SOUTHEND
Yes, I do know the pre-RESA distances:
24 LDA 1454m (now 1399m) a reduction of 55m
06 LDA 1375m (now 1285m) a reduction of 90m
The 90m reduction on LDA for 06 is accounted for by the fact that the last 90m of the paved surface has become the 90m RESA (90m being the very minimum length of RESA to meet CAP168 regulations). This means that the threshold for 06 remains in exactly the same position as pre-RESA. When you think of the type of traffic that used SEN pre-RESA, these reductions in LDA don't seem exactly momentous.
I'm sure that the church does have some bearing on the displacement of the 06 threshold and it has been suggested elsewhere that to enter discussions with the CAA on the subject might open a can of worms. RAL may wish to avoid a situation where the CAA look afresh at the whole subject of the effect the church has, only to find that they decide the threshold should be even further displaced! I don't know this to be true, but it's a possibility I suppose.
Just to clarify the debate as to whether or not the future lies with turbo-props or jets in the regional market, it is a fact that there are now more turbo-prop regional airliners in service than at any time in the past 20 years. It is also a fact that turbo-props outsold jets in the regional airliner market for the past two years and that the ATR42/72 order backlog is so great that an aircraft ordered today will not be delivered until 2088/2009. Let's have no more talk of the turbo-prop being on the way out any time soon.
As far as SEN's runway distances are concerned, all turbo-prop regional airliners can operate virtually unrestricted - they can certainly depart SEN with a greater payload than from LCY - so all of that market is open to RAL's negotiators. Add to that the regional jets that can also operate at near maximum weights, such as the A318/F70/EMB135,145,170 & 190/146, and that offers an even greater potential.
Lastly, it is not out of the question to operate IT routes with larger aircraft by routing via, say, MSE or BOH, on a split load basis. Places such as MSE might welcome additional destinations. In that way both TOW and LW at SEN would be reduced significantly making SEN's declared distances usable. After all, such operations exist now from other UK airports and in the past Air Malta used to operate from SEN via EMA I seem to remember.
It is obviously a blow that Flybe have revised their plans, not least because so much was expected of them, but it might have the effect of heightening the interest of other regionals who will now have a clear run in the market for the time being at least.
So let's not get too pessimistic at this stage and wait to see what emerges from RAL's current round of negotiations.
24 LDA 1454m (now 1399m) a reduction of 55m
06 LDA 1375m (now 1285m) a reduction of 90m
The 90m reduction on LDA for 06 is accounted for by the fact that the last 90m of the paved surface has become the 90m RESA (90m being the very minimum length of RESA to meet CAP168 regulations). This means that the threshold for 06 remains in exactly the same position as pre-RESA. When you think of the type of traffic that used SEN pre-RESA, these reductions in LDA don't seem exactly momentous.
I'm sure that the church does have some bearing on the displacement of the 06 threshold and it has been suggested elsewhere that to enter discussions with the CAA on the subject might open a can of worms. RAL may wish to avoid a situation where the CAA look afresh at the whole subject of the effect the church has, only to find that they decide the threshold should be even further displaced! I don't know this to be true, but it's a possibility I suppose.
Just to clarify the debate as to whether or not the future lies with turbo-props or jets in the regional market, it is a fact that there are now more turbo-prop regional airliners in service than at any time in the past 20 years. It is also a fact that turbo-props outsold jets in the regional airliner market for the past two years and that the ATR42/72 order backlog is so great that an aircraft ordered today will not be delivered until 2088/2009. Let's have no more talk of the turbo-prop being on the way out any time soon.
As far as SEN's runway distances are concerned, all turbo-prop regional airliners can operate virtually unrestricted - they can certainly depart SEN with a greater payload than from LCY - so all of that market is open to RAL's negotiators. Add to that the regional jets that can also operate at near maximum weights, such as the A318/F70/EMB135,145,170 & 190/146, and that offers an even greater potential.
Lastly, it is not out of the question to operate IT routes with larger aircraft by routing via, say, MSE or BOH, on a split load basis. Places such as MSE might welcome additional destinations. In that way both TOW and LW at SEN would be reduced significantly making SEN's declared distances usable. After all, such operations exist now from other UK airports and in the past Air Malta used to operate from SEN via EMA I seem to remember.
It is obviously a blow that Flybe have revised their plans, not least because so much was expected of them, but it might have the effect of heightening the interest of other regionals who will now have a clear run in the market for the time being at least.
So let's not get too pessimistic at this stage and wait to see what emerges from RAL's current round of negotiations.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Middlesesx
Posts: 2,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once again yesterday (Saturday 14th) the area leading into the business park was solid for several hours with the traffic attempting to get into the retail park and McD's. As I have stated before this in itself would create a problem for SEN as current access is poor from whatever way you seek entry. There has been much writ about the runway which is a problem despite the most optimistic view.
Finally RAL are a minor player in the business and without being rude they have little apparent experience at deveolment / operations at a full time airport. How will a relatively small company in a dificult business environment raise the sort of sums that have been mentioned and even if they are overstated the sums still require large loans and sustainable returns. The company does not have a track record in this discipline and I question whether they have the required skills for such a development. Only time will tell but the clock has been ticking away surely for to long and as I recall 'Darkstar' commented that the airport will remain as it is serving few passengers and hopfully its active aircraft services and maintainence.
Finally RAL are a minor player in the business and without being rude they have little apparent experience at deveolment / operations at a full time airport. How will a relatively small company in a dificult business environment raise the sort of sums that have been mentioned and even if they are overstated the sums still require large loans and sustainable returns. The company does not have a track record in this discipline and I question whether they have the required skills for such a development. Only time will tell but the clock has been ticking away surely for to long and as I recall 'Darkstar' commented that the airport will remain as it is serving few passengers and hopfully its active aircraft services and maintainence.
I'm sure that HZ123 is quite correct when he says that road access to SEN can get very congested and sharing the entrance with a retail park is not ideal. No doubt the problem is proabably at its worst at weekends for that very reason. But SEN is not alone in having road access problems. Luton currently has such a problem in that regard that it is suggested that corporate jet operators are looking at alternative airports of arrival (Southend?
). Bristol has a similar problem yet copes with several millions of pax per annum, so while it may cause difficulties let's keep it in proportion.
I also agree that RAL are in something of a bind at the moment. Do they begin work on the new terminal IAW the planning consent, or do they implement the expansion of the existing terminal? Or, indeed, do they do nothing until they have some operators on board and can more accurately predict the sort of revenue they will be generating? I suspect that, sadly, the last option will prevail for funding reasons, and RAL have not yet submitted the Environmental Impact Assessment that RDC have insisted upon when considering the application for the expandsion of the existing terminal. I would have thought they would have speedily drawn up and submitted this if they really wanted to press ahead with the work. I suppose they can at least say to the likes of KLM "well, you will only have to use the existing facilities until we get the go ahead for the expanded terminal."
Mind you, how on earth do you rebuild the whole terminal while it has hundred of pax per day passing through it, as will inevitably be the case?
Let's just see what happens between now at the end of the year and if any new routes are actually forthcoming for 2007.
). Bristol has a similar problem yet copes with several millions of pax per annum, so while it may cause difficulties let's keep it in proportion.I also agree that RAL are in something of a bind at the moment. Do they begin work on the new terminal IAW the planning consent, or do they implement the expansion of the existing terminal? Or, indeed, do they do nothing until they have some operators on board and can more accurately predict the sort of revenue they will be generating? I suspect that, sadly, the last option will prevail for funding reasons, and RAL have not yet submitted the Environmental Impact Assessment that RDC have insisted upon when considering the application for the expandsion of the existing terminal. I would have thought they would have speedily drawn up and submitted this if they really wanted to press ahead with the work. I suppose they can at least say to the likes of KLM "well, you will only have to use the existing facilities until we get the go ahead for the expanded terminal."
Mind you, how on earth do you rebuild the whole terminal while it has hundred of pax per day passing through it, as will inevitably be the case?
Let's just see what happens between now at the end of the year and if any new routes are actually forthcoming for 2007.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Middlesesx
Posts: 2,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There has been nothing in the local rag this week and there is a general air of winter depression at the airport. This will get worse when the 707 departs next month and the Belfast soon after that. They keep moving the Shorts 360's around.
It is not now expected that there will be any route announcements before next year, contrary to what RAL had anticipated to be the case.
They are still in negotiations with carriers but it seems that one of the main contenders may be in a period of consolidation for the first half of 2007 rather than expansion, so this has put back their plans.
I don't know the state of play regarding KLM, but presumably the meeting planned for October has taken place.
It looks as if the Flybe JER service will not operate as a schedule in 2007 (if at all) as it is not on their timetable and SEN has been deleted from the route map. I note also, incidentally, that the JER service from NWI for next year is reduced from 5 x weekly to 1 x weekly.
I would have thought the departure of the 707 and Belfast is good news as it frees up parking space for 'active' traffic.
By the way, does anyone know if the recent apron resurfacing was a proper renewal of the apron surface or just a patching-up exercise, as has been done previously?
They are still in negotiations with carriers but it seems that one of the main contenders may be in a period of consolidation for the first half of 2007 rather than expansion, so this has put back their plans.
I don't know the state of play regarding KLM, but presumably the meeting planned for October has taken place.
It looks as if the Flybe JER service will not operate as a schedule in 2007 (if at all) as it is not on their timetable and SEN has been deleted from the route map. I note also, incidentally, that the JER service from NWI for next year is reduced from 5 x weekly to 1 x weekly.
I would have thought the departure of the 707 and Belfast is good news as it frees up parking space for 'active' traffic.
By the way, does anyone know if the recent apron resurfacing was a proper renewal of the apron surface or just a patching-up exercise, as has been done previously?
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Middlesesx
Posts: 2,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The surface, signage and markings look to be a good job. As for the idea of freeing up parking space there is plenty of it. The only problem is that many of the aircraft that arrive are eventually parted out. 2007 looks to be another bleak year, I can say with confidence that even the flying clubs have been quite this year and helicopter training has reduced from 4+ aircraft to 2 only and not evry day.
Recidivist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 1,239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have noticed that Southend appears to be lacking in what I would have thought was pretty basic equipment:-
It does not have secondary radar.
It only has ILS on 24.
Does this hold back prospective commercial operators, or is it not particularly significant?
It does not have secondary radar.
It only has ILS on 24.
Does this hold back prospective commercial operators, or is it not particularly significant?
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Isle Du Cyber
Posts: 933
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Secondary Radar
Do they need it, Thames Radar has good cover,how much radrar control will they be expecting to do if they can get the traffic.
When Southend was in its hay day i dont think secodary had been heard of?
Bring it on, bring back the likes of B.A.F. and Channel Airways thats the days when there was life a Southend.
When Southend was in its hay day i dont think secodary had been heard of?
Bring it on, bring back the likes of B.A.F. and Channel Airways thats the days when there was life a Southend.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh fond memories of SEN
Worked for National Airways in the 80's
Great low load, small a/c base that worked really well.
SEN still has fantastic potential, it is just finding the right niche market. Despite being surrounded by water, London and it's East catchment is there for the taking, BRU, CDG, CGN, DUS. LHR, LGW, STN all getting congested from the trvellers point of view, right aircraft type, right destinations, (not the CI's) and off you go, sure of it. City breaks at the weekend. Domestics, all North of the border.
The market has changed since 89, and so have the regulations. Still love to see SEN find its niche. SD36 would work well, if the punters would accept it in exchange for 3-4 hours extra at home.
Great low load, small a/c base that worked really well.
SEN still has fantastic potential, it is just finding the right niche market. Despite being surrounded by water, London and it's East catchment is there for the taking, BRU, CDG, CGN, DUS. LHR, LGW, STN all getting congested from the trvellers point of view, right aircraft type, right destinations, (not the CI's) and off you go, sure of it. City breaks at the weekend. Domestics, all North of the border.
The market has changed since 89, and so have the regulations. Still love to see SEN find its niche. SD36 would work well, if the punters would accept it in exchange for 3-4 hours extra at home.
The flying clubs and helicopter training may have been quieter this year, I don't know, but total aircraft movements for the first 8 months of the year are up 2% so other types of traffic must have seen an increase.
Of course, it's rather a joke that SEN has seen the fastest growing pax figures in the country for the past 4 months which only goes to show the low base they are starting from - and that you should never put your trust in statistics
.
Of course, it's rather a joke that SEN has seen the fastest growing pax figures in the country for the past 4 months which only goes to show the low base they are starting from - and that you should never put your trust in statistics
.
Recidivist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 1,239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I listen to ATC most days, usually during 'office hours', and I would guess that, depending on wx, the takeoffs/landings/touch & go average at least every ten minutes during those times, with plenty of activity at some other times. There is also a lot of FIS and RIS transit traffic.
Granted, most of it is light aircraft/helicopters, and I don't know the fees, but I would have thought that revenue stream would provide a useful operating income?
Granted, most of it is light aircraft/helicopters, and I don't know the fees, but I would have thought that revenue stream would provide a useful operating income?
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: On the banks of the Crouch
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pretty active at Southend yesterday evening.
Between 19.00 and 21.15 there were at least two dozen movements. True, a good number were down to a couple of light aircraft doing touch and go's but there were also a number of other flights.
Arrivals from Flightline, Watchdog, Highfive (whoever they are) and a foreigner who was totally indecipherable to me and a Monarch departure.
Tailed off after 21.15 though.
Apologies for the anorak report, but Mrs S was out and being bored, out came the scanner.
Cheers
Southender
Between 19.00 and 21.15 there were at least two dozen movements. True, a good number were down to a couple of light aircraft doing touch and go's but there were also a number of other flights.
Arrivals from Flightline, Watchdog, Highfive (whoever they are) and a foreigner who was totally indecipherable to me and a Monarch departure.
Tailed off after 21.15 though.
Apologies for the anorak report, but Mrs S was out and being bored, out came the scanner.
Cheers
Southender
