All Things EMA
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Out on the bike in Northumberland
Posts: 578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
egnxema
cost issues-if the UPS facility is opposite pegasus park then depending how far west it went that would be the extent of taxyway provided, unlikely that extra taxyway would be paid for just to make my life easier!
did the white paper actually say that about extra apron south of the 453? must look out the copy at work!
to go back to the UPS facility, looking out the tower window yesterday Iwas not certain that there is enough flat ground to the northeast-would it be more likely where the old bomb dumps are NE of the radar scanner?
cost issues-if the UPS facility is opposite pegasus park then depending how far west it went that would be the extent of taxyway provided, unlikely that extra taxyway would be paid for just to make my life easier!
did the white paper actually say that about extra apron south of the 453? must look out the copy at work!
to go back to the UPS facility, looking out the tower window yesterday Iwas not certain that there is enough flat ground to the northeast-would it be more likely where the old bomb dumps are NE of the radar scanner?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: DE74
Age: 49
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/group...ion_503595.pdf
Almost Prof.
This is the best image I can find on the suggestion in the White Paper for building south of Cargo West.
On the northern side of the runway, build anything too far west, towards Donington, and it will be see from up to 10 miles away because of the slope down to the Trent. The White Paper suggestion would be less visible, which IMO would reduce public backlash.
So - tell us - is that you on www.nottinghamema.com sat in the Tower with your shades on?
Almost Prof.
This is the best image I can find on the suggestion in the White Paper for building south of Cargo West.
On the northern side of the runway, build anything too far west, towards Donington, and it will be see from up to 10 miles away because of the slope down to the Trent. The White Paper suggestion would be less visible, which IMO would reduce public backlash.
So - tell us - is that you on www.nottinghamema.com sat in the Tower with your shades on?
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Around
Age: 56
Posts: 572
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UPS Superhub EMA
Sounds interesting, but ain't there a couple of hurdles like:
a/ It's not on the continent, which means that integrating rail/air/road (which is one criteria for a superhub) is going to get difficult. For an express carrier, trucking for more than 3 hours is prohibitive. Effectively this means that all freight from the continent must be flown in. CGN if far better located for an integrated superhub.
b/ EMA is single runway; if that runway for some reason is closed you're basically f.ed. Winter ops could also wreck havoc on a single runway operation.
FWIW, the yellow brigade that has me on the payroll are also having superhub ideas, namely in Leipzig. However, before that takes off there are a number of requirements including an autobahn upgrade, construction of a second runway and rail access. Furthermore, LEJ is far more conveniently located, compared to anywhere in the UK, not only for western Europe, but indeed for the fast growing emerging markets in eastern Europe. For our part, EMA takes 3rd place after BRU and CGN, and eventually 4th when/if LEJ kicks off. There is lots of business to be had in the UK, but any hub there is rather limited to offer anything but UK traffic. Same with BGY hub; it's Italy and south eastern Europe only. Indeed, a hub is needed in the UK for any serious integrator, but I can't see how a superhub can be justified.
Just my 2 Euro's worth ....
a/ It's not on the continent, which means that integrating rail/air/road (which is one criteria for a superhub) is going to get difficult. For an express carrier, trucking for more than 3 hours is prohibitive. Effectively this means that all freight from the continent must be flown in. CGN if far better located for an integrated superhub.
b/ EMA is single runway; if that runway for some reason is closed you're basically f.ed. Winter ops could also wreck havoc on a single runway operation.
FWIW, the yellow brigade that has me on the payroll are also having superhub ideas, namely in Leipzig. However, before that takes off there are a number of requirements including an autobahn upgrade, construction of a second runway and rail access. Furthermore, LEJ is far more conveniently located, compared to anywhere in the UK, not only for western Europe, but indeed for the fast growing emerging markets in eastern Europe. For our part, EMA takes 3rd place after BRU and CGN, and eventually 4th when/if LEJ kicks off. There is lots of business to be had in the UK, but any hub there is rather limited to offer anything but UK traffic. Same with BGY hub; it's Italy and south eastern Europe only. Indeed, a hub is needed in the UK for any serious integrator, but I can't see how a superhub can be justified.
Just my 2 Euro's worth ....
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Out on the bike in Northumberland
Posts: 578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FFF
good points, cant disagree with the first point, however regarding the runway-if we need one for traffic reasons then it should be OKed, as for availibility then non weather closures in the 15 years I been at EMA count on fingers of one hand-still operating with a DC8 in the grass at one end! as regards weather then our track record is pretty good-we were open this winter when just about all the other airfields in UK shut for snoclo
good points, cant disagree with the first point, however regarding the runway-if we need one for traffic reasons then it should be OKed, as for availibility then non weather closures in the 15 years I been at EMA count on fingers of one hand-still operating with a DC8 in the grass at one end! as regards weather then our track record is pretty good-we were open this winter when just about all the other airfields in UK shut for snoclo
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe that there's planning restrictions that prohibit permanent buildings on the north side. That is why, I suspect, there's nothing shown on the north side in any of the EMA growth options in the government air transport planning document. If indeed UPS are going to put up more buildings and ramps at NEMA, there's plenty of room inbetween the Pegasus business park and the parallel taxiway on the South side of the runway - where the old aeropark and farm were. Seeing as any decision to allow develop south of the A453 was deferred by the government, I suspect that if UPS is up to anything the south east corner north of the business park and south of the runway (and across the road from their offices) will be where it'll happen.
A
A
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Around
Age: 56
Posts: 572
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Almost
Yes, indeed, EMA has been rather lucky weather wise. However, it is still a bit risky to base a superhub at a single runway airport. Just takes a couple of days of disruption to wreck havoc on a network. Murphy's law and all that 
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: DE74
Age: 49
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seeing as any decision to allow develop south of the A453 was deferred by the government,
Was it? I thought that they had said that a 2nd runway was not viewed as needed, but should things change they would review their position. But as regards expansion of freight and pax, land should be earmarked for this development.
I can fully understand the "Nothing North" policy, but I don't see the A453 as a realistic southern boundary.
But I do agree with you EastMids, UPS would most likely build near Pegasus.
Was it? I thought that they had said that a 2nd runway was not viewed as needed, but should things change they would review their position. But as regards expansion of freight and pax, land should be earmarked for this development.
I can fully understand the "Nothing North" policy, but I don't see the A453 as a realistic southern boundary.
But I do agree with you EastMids, UPS would most likely build near Pegasus.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Out on the bike in Northumberland
Posts: 578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eastmids
that was where I always assumed it would go if anywhere-just keep extending the east cargo eastbound, bearing in mind that in an ideal world the apron would be further south than the present so as to give adequate clearance from the apron taxylane and the alpha for codeE/F to pass (as the west does)
that should still give enough room to put up a sorting facility north of pegasus park
that was where I always assumed it would go if anywhere-just keep extending the east cargo eastbound, bearing in mind that in an ideal world the apron would be further south than the present so as to give adequate clearance from the apron taxylane and the alpha for codeE/F to pass (as the west does)
that should still give enough room to put up a sorting facility north of pegasus park
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: midlands
Age: 46
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all
I am quite posative
a)
there will be no european ups super hub at ema, this is nearly
complete in cologne germany, however ema will be ups 2nd
major hub in europe followed by CDG and MMX.
B)
the hub whatever the size (most say DHL) will be located oposite
pegasus, old aeropark, next to current east apron, building plotting on site was done over a year ago.
as for runways,taxi and aprons we will have to wait and see
like some previous post (should be interesting)
rgds cargohappy
I am quite posative
a)
there will be no european ups super hub at ema, this is nearly
complete in cologne germany, however ema will be ups 2nd
major hub in europe followed by CDG and MMX.
B)
the hub whatever the size (most say DHL) will be located oposite
pegasus, old aeropark, next to current east apron, building plotting on site was done over a year ago.
as for runways,taxi and aprons we will have to wait and see
like some previous post (should be interesting)
rgds cargohappy
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: DE74
Age: 49
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks CargoHappy, that sounds totally logical.
Now, how about the proposed Pax Terminal Extension/New Terminal?
Almost Prof, with Oakley's as cool as yours you must have a bit of info on that?
Now, how about the proposed Pax Terminal Extension/New Terminal?
Almost Prof, with Oakley's as cool as yours you must have a bit of info on that?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Out on the bike in Northumberland
Posts: 578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I assume the idea is to use as much as is there already, the checkin area is perfectly adequate for the time being-I think what is needed is more IDL and gates-and to 'redevelope' the terminal front airside should do that plus give up space for retail as well.
On another note I was very sceptical about the changes to the drop off arrangements outside but they seem to be working well and the new Spar in the terminal is just great-hot bacon rolls at 0300!
On another note I was very sceptical about the changes to the drop off arrangements outside but they seem to be working well and the new Spar in the terminal is just great-hot bacon rolls at 0300!
