In addition to encouraging regular passenger and cargo operators to use Manston as a destination, it would be useful to consider the use of Manston as a primary diversion airport for the extremely busy and slot constrained London area.
The temporary closure of any of the big 4 London airports puts a significant strain on the remaining resources. The CAA already stipulate Heathrow should not be nominated as a diversion airport for the London area, as it is already at capacity. Gatwick is the second busiest single runway airport in the world and regularly has flow rates imposed to limit traffic flows at peak times of the day. Luton has limited apron capacity at certain times of the day, leaving only Stansted to cope with diversions. Stansted is already very busy with base operators and so cannot handle multiple diversions for long periods.
It would require a national infrastructure policy and a suitable mechanism for funding, but nominating London Manston as a primary diversion airport would have a number of positive benefits:
1. Making Manston the primary diversionary airport for any aircraft with a hijack situation (hopefully relatively rare events nowadays) would allow the high levels of traffic using Stansted to continue uninterrupted. Manston is remote enough to allow the appropriate security services to deal with terrorist incidents away from the major hubs and with minimum disruption to surrounding communities. Kent Police would have to take over any existing activities performed by Essex Police.
2. Airlines using other London airports would be able to nominate London Manston as primary H24 diversionary airport and thereby plan fuel reserves with minimum track miles and eliminate the necessity for holding, thereby reducing required fuel reserves. Terminal facilities and onward ground transport would have to be sufficient for diverted flights. It would provide an environmental benefit from the need to carry and burn less fuel.
3. Aircraft reporting significant or high risk technical emergencies (blown tyre on take-off, undercarriage fault) would be able to divert and avoid blocking the main runways at the other 5 London hub airports. Thereby avoiding any extensive period of closure at the busier airports. Sufficient shared engineering support and ground handling support could be allocated to London Manston in order to clear the runway and move the aircraft to a suitable area for repair. The only downside would be the number of occasions when it would have been preferable to land at the home base airport where the technical fault was not significant, immediate engineering support was locally available and suitable hangar facilities were available had the aircraft landed at its intended destination.
There could be some innovative solution to funding, whereby those aircraft operators choosing to nominate London Manston as an alternate airport in the Air Traffic Flight Plan would be required to pay a nominal fee to do so. The airport operator would then have a significant revenue stream with virtually every flight to the London airports nominating London Manston as diversion, so the total fees would be sufficient to provide the necessary diversion facilities and make a profitable return to allow further investment in airport facilities. A significant revenue stream for relatively few aircraft movements. But a win-win situation for both airlines and airport operators alike.