COVENTRY
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
From: Coventry
ST,
http://tinyurl.com/4hsty
"A look at plans to develop an international airport in the Warwickshire countryside"
That would sound like they were referring to the Rugby proposals!
CVT is surrounded by a crisp factory, a car plant, two major trunkroads and a sewage works. And let's not pretend that Stoneleigh is anything other than a dormitory village for Leamington and Coventry.
which have led to a furious battle between a rural district council
You mean Warwick District Council, the majority of who's residents live in the TOWNS of Royal Leamington Spa (just 35 opponents to the airport, about 20 in favour; Warwick - 4 against and Kenilworth - 6 against & 10 in favour).
and a huge travel company.
Well, except that the opposition was just as strong when Air Atlantique still had the lease.
Good old BBC impartiality again!
Subject:
Factual; Documentaries
http://tinyurl.com/4hsty
"A look at plans to develop an international airport in the Warwickshire countryside"
That would sound like they were referring to the Rugby proposals!
CVT is surrounded by a crisp factory, a car plant, two major trunkroads and a sewage works. And let's not pretend that Stoneleigh is anything other than a dormitory village for Leamington and Coventry.
which have led to a furious battle between a rural district council
You mean Warwick District Council, the majority of who's residents live in the TOWNS of Royal Leamington Spa (just 35 opponents to the airport, about 20 in favour; Warwick - 4 against and Kenilworth - 6 against & 10 in favour).
and a huge travel company.
Well, except that the opposition was just as strong when Air Atlantique still had the lease.
Good old BBC impartiality again!
Subject:
Factual; Documentaries
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
From: Coventry
A few updates on the inquiry & election candidates:
WDC now complaining because Cov City Council has granted permission for car parking, which they say should be referred to the Secretary of State, as it needs an ES (environmental statement), but CCC say not needed because it is only minor change of use, considering most of the industrial units to the north of the airport are for vehicle storage of some kind.
WDC also insisting that car park adjacent to terminal can't be acceptable under PDRs, as it too should be considered as part of whole development, and therefore needs an ES, even though it isn't rocket science to point out that the environmental impact of parking next to the terminal, instead of driving through Baginton village, to catch a shuttle bus which then takes you through that same village, only to run back through village again empty; is overwhelming positive. Doh!
WDC Chief Executive, Mike Duffett, slated earlier this week, with airports legal team pointing out that WDC have no experience dealing with PDR issues - and that's just their planning team, their planning committee are even more clueless.
Local candidates for election in Warwick & Leamington - both Plaskitt (Labour incumbent) and White (Tory challenger) say there is no room for compromise on airport. Plaskitt says "it is just in the wrong place, nowhere else has two airports so close". When asked what CVT could do to make itself more acceptable, White just says "move to Birmingham".
In Rugby & Kenilworth, Sitting MP Andy King (Lab) refuses to answer question on why airport supporters or non opponents should bother to vote for him.
"Radio 4 'seven days' programme next tue is on this very subject. Enjoy."
Full of the usual inaccuracies, such as:
"David & Goliath battle" - local villages v. TUI. All well and good, except for local villages read wealthy busy bodies (in the main), and TUI, it conveniently forgets that the battle started long before TUI took over the lease.
Coventry being "in Warwickshire".
And somehow they managed to find one passenger who was flying to Jersey to then carry on to the USA via LGW. Overplayed the "cheapness" of the flights too - two passenger interviewed both paid £3.50 for their flights, but if that's a fair sample, then Thomsonfly would not be around for long.
Oh well, as the old cliche goes, never let the truth get in the way of a good story.
WDC now complaining because Cov City Council has granted permission for car parking, which they say should be referred to the Secretary of State, as it needs an ES (environmental statement), but CCC say not needed because it is only minor change of use, considering most of the industrial units to the north of the airport are for vehicle storage of some kind.
WDC also insisting that car park adjacent to terminal can't be acceptable under PDRs, as it too should be considered as part of whole development, and therefore needs an ES, even though it isn't rocket science to point out that the environmental impact of parking next to the terminal, instead of driving through Baginton village, to catch a shuttle bus which then takes you through that same village, only to run back through village again empty; is overwhelming positive. Doh!
WDC Chief Executive, Mike Duffett, slated earlier this week, with airports legal team pointing out that WDC have no experience dealing with PDR issues - and that's just their planning team, their planning committee are even more clueless.
Local candidates for election in Warwick & Leamington - both Plaskitt (Labour incumbent) and White (Tory challenger) say there is no room for compromise on airport. Plaskitt says "it is just in the wrong place, nowhere else has two airports so close". When asked what CVT could do to make itself more acceptable, White just says "move to Birmingham".
In Rugby & Kenilworth, Sitting MP Andy King (Lab) refuses to answer question on why airport supporters or non opponents should bother to vote for him.
"Radio 4 'seven days' programme next tue is on this very subject. Enjoy."
Full of the usual inaccuracies, such as:
"David & Goliath battle" - local villages v. TUI. All well and good, except for local villages read wealthy busy bodies (in the main), and TUI, it conveniently forgets that the battle started long before TUI took over the lease.
Coventry being "in Warwickshire".
And somehow they managed to find one passenger who was flying to Jersey to then carry on to the USA via LGW. Overplayed the "cheapness" of the flights too - two passenger interviewed both paid £3.50 for their flights, but if that's a fair sample, then Thomsonfly would not be around for long.
Oh well, as the old cliche goes, never let the truth get in the way of a good story.
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
From: Coventry
New car park now open in adjacent to the IPF, with the airport claiming they can do so under PDRs.
Airport seeming increasingly confident of winning "round 1" of public inquiry, with rumours circulating that WDC might be about to call it a day.
Airport seeming increasingly confident of winning "round 1" of public inquiry, with rumours circulating that WDC might be about to call it a day.
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
From: Coventry
Second public inquiry will now re-consider much of the same evidence seen in the first one, because "there is a new inspector", and "other participants will be taking part".
This really does make even more of a mockery of the whole system, and looks set to ensure that the talking shops end up costing more than the terminal itself.
This really does make even more of a mockery of the whole system, and looks set to ensure that the talking shops end up costing more than the terminal itself.
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 899
Likes: 0
From: Middle Earth
Atlantics third ATR42 was delivered to Coventry yesterday afternoon. I believe the other two are currently flying for Euromanx (or is GDRFC still in use with bmi since they ceased the LBA-LCY route?)
Having a quick think, would it be a good idea for Thomsonfly to use Atlantics ATRs for some thinner routes in a similar way that some of bmi babies flights from Cardiff are flown by Air Wales ATRs?
FC
Having a quick think, would it be a good idea for Thomsonfly to use Atlantics ATRs for some thinner routes in a similar way that some of bmi babies flights from Cardiff are flown by Air Wales ATRs?
FC
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
From: around
G-DRFC and G-IONA are indeed both flying for Euromanx at the moment. G-RHUM is awaiting transferral to the UK register and still carries the reg OY-CIH at the moment. RHUM is also a 50 seater as opposed to the 46 of 'FC' and 'NA'.
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 162
Likes: 5
From: kinmel bay
Used Coventry on Wednesday for the second time, not so impressed though.The car parking is a shambles with unhelpful staff, there is nowhere under cover to await the bus to the terminal.The waiting area in the terminal is far too small.By 5.30 am there was standing room only.
The return flight was delayed at Amsterdam, no problem there, but what i did have a problem with was the attitude of the 2 female flight attendants, surly and unprofessional comes to mind.Upon arrival at Coventry a delay to get steps to the aircraft.
I wish Coventry well, but i fear they will have to improve aspects of their operation along with Thomsonfly.
Impressed with the Titan 737-300, very pleasant cabin.
The return flight was delayed at Amsterdam, no problem there, but what i did have a problem with was the attitude of the 2 female flight attendants, surly and unprofessional comes to mind.Upon arrival at Coventry a delay to get steps to the aircraft.
I wish Coventry well, but i fear they will have to improve aspects of their operation along with Thomsonfly.
Impressed with the Titan 737-300, very pleasant cabin.
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
From: middle england
Not all the issues regarding TOM's 737's are due to technical issues alot of them are down to them not having the crew to operate the flights due to crews not being in check. Yes occasionally an aircraft does go tech but that happens at every airline.
Coventry and TOMfly will be successful if they didn't have all the problems with the Warwickshire Council hanging over them.
All the guys and girls that work for all the companies involved with CVT and TOM are working very hard to ensure that the airport is successful.
Coventry and TOMfly will be successful if they didn't have all the problems with the Warwickshire Council hanging over them.
All the guys and girls that work for all the companies involved with CVT and TOM are working very hard to ensure that the airport is successful.
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
From: Middle england
With all the subcharters being brought in, the positioning of 757 to cover and the costs of running the airport I do not see how they can be looking to break even or move into profit at the moment.
I bet they are hoping that nobody starts a decent Bareclona or Valencia down the road.
Also with Flybe dropping Shannon from the winter, again down the road, perhaps Thomsonfly should re consider giving up the route.
Centre cities
I bet they are hoping that nobody starts a decent Bareclona or Valencia down the road.
Also with Flybe dropping Shannon from the winter, again down the road, perhaps Thomsonfly should re consider giving up the route.
Centre cities
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
From: middle england
True, they may be struggling to break even but it takes more than just one year to break even, it can take many years. TOMfly have launched 3 bases in the space of one year, 2 being bases from scratch and one already set up. There are bound to be teething problems with all bases, not only from an aircraft point of view but also from a crewing issue and airport issue.
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
From: Coventry
Ducki,
the problems were with Warwick District Council, not the County, who have raised no major formal objection. The land is owned by Coventry City Council, but WDC are the planning authority.
Fortunately, they have now seen sense, and started to back the airport - see http://tinyurl.com/alxjq.
They do seem to have been having a few tech problems of late, but who doesn't? I'm sure that CVT's cost base is much lower than that at BHX, legal fees included.
Either way, now the major planning obstacles are starting to be knocked over, and the nimbys attempts to Make CVT History have backfired spectacularly, the future can only be bright.
the problems were with Warwick District Council, not the County, who have raised no major formal objection. The land is owned by Coventry City Council, but WDC are the planning authority.
Fortunately, they have now seen sense, and started to back the airport - see http://tinyurl.com/alxjq.
They do seem to have been having a few tech problems of late, but who doesn't? I'm sure that CVT's cost base is much lower than that at BHX, legal fees included.
Either way, now the major planning obstacles are starting to be knocked over, and the nimbys attempts to Make CVT History have backfired spectacularly, the future can only be bright.
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
From: middle england
True things do seem to be improving for the airport. But the lose of HLX to BHX is a real shame.
As we said tech issues happen within every airline, the aircraft still go out even if they carry an an issue that needs fixing but crewing issues are things that should not be happening, crews are being taken from DSA to operate a flight from BOH and like wise.
CVT could be an extremely profitable airport if they could get all the planning permission sorted, CVT is a very busy cargo airport at night and more freight should be invited to CVT
As we said tech issues happen within every airline, the aircraft still go out even if they carry an an issue that needs fixing but crewing issues are things that should not be happening, crews are being taken from DSA to operate a flight from BOH and like wise.
CVT could be an extremely profitable airport if they could get all the planning permission sorted, CVT is a very busy cargo airport at night and more freight should be invited to CVT
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
From: Coventry
"CVT is a very busy cargo airport at night and more freight should be invited to CVT"
LOL, now that would REALLY please the locals!
After months of holding out, WDC has finally caved in, only to have the same people who previously lauded them as heroes spitting blood from the gallery at the "betrayal" of their cause.
Out comes the usual claptrap about integrity of the planning system etc. That went out of the window the day WDC ignored CVT's request for mediation back when the pax flights first started.
All the pointless expense of a public inquiry for nothing. And if any politicos think they will get votes by supporting nimby causes, think again - the moment you try and reach any kind of consensus, you are dropped like a lead balloon. At least a rather expensive version of democracy seems to have won through, and the special interest groups, who often speak only for their leaders (none have ever asked their members if they support their actions), have been put in their place.
LOL, now that would REALLY please the locals!
After months of holding out, WDC has finally caved in, only to have the same people who previously lauded them as heroes spitting blood from the gallery at the "betrayal" of their cause.
Out comes the usual claptrap about integrity of the planning system etc. That went out of the window the day WDC ignored CVT's request for mediation back when the pax flights first started.
All the pointless expense of a public inquiry for nothing. And if any politicos think they will get votes by supporting nimby causes, think again - the moment you try and reach any kind of consensus, you are dropped like a lead balloon. At least a rather expensive version of democracy seems to have won through, and the special interest groups, who often speak only for their leaders (none have ever asked their members if they support their actions), have been put in their place.