Originally Posted by
destinationsky
I am still struggling to understand why people think that EZY are the saviours in all this?! There are no routes that would suit their business model and if Flybe etc could not fill an aircraft with 70-80 seats, how would you fill an Airbus with double that? With the global airline industry suffering due to coronavirus, I would highly doubt that any airline the size of EZY would commit to anything new for at least 6-8 months.
Ref the runway extension, don't bank on it. Any major infrastructure project will now be expected to demonstrate how it complies with the Paris Accord otherwise it will be very difficult to pass any judicial review. We only have to look at the delay to LHR R3. The starter strip would in theory lead to an increase in movements, a shift in traffic and different operational characteristics which would all lead to increase in co2, NOx, noise etc. The airports planning application was woeful in mitigating any of these aspects. The airport will struggle to get out of this one and it is sadly a result of to much reliance on one carrier. No matter what the management do now, it will be a struggle.
With that logic perhaps you can explain how EZY and FR exist today? There would have been no market at any airport for their business model before they existed, and some how they became the massive operations they are today. Hampshire is one of the most wealthiest counties in the country, and a large part of LGW's traffic comes from here. LGW like most London airports are slot restricted, hence growth at SEN. You only have to look at what routes EZY and FR are opening at SEN to see what they would do at SOU. BE's business model was completely different, and the fairs were double if not triple what a low cost operator would charge. BE was also badly run so you cannot use it's failure as an example of there not being a market.
I agree with you that the runway extension looks unlikely but not impossible.