I see the apron regularly and the airport is NOT permanently full for days on end. Yes, there are plenty of parked-up aircraft, but that is not the same thing as 'full'. If the airport were actually "full" as you say, it would be necessary to hold each inbound flight until a departing aircraft vacates a stand for it, wouldn't it? That is clearly not required, as the airport is not "full". Some (vacant) stands may indeed be set aside for an incoming flight, but not all of them. And not all day - a 'splash-and-dash' could certainly be accommodated in the middle of the day. Most diverted flights don't require contact stands anyway. And that is why a dynamic diversion policy should apply. The alternative reflects the lamentable "do not disturb" mentality which Manchester Airport highlighted to great effect when challenging the Department of Transport all those years ago.
Not every diversion can be accepted. We all recognise that. But
some certainly can. I strongly suspect that those aforementioned Jet2's could have been accommodated. And what about smaller aircraft such as Citations and Learjets? A catch-all blanket no-divs notam prevents them from enquiring about access by default also.
A dynamic diversion policy allows for aircraft which genuinely cannot be accommodated to be turned away. But those which can be accommodated can be accepted. That is a good thing, though the "not my problem" brigade clearly need some convincing. Almost all other major airports operate a dynamic diversions policy without issue. But perhaps this is another example of the "Manchester way" alone being right beyond question, and every other major airport being incompetent without realising it.
the issue of stand capacity is a very real. I experience this first hand on a regular basis …
Yes, on a regular basis. That means not permanently. Which is why a dynamic policy should apply. Scope to use discretion is a good thing in a successful business.