Originally Posted by
OzzyOzBorn
We can argue about the extent to which this would hold true, but it will be a compelling argument for change and we know that the airport in it's present form is an unsustainable loss-maker.
Some valid points. Too many contributors here and across the forum on airport matters are shallow thinkers. Airport = passenger terminal, with no passengers it’s not an airport, therefore it can’t make money.
Well in DSA’s case taking your logistics point, with a repurposed terminal and no holiday/schedule traffic, you have a turn key 24/7 short to long range logistics centric airport for that industry. Not only does it have easy access to the M1 corridor, there’s the A1/M18/M62 links even closer. The terminal could be re-introduced 5-10 years down the line if the business case warrants it. In the meantime it can be used as a commercial space. If cargo only the terminal stands can service something like 5x 767’s simultaneously or multiples of 737’s and other cargo types. Remove the passenger terminal element you have an immediate massive financial saving apart from care and maintenance. Executive charter traffic can still use the airport with a small dedicated terminal giving speed and privacy/security for those clients. Take away ‘passenger’ flights you save a significant financial outlay immediately, and still have a unique facility for the north East Midlands. With no disrespect to LBA or HUY, neither of those sites could offer that same flexibility now, or in the future.