Originally Posted by
highwideandugly
So..the great and respectful DVTM movements site listed one KLM arrival and 2 departing KLM flights today.
Plus 2 Cherokee movements today.
Im certainly not an economics expert…but when you compare Doncaster flights and movements on closure..to this….can someone please explain how the airport is financially viable and Doncaster isn’t?
Economies of scale. For a start KLM do not need the fire cover that a 737 or A320 requires. It probably has much lower overheads due to not being a large facility with H24 operations handling 737 sized aircraft multiple times per day, it also has a smaller footprint with more ancillary business on site that helps to pay the bills. Humberside currently operates to reduced operating hours and has the necessary fire and ATC cover out of hours when required for KLM or biz jet traffic. It’s being run on a shoe string with minimal staffing levels. Presumably Teesside is employing the same?
That said, it’s still losing the same amount as DSA was, just that the Regional Mayor has purchased it on a mandate to turn it around, jury still out whether this has happened or not.
Id be interested to know just how much the cost of handling 737 sized passenger aircraft has increased in the last 20 years since the days of IT Charter flights. Teesside and Humberside both did well in this regard back then, obviously volume is the name of the game now, and leisure airlines favour larger bases at fewer airports, however have the costs of handling these types of flights increased so much as to price out the smaller airports completely?