss of the AA 757 BOS service came as a blow to SNN as loads were always good (can't comment on the yield).

This again was due to deals and alliances (AA/Aer Lingus) and now there are many times when Aer Lingus is full, very expensive or both on SNN-BOS and vv.

SNN - BOS is likely to be profitable May - October. The added cost of a MAN sector compared to extra income is questionable on a 757 but the extra seats on a 767-300 may just make such a route viable but I wouldn't put my last cent on it.

[mickyman]

philbky

re:post #155

I commend you on a well written/sensible post

MM

[philbky]

Thank you mickyman.

[BHX5DME]

Air Blue will reduce their daily flight to 5 per week from Mid-December.

BHX5DME

[BombardierCR7]

Ironically Wed and Sat, the same days as PIA's ISB-LBA-ISB

[Ametyst1]

Eastern Airways are to pull their scheduled services from Manchetser. After dropping the Manchester to Inverness service, the airline is pulling off the Manchester to London Stansted service from 28th November.

[Manchester Exile]

G'day Skip:

You asked: As this is presumably a BA code share, what did they offer you when your connecting service was delayed?

They told me to go back home and call BA to make new arrangements for the following day. Which I did; but the poor chap at BA said that he was unable to help and that I should go back to Ringway airport to re-arrange my travel for the next day. Naturally I was unimpressed at this shuttling back and forth, and made that clear. Credit to the bloke on the other end of the phone. He put me on hold and, after 30 minutes, had re-booked me onto another BA shuttle the following day, and a new QF flight from LHR-SYD. It was explained to me that he only did this due to my One World status. Which is nice for me, but a great pity for casual travellers who would otherwise be left in the lurch.

So I did get home to Sydney, but arrived a day late, which caused a few issues at work.

[Anna's Dad]

philbky - Many thanks for your articulate arguments outlined in posts 155 and 163. As a proud Mancunian and reasonably informed 'layperson' when it comes to aviation, I found your points very persuasive, well made and informative.

Cheers.

[philbky]

Thank you Anna's Dad

[Bagso]

yep here here......to those comments Philbyk

[virgin_cc_wannabe]

FlightAware > Live Flight Tracker > American Airlines Inc. #54 > 18-Nov-2008 > KORD-EGCC (http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AAL54/history/20081118/2355Z/KORD/EGCC)

Is an AA 757 comming in tomorrow morning on the ORD route?

[Tower1]

NO, it was showing as a 763.
Of further interest today, BMI flight to ORD, is listed as departed 3 mins. before AA,
and landed 40 mins. after AA at ORD.
Is the 763 that much faster than theA330,or is it down to different routings.
Tower

[zfw]

Hearing rumours about SIA pulling out next year unsubstantiated at the mo, anyone heard anything on this?.

zfw

[semisonic]

SIA pulling out?!? Please no. Am using them over Xmas to Oz (more expensive than Thiefrow). When will this madness end?

[philbky]

It's an unsubstatiated rumour as likely to have come from someone bored, but with a fertile mind as much as from a reliable source.

Whilst this is a rumour network and the OP has stated that the story is unsubstantiated, it would be useful to know the source.

[daynehold]

B*gger LHR, I'd rather overnight via AMS anytime. UK airports are the pits.

Well said al446. Heathrow is a dump! Flew there last Friday - terminal fascilities are reasonable but apron side looks a slum ready for demolition! If I need to travel inter continental I'd go via Amsterdam in the absence of flights out of Manchseter.

BA never has had a commitment to Manchester or the region known as "not London". If one looks at the catchment area within 70 miles of Manchester there is surely potential to develop services particularly (apart from the current recession) across the Atlantic. Just looked at the Lufthansa website and they operate various services across the Ocean out of Munich which suggests a commitment to a comparable market to Man.

BMIs withdrawl from Manchester only adds salt to the wound.

But what is most galling are the adverts by both BA & BMi for "cheap" flights out of London to the USA. I recognise that to make a profit the routes will be partly dependent on business travellers but within the Manchester catchment area there are a significant number of business travellers who would happily fly from a regional airport if only they still had the choice and services were available. Isn't it ironic that Jet2 (admitedly a low cost carrier) is reporting satisfactory interest in their pending service to New York from LBA?

Lets hope a carrier takes up the challenge and establishes successful East Coast routes out of Man.

[Skipness One Echo]

Lets hope a carrier takes up the challenge and establishes successful East Coast routes out of Man
Like Newark you mean? *cough* Continental twice daily from Terminal 2.

We get it. You hate Heathrow and you have no grasp of the airline business. Apron side is a mess because they are expanding the EuroPier and building Terminal 5C.
Take some time and read through the 1000s of posts that tell you why Germany and the UK are different markets.Course perhaps you're right and all those airlines know nought. I suggest a letter.

Oh yeah, that's right, take away BA's JFK and BD's ORD (Antigua, Vegas and Barbados are leisure routes), and what are you left with?
Continental, American, Delta and USAirways!!!!! GEEEZZZ

[DeltaIndiaSierraPapa]

The thing that I cant get my head around is this...

We all hear airline know it alls on this site forever bang on about how there are no high yeild passengers out of MAN (or anywhere else North of the Watford Gap for that matter). Well lets expand it a bit and say the Northwest in general.... Let me ask you this.

What choice do high yield pax have out of MAN?

Oh yeah, that's right, take away BA's JFK and BD's ORD (Antigua, Vegas and Barbados are leisure routes), and what are you left with? That's right, either a trip to LHR, CDG or AMS.... Perhaps if the airport got off their arse and quit charging airlines through the nose and started attracting proper scheduled carriers to the airport. You know, ones that actually offer the same level of services as London Deathrow, then perhaps, just mabey, us silly Northerners might actually BUY said services, because many of us BUY the same services from other airports!

[MUFC_fan]

Well said one echo!

Who cares if you hate Heathrow? A lot of people join the slagging wagon but how many people use it? Yes...more than everyone elses favourite hubs of AMS, CDG and FRA!

LHR may have had its bad press but it is now working a lot better and a T6 with a 3rd runway would put it up against ATL and ORD.

[Mr A Tis]

Boston & Miami are two glaring ommissions from the MAN - East coast portfolio.
Both of which could be served by American, rather than feed LHR offering a choice to the perceived wippet & ferret unwashed northerners.
Draw your own conclusions why they were withdrawn last time, but they were not that easy to book, routing via somewhere else (guess?) always came up first.

[MUFC_fan]

Does anybody have any proof of the so called 'London Airways' forcing AA to avoid MAN?

If not, which i presume, WW may have a few bones to pick with a few people on this forum. Slander is an expensive hobby! Even more than aviation!

[Euroboy39]

I am so incredibly bored of Manchester fans with chips on their shoulders moaning about BA and BMI (and yes, my local airport of Manchester!). I believe whole heartedly in the idea of supply and demand- if the premium passengers are really there, as so many seem to claim, then some airline will see the potential and jump into these routes. It's quite telling that BA and BMI can't make longhaul from Manchester work and VS has not expanded beyond a handful of leisure routes. If you are right, there is no need to worry, as surely AF, LH or someone else will JUMP at such a profit-making option!

I've said it once and I'l say it again- BA does not owe anything to anyone other than its shareholders. These ideas of airline 'loyalty' are misplaced. Please can we stop BA-bashing (or BAshing, haha), as it's so tiresome to read.

On a positive note, its pleasing to see Easy expanding, albeit slowly at Manchester. I'm a tad surprised at only one daily frequency to Paris, but I guess that they want to test the waters first. Air Canada is more good news and they should do better now that some of the competition has disappeared and people are increasingly concerned about whether their airline will actually be running by the time they take their flight! Great news!

[Ringwayman]

DISP, if MAN is "charging airlines through the nose", how come Ryanair have gone to 10 routes ex-MAN? After all, they've previously gone public with "High charges at MAN" and cut services.

Another forum suggests some expansion (new easyJet A320 at MAN with a breakdown of service details) and a very surprising resumption (one that makes me doubt the accuracy of what's proposed)

As for London Airways, contemplate why they did not codeshare MIA-MAN when they had the opportunity (perhaps too many MAN pax would choose that route rather then MAN-LHR-MIA?) and the BOS route had allegations that the poorer yielding passengers were being routed through onto AA's service using the BA codeshare.

MAN is not going to produce a combined J, Y+ and Y mix to make routes profitable. Perhaps it's telling that as BA is a "commercial" airline, the route to JFK ran profitably with just J and Y classes (well, it wasn't withdrawn was it?!). The moment they do away from it, they run into trouble. Perhaps it's not the MAN catchment area's problem....it's the airlines perceived ideas of what they think is best for the area.

[Skipness One Echo]

Are we hearing Air Canada returning now Zoom are gone? *wonders if hope for GLA*

MAN is not going to produce a combined J, Y+ and Y mix to make routes profitable.
So what the Hell are Continental, Delta, USAirways and American flying across the Atlantic from Manchester? Fresh air?

[jubilee]

Geneva bookable through the summer on Easyjets site.
Jubilee

[BDLBOS]

So what the Hell are Continental, Delta, USAirways and American flying across the Atlantic from Manchester? Fresh air?

No me!! Gotta love the US Carriers, service is not as good, but they are reliable. Now that the UK carriers have taken their bat and gloves down to congested city, they should make more money out of MAN also. Every cloud does have a silver lining:ok:

[Bagso]

SIA pulling Out - please no :ugh:

...problem here might be the A380 at Heathrow !

Did they bring down frequency at LHR when this came in or have they simply added capacity ?

[Skipness One Echo]

It's adding capacity I'm afraid, and lots of it.

Also, no spare capacity to run an A340 of the VS LHR fleet to MAN,

Thought they were scaling back routes at MAN not adding to it!

[virgin_cc_wannabe]

All that talk of exansion on airliners.net promted me to do some searches.

The poster says that olympic will be double daily on 3 days a week, but infact olympic are down to 2x weekly (op MON & THU), so we have yet another downgrade.

No sign of SIA, AC, EZY or BE expansion, so may be just a pipe dream.

Also, no spare capacity to run an A340 of the VS LHR fleet to MAN, so that might not happen either. Saying that, things can change, although to maximise loads, if routes are being launched in march, isnt it best to announce them now, as it comes around faster than you think?

Just my 2 cents

[DAr19]

We get it. You hate Heathrow and you have no grasp of the airline business.

Firstly, you have no idea as to daynehold's level of understanding.

Secondly, do I have no grasp of the airline business because I believe it was a bad idea for BA to terminate Manchester-JFK. I as an experienced accountant who has worked in yield, commercial and accounts payable departments with four airlines alongside the Syrian tourism authority?

Whenever a Manchester enthusiast or employee complains about BA you become unpleasant with them but that aside, allow me to point out a few things you might be missing in your black and white view of a complex industry:

1.) Manchester-JFK had PR impact, to the casual (i.e not airline related) observer it would appear that BA had a very small base at Manchester with a few destinations including New York, thereby creating the illusion that BA had a presence in the regions and creating goodwill in those regions.
2.) Said goodwill could have convinced those who had taken satisfactory direct flights from Manchester to use BA via Heathrow.
3.) Swapping Manchester for Gatwick puts the idea of a sort of "anti-Northism" into the minds of residents of the North of England causing bad feeling towards British Airways.
4.) The public do not understand that BA is privatised, they consider it the national carrier and they have even less understanding of the "hub and spoke" model.

Perhaps before you insult others you might consider arguments outside of your black and white mentality (such as PR, goodwill, etc).

In any case, you seem to consider anyone who criticises the hub and spoke model to be lacking in understanding. Remember what they said about Ryanair's decision to set up at Charleroi? Something along the lines of "no feeding traffic, not enough point to point travellers" which seems to be the argument on your lips the majority of the time.

[Suzeman]

Looks like all these stories on other boards may be coming out of the Slot Conference which I think was last week.

And I'm sure we all remember the speculation frenzy on this board a few years ago after an earlier slot conference. :}

Let's just say that many of the slot bids never turn into reality for a number of reasons - only when an airline is taking bookings are we getting close to something happening

Suzeman

[Skipness One Echo]

DAr19, I have amazing repspect for the Syrian Toursit Authority and the Sterling work that they are doing. Truly a world shaping organisation. The points you make are actually well made sir, but peripheral.

Most people know BA is a plc, they just have a memory of them as the national carrier. When they were the national carrier, they were hardly the worlds best. Most people old enough to remember them as the national carrier also lived through Thatcher's era of mass privatisation. I don't believe they really believe BA is a national carrier in the way you mean. Honestly.
Now surely as an accountant I expect a logical grasp of revenue generation and an understanding of getting as much from ones assets as possible. This is the managements responsibilty to the shareholders. This is what BA do ruthlessly ( except for Open Skies which is a ruthless attempt to screw over their own staff ! )

PR and goddwill are part of the business model no doubt, ruthless business acumen is demanded especially right now or there won't be a BA to bitch over. They have a MASSIVE pension deficit and we are heading into a downturn. The decision to terminate MAN-JFK looks smarter by the day, the decision to begin LGW-JFK may not pan out.

I also refer you to my arguments that legacy carriers use the hub and spoke model, the new locos not so much as they operate numerous bases across Europe.

The bottom line is that no one on here has suggested a way for BA to compete head to head outside of London with the locos. The public vote with their feet and the BA cost base is HUGE in comparison with the new boys.

BTW I'm not a soft southern fan boy, I'm a bitter Scot who lived through Glasgow losing NWA , BA, American, Air Canada and United. All that promise and rhetoric from the airlines and not a penny of profit after all that effort. I want MAN to do well, and I reckon that all things considered they ARE doing well.

[The Big Easy]

So who is rumoured to be picking up the BD longhaul routes ex Manchester this week?

TBE.

[Vuelo]

Errr....noone! The economy is on its arse and even AA are currling capacity on the route to a 757!

[zfw]

According to today's Sunday Mail MAG has joined the beardy Branson and Easy consortium to buy the No.2 Southern Softy Airport LGW.

Apparently we didnt have enough muscle to go it alone and couldnt raise the spondoolicks.

More shops on the way for LGW then............or should that be EVEN more......

No more on the SIA rumour from a few days ago.........appears to be just that a rumour.


zfw

[ManofMan]

I met with SQ last week in Shanghai and have signed a BSA (Block Space Agreement) with them for the next 12 months, the summer schedule i have from them stays at 5 days per week.

[MUFC_fan]

The reason AA have brought it down to a 752 is that they are retiring their A300s which are being replaced by their 763s which currently fly across the pond everyday.

NOT because of the current economy.

[Flightrider]

NOT because of the current economy.

In all fairness, AA have over 50 767-300s in the fleet and although they are downgrading a number of routes to free up replacement aircraft for the A300s leaving the fleet, it is a fair bet that the routes being downgraded are the ones whose commercial performance is sub-par.

Put it another way, if the 767-300 was going full every day with profitable high-yield traffic, do you think American would be turning away 40+ pax every flight from Manchester or looking at other sectors in their network which were under-performing and downgrading those to a 757 instead?

They need to downgrade 28 lines of flying to release the A300s for retirement and it would appear that Manchester-ORD being chosen for a downgrade to 757 indicates that the route appears somewhere in the bottom third of the profitability table for AA.

--

Routes for Summer 2009:
Air Canada back with a daily YYZ 767 service
Air France launching a daily LYS CRJ service
BA cutback on LGW-MAN from 7 to 5 per day
Flybe having a go at bmi regional on MAN-ABZ, 6 x daily
Continental staying at twice-daily on EWR with 757
Delta staying daily 757 on JFK but at later arrival/departure times than now
Sun-Air adding lunchtime service to Billund
EZY on TFS, FUE, ALC, AGP, HER, GVA, CDG, NCE, PFO, CFU, MLA, SOF
One new route from Ryanair (twice weekly, don't know what)
CSA increasing up to 3 per day
Monarch daily NCE + second daily BCN

Most of this not yet announced.

[airhumberside]

One new route from Ryanair (twice weekly, don't know what)
FR announced Cagliari twice a week recently. Is that the route you mean or another new route?

[Bearpit]

Flightrider, you seem to forget, this is only a slots submission and often doesn't bear any resemblance to reality. Lots of airlines "fly a kite" when it comes to this process! Can't see many of these coming off in the current climate.

[MANFlyer]

I sometimes have to do a double take when I read some of stuff on here...:ugh:

SQ are increasing capacity/flights ?!. Not going to happen.

SQ are pulling out ?!. Neither is that.

Oh, and just to wind up the load-factor gang. I flew BD705 to ORD a couple of weeks ago and there was just one empty seat up front. They've even finally fitted IFE screens in row 1 now......

[G-STAW]

who ever has made the SQ rumor up wants to get a life, the only thing i cant say is that SQ have warned MAN plc that they will not move to T1.

regarding the DL interest in BOS-SNN-MAN, i heave heard nothing, but, DL are seriously considering DTW-MAN, once the DL/NW merger is complete.

and virgin have stated that they want to operate two A340-300's both sat and sun (on top of the 744)on the orlando route starting next summer

thomas cook are getting ready to move over to T2, before march.


G-STAW

[Skipness One Echo]

and virgin have stated that they want to operate two A340-300's both sat and sun (on top of the 744)on the orlando route starting next summer
Any idea what's being dropped at LHR to accomodate this?

[MUFC_fan]

I am assuming there are new A346s arriving to accomodate these aircraft or maybe, as they are only operating two services a week with it they may have reduced/increased a business based route (ie NYC etc.) during the week.

[Skipness One Echo]

No, Virgin Atlantic are not expanding the fleet until the B787s and A380s arrive I believe.

[G-STAW]

well, Virgin have a slight problem due to lack of aeroplanes (as we know)

they have held several meetings to move 2 A340's from london to Manchester, ill try and get more asap.

[MUFC_fan]

Could this mean two A343s based at MAN? Maybe new routes?

However, I don't understand how they want to increase frequency on some routes yet they don't have the a/c to do it yet they are doing it anyway!

Please explain and sorry for my ignorance!:}

[Skipness One Echo]

One assumes that would involve the 2 747-400s returning to LHR / LGW and being replaced by the older A340-300s? We shall see....

[G-STAW]

Could this mean two A343s based at MAN? Maybe new routes?


thats my exact thinking, even more so now that BMI are pulling out...

[MUFC_fan]

My list:

JFK
LAX
PVG
HKG

What?! Its OK to have abit of fun once in a while!:ok:

[Ringwayman]

I'm tending to agree with Skipness on this. 2 A340s based full time = 8 MCO a week, 2 BGI a week, 2 LAS a week plus a couple of GLA-MCO services a week?

[parky747]

Found this quote on BA Cityflyer recruitment site:

Our Head Office is based in Didsbury, South Manchester, within close proximity to the city centre and a short distance from Manchester Airport. Manchester is often described as the “Capital of the North’ and is a vibrant centre for the arts, media, higher education and commerce. Recognised as England’s ‘Second City’, a recent report also rates Manchester as the fastest-growing city economically, with levels of investment second only to London.

So if Manc is considered as 2nd City to London, BACF should have based AC here too, or maybe it will be just a new coat of paint on Flybe AC in time!!!!

[mutualswap]

Our Head Office is based in Didsbury, South Manchester, within close proximity to the city centre and a short distance from Manchester Airport. Manchester is often described as the “Capital of the North’ and is a vibrant centre for the arts, media, higher education and commerce. Recognised as England’s ‘Second City’, a recent report also rates Manchester as the fastest-growing city economically, with levels of investment second only to London.


by who :eek::p

[MANFlyer]

the only thing i cant say is that SQ have warned MAN plc that they will not move to T1.

Well I can say they won't be moving to T1...;)

[ManofMan]

by who

err anyone with common sense !!!!

or are you saying thier is another city that could take this title ???

[Momentary Lapse]

Is Deansgate still knee-deep in rubbish and beggars?

[BHX5DME]

by who

err anyone with common sense !!!!

or are you saying thier is another city that could take this title ???

Birmingham is and always will be the UK's 2nd City

But I dont want to get into that argument again !!

BHX5DME

[ManofMan]

Birmingham is and always will be the UK's 2nd City

But I dont want to get into that argument again !!


Err i was talking about the Capital of the North

Manchester is often described as the “Capital of the North’

Has Birmingham moved ?

[mutualswap]

im not sure the north has a capital :eek:


id wager my mortgage that the lovely fair folk of
Leeds Liverpool Newcastle Hull Sunderland Carlisle Blackpool

dont think of it as their capital :ugh::rolleyes:

[wingeel]

Birmingham has the largest local authority population in the country unless you count the London assembly. But municipal populations are irrelevant. It is Metro area populations that are used by most demographers to determine the 'size' of a city. In municipal terms, Indianapolis is bigger than Miami or Atlanta, for example. But which are the more prominent of these cities ?

As for Birmingham v Manchester, the respective Metro populations are more or less identical.

[MUFC_fan]

Who cares what Manchester is? Yes- it is the largest city in the north.

It is also the second largest city financially and for business in the UK with the likes of BBC etc. having big bases there.

There has been more money spent on redevelopement in Manchester than any other city on the planet so it must be counting for something.

[rutankrd]

Well I 'm Mancunian in excile however to my mind and as a matter of history both Manchester and Birmingham claims are spurious.

Canterbury is the second city and York is the primary northern city.

Its not about size but diocesan ranking (We are still A Christian Country and have a STATE religion after all)

Manchester claim claim to be Englands second financial city after London with some justification and i think Birmingham may have a larger population and what remains of the manufacturing industries.

But anyways what has this to do with airlines and airports?

[wingeel]

AMEN to that !

[Code 100]

I didn't really want to join in the argument about who has the second biggest (city!). Capitals are a Roman thing, as in Capitol. This refers to seats of government. Can we pleeeeeease get back to airlines and airports now. I am sick of getting excited when I see there is a new MAN post but it just refers to regional cock-fighting rather than aviation matters.

[MUFC_fan]

Back to aviation:

Is there any more news of what LH are to do with BD and more importantly are they to do anything from MAN?

[virgin_cc_wannabe]

Regarding the Virgin A340-300 rumour

Will these 2 aircraft be re-fitted before comming to MAN. If you look at the seatmaps, they are rather front (premium) heavy, which in my opinion is not suitable for the Leisure market.

Also, what routes will these 2 aircraft do if it is true?

Im presuming the following:

7x weekly MCO for frame 1

2xweekly MCO
1x weekly BGI
1x weekly UVF? (I know its been dropped now but could be brought back)
2x weekly LAS?
1x weekly ANU? for frame 2

What are your thoughts?

Also RE BD/LH I think just a stregnthing of the Germany routes, maybe a slight reduction in shuttles, selling off of regional and maybe baby aswell, but thats just my personal opinion.

[Ringwayman]

What was the config of the A340 when they 1st started their MCO service?

[Skipness One Echo]

Regarding the Virgin A340-300 rumour

Will these 2 aircraft be re-fitted before comming to MAN. If you look at the seatmaps, they are rather front (premium) heavy, which in my opinion is not suitable for the Leisure market.
If only you'd APPLIED instead if remaining a wannabe....ah well

The A340-300 fleet is Heathrow based flying assorted BOS / BOM / EWR / IAD/ JFK services as well as MRU. Any swap with the B747-400s would involve a substantial cut in capacity as well as a reconfiguration of the aircraft. I doubt UVF will be back any time soon.

[BYALPHAINDIA]

Are 'Kuwait' AW having a 'Nosey' at MAN??

With the recent flights to MAN, It makes me wonder if they are also looking at a possible service/s??

777 would be nice!!

[TheSpirit]

It's all well and good BA making the decision to centralise their operation at LHR, but when are they going to improve the connections, for example I have a business trip to Washington coming up, on the return leg I land at LHR at around 09:00 and don't have a connection back to MAN until arond 13:40.

I could drive back from LHR to MAN in a much shorter time than the 4.5 hours I am going to be forced to wander the T5 shopping mall.:*

[Betablockeruk]

Are 'Kuwait' AW having a 'Nosey' at MAN??

With the recent flights to MAN, It makes me wonder if they are also looking at a possible service/s??I think we've been on KUs radar for a while. Airlines having a 'nosey' has been done before - in the same way, I'm sure that SVs many Hajj flights served us well when deciding to start scheduled services.

This article was from Mar 07: Broader horizons for Kuwait Airways - Travel & Hospitality - ArabianBusiness.com (http://www.arabianbusiness.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9302)

[Vuelo]

Rumour of FR taking up STN route..anyone know anything?

[Betablockeruk]

Air Blue to cut Manchester Capacity
Air Blue will reduce their daily flight to 5 per week from Mid-December.

BHX5DME


To source new Lahore & Islamabad - Sharjah flights from 15/12.

[AldiAl]

Nope.Not heard that one though it always surprised me that FR hadn't jumped in a while back.Whenever I used their Blackpool-Stansted flight it was pretty full outbound.I understand it was inbounds on the 1st service where the loads were not that good and so they pulled it.

Would think they'd stand a better chance from MAN....so fingers crossed!