I would concede that given the combination of impending recession/depression, the enforced closure periods due to lack of air traffic controllers and the tempting offer that has rumoured to have been tabled by the BHX managenment that at least in the short term the future of passenger flights at CVT is anything but rosy and that the chance of Thomsonfly decamping has moved from possible to probable.
However in what I strongly suspect will be a futile effort to engender empathy for those whose livelihoods depend on the CVt operation from those at the other end of the A45 can I offer the following analogy.
1. It has been stated that Thomsonfly should abandon Coventry in favour of Birmingham because it can be argued that as a proportion of the distance flown the distance between the two airports is relatively modest, Thomsonfly has a bigger operation at Birmingham in any case, the terminal facilities on offer at Birmingham are more extensive and the Birmingham runway unlike the Coventry one does not place any restrictions on the sort of aircraft that can operate the routes.
2. It could be stated that Air india should make their movement from Birmingham to Heathrow permanent because it can be argued that as a proportion of the distance flown the distance betwen the two airports is relatively modest, Air India have always had a bigger operation at Heathrow in any case, the terminal facilities on offer at Heathrow are more extensive and the Heathrow runway unlike the Birmingham one does not place any restriction on the sort of aircraft that can operate the routes.
Before I get lambasted by the BHX centric I think both arguments are equally spurious.