Originally Posted by
055166k
Sheffield's problems included subsidence. Even the biggest airports can be affected, for example Burtonwood was the largest US base in Europe. A forty years plus career in aviation at a variety of airports leads me to disagree with your 100+ seating capacity remark......regional airport success for the business community pax depends on frequency and connectivity. As for the runway extension, it will be practically useless without a major upgrade in landing aid and associated lighting.....and the LDA is not being increased anyway. Even now there is still the comical circling approach due lack of Regulated airspace.
Do not understand the logic of starting a new Southampton thread when Southampton-3, and its predecessors served us well.
IMHO it appears that a new thread has already brought with it a number of factually incorrect/misleading statements. I will deal with those above first, the other will be addressed in my next post to another player.
While I do not dispute any subsidence issue with Sheffield City, my perception is that its financial viability came into doubt when operators pulled out due to a lack of Controlled Airspace and provision of a Radar Surveillance service. This resulted in a number of Airproxes involving Sheffield traffic when operating in Class G airspace (aka bandit country!). Interest in using the airport soon diminished.
SOU is in need of the extended declared distances that the runway extension will bring in order to increase the viability of destinations beyond southern Spain and the Balearics. I would however point out that the 02 LDA could well increase, albeit that this would be a bonus beyond the increased TORA/TODA that are sought. Linked to both LDA and TORA is the change to take-off performance calculations afforded by the new contaminated runway criteria that was introduced worldwide in November 2021. Unlike the previous criteria there is now no performance penalty when a runway is reported WET, providing that any water is 3MM or less in depth and the runway surface is such that it does not require declaration of SLIPPERY WET.
Based on evidence seen at SEN the A320's & B738s (presumably SFP) can handle LDA's less than that already available at SOU.
On the subject of upgrades to landing aids and lighting, we have already done that one to death at Southampton-3. Any discussions with current/prospective operators will have probably covered this in that it is impracticable to make significant improvements. So any continued interest will have apparently accepted what is going to be available. Look at LCY's limits!
The "comical circling approach" has also been done to death on Southanpton 2 & 3, what I used to refer to as a Winchester 2 arrival on 20 as you got to see Winchester twice! To their credit SOU's owners are at last looking to resolve this by embarking on an Airspace Change Proposal to extend the CTA to the north. This was temporarily suspended due to Covid, but is imminently about to restart.