The TP is actually a very impressive and complex undertaking. Given MAN's need to remain operational throughout the construction period, the TP will be completed in phases over 10 years. That is pretty good considering full operations continuing at the airport throughout. No major construction project of this size - even in a sterile environment - appears in days. As you say, the MAN TP probably would be paused in the event of a major recession. That is actually one of the advantages of the modular approach. Flexibility is a good thing in a highly-volatile business such as commercial aviation. And if recession does strike, don't expect STN to be immune from defensive measures to protect revenue either.
T2(Phase 1) at LHR which I think was somewhat bigger and complicated was done in half the time. If MAN got anything like T2 I am sure we would be delighted and we live in hope.
I am not a poster, on this site as such but having had the misfortune to have used Stansted a few times in recent years i have to say i see very little scope for this airport to expand and pull in legacy carriers, especially since Gatwick, cant hold on to them for too long.
You obviously haven't been to STN recently?
I have had the mispleasure of traveling through STN twice since August 2015, and I would go as far to say I'd rather use T3 at MAN, and I'm not a fan of T3 either. I just hope that as STN has just been remodelled by MAG, it isn't a sign of what the expansion of T2 will look.
Yes I have been recently as I now live within the catchment area and have to listen to Andrew Harrison at least twice a week on the BBC News. However the last time I flew through STN was over 40 years ago so can't speak directly from experience from a PAX point of view but I did make a stop there 6 years ago.. I nonetheless think that even landside
STN has advantages over T1 T2 and T3 at MAN. STN is far superior airside.
Don't get me wrong I am a huge MAN supporter and have flown more times from there than anywhere else. I also get so frustrated with the London Centric nature of this Country. I was born in London and spent over half of my working life living and working there but grew up in Stockport and spent many hours at MAN in the 1960s.
I would love MAN to grow in the way we all hope. However I feel that to do that well we must get the infrastructure right which at present it isn't for an airport of its size. Airside needs major work. Some of it was promised some years back but it wasn't done. Others cant be done until Pier C and part at least of A have gone. Unlike others I don't feel a full length taxiway for R2 is really required as there would be little gain. What I would prefer is the Dubai set up which would mean better use and increased capacity,
However the PAX don't see the airside they only see landside and the terminals.The TP is to be welcomed but it falls short of what ideally is needed. I also feel that it could be cut back or paused at each phase very quickly.
STN was a distraction for MAG and to the detriment of MAN and may continue to be so because of the "London" tag. The TP should have been in hand a few years ago but because of the STN distraction and the need to keep the Australians happy who lets face it were only interested because of STN it didn't come forward quick enough.
Stand Capacity at MAN is dire and you can't get expansion without the capacity. The TP is conflicting on the number of extra stands. The Planning application says only 1 extra. That I think means 1 more over what there is already on the ground and those already consented to but not yet built and takes account of those lost from Pier C but not A which is more long term. That I think could be up to an extra 20 overall but that is some years off and we really need them now.
LAX_LHR I know you have posted elsewhere on the start dates for new and increased services but I think a number of those are yet to be confirmed. TAP still seems to be 11 per week at present.