HUMBERSIDE

[aeulad]

The Excel flights ARE going ahead, there will be an announcement around the 19th. The deal was only finalised last week, so negotiations WERE still underway when the flights went on sale at the freedomflights website. Flights would not be put on the website 'by mistake' this would be highly unproffessional.

Excel have asked HUY to hold off with the announcement, probably to give the Cardiff announcement it's air time.

Jet2 will have been put off by the based XL a/c, it is a pity, but HUY will continue to offer niche services. Next year HUY will have more charter destinations that LBA and MME.

Regards

Mike

[circseam]

That doesn't leave many UK based, low cost (or in 7006 Fan speak "Cheapie flights") operators left to entice to HUY, from what I've read on this forum, Jet2 have followed Ryanair's decision in not wanting to operate from HUY.

But at least we have a "Bear In The Air" located at the airport, movements will go through the roof (Tongue In cheek Comment)

How is the hangar development going, any news as to whom (as in companies) are being approached to utilise it?

7006 Fan - Good to see your views are as popular as ever, maybe you should turn your attentions to spotting river craft on the River Ancholme, maybe you could entice scheduuled full service boats as obviously charter and scheduled low cost are beneath someone of your stature.

[aeulad]

Apparently flybe. are not interested in HUY anymore

With Jet2 and flybe. out of the running, I don't think HUY will ever get a lo-co. The only suitable airlines now as far as I can see are EUjet or Air Southwest.

Guess we will stick to full fares and charter in the main. Not neccessarily a bad thing mind

Summer 2006's charter list will look something like this:

Palma
Mahon
Ibiza
Tenerife
Las Palmas
Arrecife
Fuerteventura
Alicante
Malaga
Faro
Larnaca
Paphos
Corfu
Heraklion
Rhodes
Zakynthos
Antalya
Bodrum
Dalaman
Bourgas
Jersey

Regards

Mike

[airhumberside]

Apparently flybe. are not interested in HUY anymore

What about DSA?

[7006 fan]

Hotel Uniform Yankee

If that is the case, and it is all a mistake and an error, why is Humberside still on the XL web site with the same flights as is suggested are the new routes? I would have thought a professional organisation such as XL would continue to offer something they were not going to provide. it would surely be bad press for them to do so.
Amazing how everyone here knows what is happening at Humberside, more so than those 'in the know' at Humberside. When I have spoken to anyone 'in the' they have 'counted nothing in or out', but I do know they will not commit financial suicide just to fly people for less than nothing. (take a look at the Valuation Office web site, the airport has to find £300,000 for business rates and what do business rates do ...bogall, so who pays that!!!)
Tunisia is being advertised for 2006, and that one was dismissed by the great and good, and Tunisia has not been plastered all over the front page of the ScunnyT or HDM.
Maybe their method of selling is different to 'in your face'.?



Circseam,

I would call LHR-VIE-LHR @ £150 on time each way with Austrian good value full service (hot meal, newspaper and drinks included)
I would call DSA-PRG-DSA @ £140 with delays on "lo-co" a mug's game. (there is a golden rule...you don't get something for nothing...).
I have got nothing against lo-co, just wish it was not visualised as the be all and end all of aviation. Bit like going to Fortnum & Mason and saying their restaurant is crap because they don't do beans on toast for a £1, coz the greasy round the corner does!

Cheers Mike but...
You missed Tunisia!!
And of course the boring AMS to points global (Alaska to Australia, all connections within 1 hour's reach -which is quicker than driving to MAN!!!)

[terrywilcox]

humberside etc

7006 fan. re your comparison with LHR on price with the loco. Hope you appreciate that to travel to London for the flight from our area adds a little to the cost. Personally I would much rather fly from HUY on ANY flight than from LHR.

[circseam]

7006 Fan - The publics view of low cost is their cheap price compared to legacy carriers, as we both know the cheapness of these tickets is on a sliding scale, the longer you advance book the chaeaper the price but my point is theyre are bargains to be had and unlike yourself, I dont mind the flight as long as the price is right.

As for DSA, have now flown twice and thompson fly has been great on both ocasions, the pity is the flights from DSA are not available at HUY.......

And by the way, give me a greasy spoon any day

[7006 fan]

I agree with you Terry, I unfortunately have to do the LHR slog on a regular basis, but that is where lthe 'daan saff' guys get the best of both worlds, shame we can't get the same up here.
I always wonder why, in a country so small, travel is fixated with LONDON -OK it is the Capital but from a business point of view there should be loads of little air shuttles flying about, such as A1 Airways and so forth buzzing about the skies. Why not...coz BAA charge stack loads at peak time. Would love to see HUY-LGW or DSA-LGW, because I would prefer a 1 hour flight in a 1900T than 4 hours in car, providing the costs were not astronomic, say £50 e/w?, what is that 10 pax e/w £500, would an airline make money, dunno pssibly Stelois or Micky could, no idea!
I want to see the area grow and get better, the possibility of reducing unemployment, creating new jobs and so forth is exciting, providing the airports work together , but there seems to be a political (Political) bias in the direction of S Yorks, is that because it is Yorkshire Forward, or Yorkshire 'and the Humber' I do not know, but N. Lincs tends to be considered as an 'add-on' by the NGO's.



Circseam,
the greasy spoon. Had a Fortnum's Hamper for Christmas once, I was so disappointed, the pate was tasteless, biscuits dry and so forth, so even with all that money things are not a success, but 'devil and deep blue sea' spring to mind.
I just know that should I use a lo-co, I will get delayed left right and centre (it is my destiny!). Like I go shopping and think 'err don't like that queue, I'll go here', then spend 20 minutes whilst each product from the person in front has to be itemised. Some of us are destined for that life

[jumpseater]

Inconsistencies

7006 wrote
'I have got nothing against lo-co, just wish it was not visualised as the be all and end all of aviation'
Yet a few posts earlier had written,
'I have lost count of the number of, for clarity, I shall refer to them as full service flights, I have taken. As to charter, I spent 4 hours in a seat designed for someone of 4'6" not 6', suprised I did not get DVT. Cheapie flights? Being treated like cattle, free for all seats, travellers in various states of inebriation/undress, vulgar uncooth behaviour, inumerous delays, people thinking it is clever to be the last one on and expecting applause from the other pax -motor-coach travel is more appealing.'
So that'll be an unbiased opinion then based on one lo-co flight and one charter......

I would call LHR-VIE-LHR @ £150 on time each way with Austrian good value full service (hot meal, newspaper and drinks included)
I would call DSA-PRG-DSA @ £140 with delays on "lo-co" a mug's game. (there is a golden rule...you don't get something for nothing...).
And you're not comparing like with like are you?, why not? What and where en-route, was the reason behind the PRG delay? Were the routes flown identical? Why haven't you compared LHR-PRG? If the PRG delay is an arrival/departure restriction where is your operational advantage for your scheduled full service carrier over your lo-co scheduled carrier? Which European routes do you frequently travel on then?
Why not...coz BAA charge stack loads at peak time, well why shouldnt they? they're in business to make a profit!.
Would love to see HUY-LGW or DSA-LGW, erm theres the issue of available runway slots too, and I see you'd like a lo-cost feeder service (scheduled I presume) to LGW in a 1900T for £50.00, I was wondering if you were being serious, but reading that I realise you do have a sense of humour, bring it on matey....
Meanwhile back on planet earth there's a regional airport on the coast surrounded by airports with better facilities and bigger catchment areas, that people have to drive past to get to the airport on the coast, thats likely to remain a small regional airport....

[7006 fan]

Jumpseater,
It is exactly what the passenger wants, that is my point. They want to fly for all. In the ScunnyT the other day; following that 'daft as a brush' article about 'Lincolnshire International', their reporter went out on thestreet to get 'opinions' one theme that was apparent
"it's a good idea because we will get cheaper flights...!!!" What the are these people on.
And only the previous day in the ScunnyT there was an article that (if one straight-line depreciates the numbers) indicated an aircraft produces 13,000 Tonnes of CO2 per flight on a 1000-1500 mile route. I have seen these figures before (The Saturday Times, no less), so let's all say " the environment, just give us cheap flights, so we can enjoy exploiting cheap countries, before we turn the world into a huge great rubbish tip full of our 'throw away society' crap"
Bring on the £1.99 flight to JFK, they will sell like hot cakes.
Oh not forgetting the 10p burger brought to you by courtesy of a few murdered pygmies (who no-one gives a for anyway) and a bit of rain-forest, it's OK I will plant some Cyprus Leylandia to assuage my conscience.
And of course must have those 1p trainers with the flash name on, brought to you by 3, illiterrate 7 year olds working for a grain of rice a day.
That is what cheap is all about.

[jumpseater]

erm.....
So are you saying that lo-co is assisting in world poverty? and that cheap flights should be restricted, thus making them available only to the more privelidged. Well that'll reduce the amount of flights even more at regional airports and create even more difficulty for them to survive....
I'll have some of that stuff you're on please, probably brought to you by 3, illiterrate 7 year olds working for a grain of rice a day.

[7006 fan]

No, I do suggest that lo-co is a big contributor, within aviation, to global warming. Most of the lo-co flights are in the 2-2.5 hour area of time, which is understood to be the most inefficent operating time for a jet engine i.e. it has not really warmed up properly (just like a car, the worst fuel consumption and inefficient burning of fuel is in the first 30 odd miles).
And what is wrong with restricting air travel to those who can afford it, diamonds are restricted to those who can afford it, so is a large mansion house, a Maserati/Lamborgini, first class rail fares or do we sugget that because of consumer demand, all these items should be available to all.
Thinking about it we should really all exist in a Communist/Socialist state, as air travel was nearly free in Russia, the state provided and everyone had a flat provided by the state, and a little patch of ground on the outskirts of town for their Dacha, bread queues were Western propaganda and so on.
Consumer choice is a weak expression used by monopolistic suppliers as a way of getting rid of the competition. The big supermarkets offer choice by bankrupting sole traders to create a market controlled by themselves. Fuel is a cartel, so is coffee production, over produce coffee and the price falls, so burn the supplies to keep the price high.
British farmers are being bankrupted by 'Consumer Choice' A leg of lamb costs about £10, farmers can't even sell a lamb at market for that sort of money.
That is what lo-co does to an airport, forces down the cost so that staff have to be sacked/laid-off to keep costs down.
Ryanair say they do not need flashy terminals and will not pay proper fees, so why do they use them, why not use some GA field somewhere, because if Airports did a lo-co on the lo-co, pax would get really p**sed off. Imagine catching a flight from a barn. That is what the pricing structure of Lo-co should accept (nothing for nothing).

[MrDearne]

And what is wrong with restricting air travel to those who can afford it, diamonds are restricted to those who can afford it, so is a large mansion house, a Maserati/Lamborgini, first class rail fares or do we sugget that because of consumer demand, all these items should be available to all.

The rich man at his castle, the poor man at his gate.
Why not go the whole hogg and re-introduce workhouses.
I think your on the wrong board 7006 fan. Search carefully and I am sure you'll find a Thatcher's A*** licking Forum somewhere.
Do you know what is even more sad, you actually believe your own crap.

[jumpseater]

'7006'
'Most of the lo-co flights are in the 2-2.5 hour area of time, which is understood to be the most inefficent operating time for a jet engine i.e. it has not really warmed up properly'

Oh dear oh dear oh dear....... If you'd like to put a car analogy to this, the jet engine uses the choke to enrich the fuel mix for a few seconds during start up. It then returns to the normal lean burn process. Warming up indeed... oh you are a card 7006.....

Oh and if you think lo-co's have forced or kept ground staff wages low at airports, that firmly indicates to me just how little you know about our industry.

[7006 fan]

Mr Dearne
I hated Maggie and ilk. She was the one that started all this consumer value crap in the first place, by selling off the family silver, shutting down the mines and buying coal from abroad, so do not call me an a*se licking Thatcherite.!!
If you had read my post carefully you would have realised that I consider capitalist exploitation to be abhorrent. But Jumpseater sums up the consumer attitude quite well with his support of 3 7year olds on a grain of rice for his smart trainers.
Why then, if aviation is so environmentally friendly, is it recognised as one of the greatest polluters of the earth! How many litres of Avtur (which is just a purer form of deisel) does your average holiday charter use per flight 5-6,000? What happens to all the particulates, the benzene the CO2, the CO, the soot etc, I know, the good fairy magics it away of course I had forgotten about that, silly me. Watch a plane take off and look at the crap that comes out of the exhaust and once up look at all the con-trails they are not clouds but pollution.
Not saying ban flying, just wish people would admit it that's all.

Or is Bush right, global warming is just a state of mind. Personally I do not believe anything 'the chimp' says, when I can understand what he is burbling on about that is.

[jumpseater]

I realise you're beginning to lose the thread here old chap as you've now managed to drag Humberside into the third world and abject poverty, but please do me the honour of quoting me the part where I made mention of my ' support of 3 7year olds on a grain of rice for my smart trainers'. I must have missed it laughing at the engine warming up joke. It was a joke wasn't it?

In my professional career I have done quite a bit on protecting the environment from aviation, I spent over 6 years doing it. I note that Humberside doesn't even think fit to give environment the most cursory mention on its web site, let alone have a publicly available policy on it.

'Why then, if aviation is so environmentally friendly, is it recognised as one of the greatest polluters of the earth!'. Well whilst not decrying aviations impact, I think you'll find the 'car' and 'industry' are a bit of a bigger problem. So much so that you'll find that the biggest polluter around airports are the very vehicles that bring the passengers etc to the terminals. Diffusion tubes at airports I have dealt with showed consistently higher amounts of particulate matter etc 'airside' rather than 'landside', which indicated to us, that the 'crap that comes out of the exhaust', as you so eloquently put it, needed addressing through planning issues, to encourage the use of public transport, as the greater pollution risk in terms of emissions was in fact largely outside the fence.

[airhumberside]

What does half this stuff have to do with HUY?

[jumpseater]

No idea mate, 7006 suddenly 'went native' and ended up buying trainers for 1p, and then some dead pygmies turned up with a burger apparently, if I read his ramblings correctly.

[onion]

Hey leave Maggie Thatcher out of this, she's a legend.
7006 you do talk some c**p sometimes.
Yes lo-co do try and push their luck at airports, but on the whole I think you'll find that many an airport wouldn't last without them now. Look at Stansted they must make money yet probably 95% of their movements are lo-co.
On the issue of contributing to the global warming effect, yes aircraft do pollute but not as much as cars would if every person drove to where they are going.
The other thing is that in the UK aviation pays 11euros to the public budget for every 1000 passenger km travelled. On the other hand for every 1000 passenger km travelled on a train cost the public budget 35euros. This is similar in other european countries as well so is not just a one off.
Another interesting fact is that aircraft travelling at altitude actually create ozone and so help close the wholes in the ozone layer.
Also the particules in all fuels that are unburt are actually stopping the global warming effect as they reflect heat from the sun. So we have the situation where by if tomorrow we all stopped burning any fuels the global warming effect would increase over night (this has been scientifically proven).
I'm not saying we should keep polluting the planet far from it but the problem is that with cleaner fuels being developed all the time we have the situation where by the global warming effects will gradually increase. But if we stop burning tomorrow the planet will warm up even quicker. We have reached the stage where by we a damned if we do and damned if we don't.
Also how do lo-co help create world poverty? Remember aircraft use components from all over the world. For instance Boeing have factories and use suppliers in China which ok probably don't pay their work force as much as in the USA but don't pay them a pittance compared to what other workers in China will be on.
Oil comes from all over the world but more and more is coming from Africa and again those employed in it's extraction will be payed very well compared to their nations average. Think of all the fabrics for seats some must come from places like Afica and Asia where the majority of poorer nations are.
What about those lo co in places like India that are employing people in skilled jobs, can't see that these are contributing to global poverty.
I could go on but am now getting bore and fustrated at someone so narrow minded as 7006

[Jamesair]

You have my sympathy AirHumberside....that kind of stuff needs to be on an "anti-aviation" forum.