DONCASTER/SHEFFIELD
i am willing to be proved wrong or at least have a reasoned debate.
Not so sure why i wrote that to be honest
Say's it all really, hardly going to get a reasoned debate with that logic
Not so sure why i wrote that to be honest
Say's it all really, hardly going to get a reasoned debate with that logic
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Doncaster
Age: 63
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mature debate?
Any chance of this thread on Pprune not descending into bitchiness, puerility and sarcasm like we see on the Ryanair thread?
Sure it's not an easy time for airports and airlines at the moment, but I would have thought that most aviation workers and/or enthusists would wish for the best outcomes for everyone.
Reasoned debate why this may not happen is fine, but sniping and excessive doom-mongering just to try and prove a minor point is not.
Sure it's not an easy time for airports and airlines at the moment, but I would have thought that most aviation workers and/or enthusists would wish for the best outcomes for everyone.
Reasoned debate why this may not happen is fine, but sniping and excessive doom-mongering just to try and prove a minor point is not.
Last edited by johnnychips; 23rd Feb 2009 at 23:39.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: On the move
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes I agree johnnychips.
We know about the rivalry with LBA & HUY and it is understandable to a certain extent as long as the rivalry remains good humoured and the comments interesting. Some of the postings are pointless.
We know about the rivalry with LBA & HUY and it is understandable to a certain extent as long as the rivalry remains good humoured and the comments interesting. Some of the postings are pointless.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Doncaster
Age: 63
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for your replies WRK and pug.
I think what happens on these forums sometimes is that
- everyone has their own opinion or affiliation to an airport/airline/region
- somebody puts something provocative or contentious
- it is a rumour network, so sometimes things may seem just plain stupid
- you can't tell what 'tone of voice' they mean it in so if you're in a good mood you'll send a jocular reply back; if you're not you might resort to sarcasm or flaming
- then it escalates into personalities and Machiavellian plots.
I'm sure if all the recent posters sat down in a pub and had a few pints we'd have a civilised, if somewhat passionate debate. After all, we wouldn't be on this site if we didn't want a successful aviation industry everywhere in Yorkshire and Humberside. There weren't debates like this when all was going well with the economy. But anybody over about 25 knows that recessions end eventually.
-but obviously we are annoyed if some airport is succeeding while others aren't, and we think there are too many airports, or one is poaching routes
This is all the stuff of good discussion.
If you haven't looked at the FR thread, it's like about 10 cats scratching at each other, with a few others trying to be reasonable. I wouldn't (or perhaps I would) like them to be in a pub together.
I think what happens on these forums sometimes is that
- everyone has their own opinion or affiliation to an airport/airline/region
- somebody puts something provocative or contentious
- it is a rumour network, so sometimes things may seem just plain stupid
- you can't tell what 'tone of voice' they mean it in so if you're in a good mood you'll send a jocular reply back; if you're not you might resort to sarcasm or flaming
- then it escalates into personalities and Machiavellian plots.
I'm sure if all the recent posters sat down in a pub and had a few pints we'd have a civilised, if somewhat passionate debate. After all, we wouldn't be on this site if we didn't want a successful aviation industry everywhere in Yorkshire and Humberside. There weren't debates like this when all was going well with the economy. But anybody over about 25 knows that recessions end eventually.
-but obviously we are annoyed if some airport is succeeding while others aren't, and we think there are too many airports, or one is poaching routes
This is all the stuff of good discussion.
If you haven't looked at the FR thread, it's like about 10 cats scratching at each other, with a few others trying to be reasonable. I wouldn't (or perhaps I would) like them to be in a pub together.
Last edited by johnnychips; 24th Feb 2009 at 23:13. Reason: Grammar
I agree with your point johnnychips.
My point in the discussion is my doubt over the long-term viability of the site as a passenger carrying airport. I know it may offend some people as there could be jobs at stake but realisticaly alot of people fear the same risk at the moment.
Latest rumour is that LS have held talks with Peel over ops from DSA. While i can believe that they happened, and would not rule it out as a possibility of coming to fruition, i remain cynical of anything coming of it.
1) Its a rumour that has come from a sole poster
2) Aircraft allocation would be a problem (unless they were to cut back at other airports)
3) It has been suggested by more than one persom that PM has said that DSA is 'in the wrong place'
I dont doubt that Peel have been holding talks, particularly regarding the ILS training and diversion contract, and that they will have given them an offer as any airport operator would who is aspiring to grow. Thing is could the offer be unrealistic in the long term? I.e. effectively buying the airline in? What routes could they offer that existing carriers at DSA (like TOM) dont and that could warrant full a/c utilisation? Any 'buy in Peel deal' could not be financialy viable and i suspect it would be in order to prove that pax figures are up to retain funding for the pie in the sky link road scheme.
I would also consider the offer they made to MAG over HUY a couple of years ago. I suspect they may have burnt some bridges there but may come back around in the future....
My point in the discussion is my doubt over the long-term viability of the site as a passenger carrying airport. I know it may offend some people as there could be jobs at stake but realisticaly alot of people fear the same risk at the moment.
Latest rumour is that LS have held talks with Peel over ops from DSA. While i can believe that they happened, and would not rule it out as a possibility of coming to fruition, i remain cynical of anything coming of it.
1) Its a rumour that has come from a sole poster
2) Aircraft allocation would be a problem (unless they were to cut back at other airports)
3) It has been suggested by more than one persom that PM has said that DSA is 'in the wrong place'
I dont doubt that Peel have been holding talks, particularly regarding the ILS training and diversion contract, and that they will have given them an offer as any airport operator would who is aspiring to grow. Thing is could the offer be unrealistic in the long term? I.e. effectively buying the airline in? What routes could they offer that existing carriers at DSA (like TOM) dont and that could warrant full a/c utilisation? Any 'buy in Peel deal' could not be financialy viable and i suspect it would be in order to prove that pax figures are up to retain funding for the pie in the sky link road scheme.
I would also consider the offer they made to MAG over HUY a couple of years ago. I suspect they may have burnt some bridges there but may come back around in the future....
Apparently Shaheen are once again looking at flying to a 'secondary UK airport' and onto Canada with leased 777's. Perhaps they will be talking to Peel again.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be reasonable to assume that they will want to fly in to an airport near to a concentration of its target passenger - West Yorks / Birmingham / East Midlands / London. Same old problem for Donny, wish it were different.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Doncaster
Age: 63
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not knocking anyone would like some info
Shaheen strung DSA out with odd promises, then ended up at LBA and did some flights. This is a completely innocent question - why did they finish at LBA? And if it was not for operational or economic reasons, why would any airport trust them again? Or was this some hiatus out of their control?
The thing is, if they do lease some 777's, they wont be able to operate from LBA as far as im aware. I think they're looking at an onwards connection to Canada too.
As johnnychips says though, it should be taken with a pinch of salt going by the way they did it last time.
As johnnychips says though, it should be taken with a pinch of salt going by the way they did it last time.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: north yorkshire
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The LBA ops were stopped as the lease on the A310's expired and suitable replacements couldn't be found.
So presumably they would want to get back into LBA, possibly on different days to the PIA service which moves to 3 times weekly, shortly.
ABU DHABI, March 3 (Reuters) - Pakistan's privately owned Shaheen Air plans to buy seven used and two new Boeing (BA.N) aircraft and start flights to India and Iran, its executive director said on Tuesday.
"We have almost completed the process of acquiring seven Boeing 737-200 aircraft from an airline in South Africa," Khalid Bashir Anjum told Reuters on the sidelines of an aviation conference in the United Arab Emirates. He did not give details.
"We will also be acquiring two new Boeing 737-900 ERs by end-2010. The new aircraft will enable Shaheen to start new routes to Mumbai and Mashhad in Iran," he said, adding that Shaheen would also increase flights to Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Kuwait and Muscat.
The airline, which has a fleet of seven Boeing 737s, flies to six destinations in the United Arab Emirates, Oman, Qatar and Kuwait.
Shaheen stopped flights to Leeds in Britain last year after fuel prices peaked, he said.
"But we are seriously thinking about resuming flights to the UK, to some secondary airport, and to Canada provided fuel prices remain stable and not too high" said Anjum, adding that the airline may lease a few Boeing 777 ERs for the flights.
The airline, which also operates on domestic routes in Pakistan, carried 1 million passengers in 2008, up 22 percent over 2007, he said. (Reporting by Stanley Carvalho; Editing by David Holmes)
"We have almost completed the process of acquiring seven Boeing 737-200 aircraft from an airline in South Africa," Khalid Bashir Anjum told Reuters on the sidelines of an aviation conference in the United Arab Emirates. He did not give details.
"We will also be acquiring two new Boeing 737-900 ERs by end-2010. The new aircraft will enable Shaheen to start new routes to Mumbai and Mashhad in Iran," he said, adding that Shaheen would also increase flights to Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Kuwait and Muscat.
The airline, which has a fleet of seven Boeing 737s, flies to six destinations in the United Arab Emirates, Oman, Qatar and Kuwait.
Shaheen stopped flights to Leeds in Britain last year after fuel prices peaked, he said.
"But we are seriously thinking about resuming flights to the UK, to some secondary airport, and to Canada provided fuel prices remain stable and not too high" said Anjum, adding that the airline may lease a few Boeing 777 ERs for the flights.
The airline, which also operates on domestic routes in Pakistan, carried 1 million passengers in 2008, up 22 percent over 2007, he said. (Reporting by Stanley Carvalho; Editing by David Holmes)
Although it doesnt say any UK airport in particular, it is interesting to note they suggest 'secondary' airport. Unless you could perhaps class CWL, BRS or NCL as secondary or some airport in Scotland or Ireland then i would think it would be DSA or EMA as i cannot think of any other capable of handling the 777ER?
Come to think of it, wouldnt BRS and NCL have problems handling a 777?