Lots to discuss here. GIP have shown themselves to be masters at squeezing the proverbial quart into a pint pot. At EDI this has been done with a mish mash of terminal bolt ons. At LGW it has been done by achieving a considerable increase in the declared capacity of its single runway. In the 1990s I used to participate in the bi annual runway capacity meetings at LGW. These consisted of representatives from ATC, the airport operator, the principal airlines (operating at LGW) and the Scheduling Committee. Obviously safety was the number one concern but thereafter we looked at the modelled effect that increasing runway capacity would have on delays. In general, naturally the airport operator wanted the maximum possible number of movements allowed as this translated directly into revenue for them. The airlines also wanted increased capacity as that meant more slots available, but not at the expense of too much of an increase in delays. We were ecstatic, and highly impressed by ATC, when we managed in the 1990s to get a couple of hours each day declared at 40 movements (previously the maximum was in the 30s). Since then the declared capacity has steadily increased and now peak hours are coordinated to 55 movements. The effect of this is obvious to anyone who travels regularly from LGW - you frequently sit in a queue of departing aircraft for over 30 minutes. As the domestic route I travel on most often is LGWEDI and vv I get the full GIP experience - delays at LGW and inadequate terminal facilities at EDI. Suffice to say I am no fan of GIP.
So what does this mean for EDI in the future? IMHO there is no way GIP will invest in significant terminal expansion (and the idea of knocking it down and rebuilding from scratch is a pipe dream). This is not the GIP model which is, again IMHO, to pump up the asset and sell it on. I cannot see any other source of private equity undertaking massive terminal expansion. I think Holyrood getting involved with any expansion is a non starter. The owners of GLA would scream unfair competition, Nicola is in hoc to the Greens and airport expansion does not fit with the Green agenda and anyway, Scotland has loads of airport capacity, just not necessarily in the right place (but that’s the case with UK airport capacity in general).
My best guess is that EDI will continue to muddle along with a bit of bolt on capacity here and there. If growth continues it will eventually have to be fully coordinated but based primarily on terminal capacity rather than runway capacity. Airlines wishing to add flights will either have to accept sub optimal timings or overflow, presumably to GLA or NCL (while they wait for slots at EDI to become available).
Finally, I agree that this thread is a bit spotter orientated at times which is obvious from some of the rather naive comments posted. But don’t knock the spotters - I started as one in the 1960s and I could name quite a few senior managers in UK airlines who did the same. It’s a tough industry and it helps if you have an enthusiasm for it. After all, you’re (hopefully) going to work for a large chunk of your adult life and it’s much nicer to do something you enjoy.
Last edited by willy wombat; 18th Dec 2022 at 07:32.
Reason: Punctuation