Guernsey Airport Runway
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guernsey Airport Runway
There is a great deal of controversy in Guernsey (GCI) as to whether the runway should / needs to be extended to accomodate aircraft such as the 145 etc.
Some claim there is no need to extend the runway, others seem to think that services other than to London and south Coast will suffer if the runway is not extended.
It will be interesting to have the views of professional pilots on this matter. It seems that Gatwick and South Coast flights are not the problem but flights from the Midlands, North of England etc might well be precluded from operating in Guernsey due to runway length.
Any views from pilots?
Some claim there is no need to extend the runway, others seem to think that services other than to London and south Coast will suffer if the runway is not extended.
It will be interesting to have the views of professional pilots on this matter. It seems that Gatwick and South Coast flights are not the problem but flights from the Midlands, North of England etc might well be precluded from operating in Guernsey due to runway length.
Any views from pilots?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Position info not valid
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Presumably the bunch of politicians that are sat on the Airport fence are not the same ones that got stuck in and sorted the bus transport system out-some recent incidents at GCI would seem to indicate that a bit more runway wouldnt harm anybody specialy on a dark and windy night. I think one of the grave dangers here is that unless GCI has a runway and Airport that meets as many operators requirements as possible it may well find itself without many of the UK connections it has enjoyed in the past.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Sadly almost certainly the only thing that will matter is whether the performance numbers work for the aircraft that currently operate. History seems to show that airports the world over seem to be unable to plan realistically and won't spend money on infrastructure until the need actually exists. While there are some good reasons for this - its stupid to spend money if you don't need to - the ben counters often seem to be oblivious to obvious until its too late. Given the lead time to build new runways or terminals, by the time its agreed that something is needed the airport has often missed the commercial opportunity!
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Kalgoorlie, W.A. , Australia
Age: 86
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fr8t M8te and they only needed grass, though knew someone who over ran in a Valetta on a stickey wicket!
[ 28 December 2001: Message edited by: Pom Pax ]</p>
[ 28 December 2001: Message edited by: Pom Pax ]</p>
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South of Watford
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eventually the runway at GCI will be a limiting factor. If the island wants to maintain direct services rather than route through JER it will have to start addressing the problem.
The demise of the RJX means that the end of jet STOL aircraft is coming to an end. Once the 146/RJ airframes start being retired then the problem will become more apparent. The A318 is 2+ years off(if at all) and from what I've seen and heard of the 318s performance figures it's derated engines give it performance limitations on departure. In fact the A319 might be more capable.
Of course from the airlines perspective is the need to operate these specialised aircraft to service a few airports when these aircraft are a compromise in terms of economy/payload. So GCI may find itself being served by niche operators or turbo prop aircraft whilst their nearest neighbour is enjoying the benefits of greater choise, more direct flight and greater competition.
So GCI you need to decide whether to move with the times or accept the higher cost of niche operators. And guess who pays for the higher cost?
The demise of the RJX means that the end of jet STOL aircraft is coming to an end. Once the 146/RJ airframes start being retired then the problem will become more apparent. The A318 is 2+ years off(if at all) and from what I've seen and heard of the 318s performance figures it's derated engines give it performance limitations on departure. In fact the A319 might be more capable.
Of course from the airlines perspective is the need to operate these specialised aircraft to service a few airports when these aircraft are a compromise in terms of economy/payload. So GCI may find itself being served by niche operators or turbo prop aircraft whilst their nearest neighbour is enjoying the benefits of greater choise, more direct flight and greater competition.
So GCI you need to decide whether to move with the times or accept the higher cost of niche operators. And guess who pays for the higher cost?
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I jumpseated an ancient F27 (G-BMAP) out of there years ago. There didn't seem to be much runway left unused by the time we unstuck.
SSD
[ 01 January 2002: Message edited by: Shaggy Sheep Driver ]</p>
SSD
[ 01 January 2002: Message edited by: Shaggy Sheep Driver ]</p>
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: a fence in the sun
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do the manufacturers build aircraft which are
(a) right for the route, and
(b) can't use the runways?
There is little evidence of genuine improvement in the design of transport aircraft - this is the crux of the matter here, not the 'need' to lengthen the runway at GCI to 'accommodate' new aircraft which need more runway than the 100 plus seaters of old?
GCI was always just as much 'fantasy island' as JER - often more so. I hope that the island continues to be well-served.
The villains of the piece are the likes of Embraer, not the States! (And the purchasers of said equipment, happy to accept 'new' aircraft which don't perform as well as 'old' ones!)
(a) right for the route, and
(b) can't use the runways?
There is little evidence of genuine improvement in the design of transport aircraft - this is the crux of the matter here, not the 'need' to lengthen the runway at GCI to 'accommodate' new aircraft which need more runway than the 100 plus seaters of old?
GCI was always just as much 'fantasy island' as JER - often more so. I hope that the island continues to be well-served.
The villains of the piece are the likes of Embraer, not the States! (And the purchasers of said equipment, happy to accept 'new' aircraft which don't perform as well as 'old' ones!)
Death Cruiser Flight Crew
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Vaucluse, France.
Posts: 613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Twenty five years ago, BEA used to operate the Merchantman into Guernsey with the tyre pressures lowered. Mind you, on one famous occasion, they also put a TriStar into Jersey, to pick up a couple of hundred fog-delayed pax. Pity about none of the steps being tall enough to reach the door sills...
