STANSTED - 2

[Buster the Bear]

The lack of 'cross subsidies' and their concequence is most interesting.

In 3 words; LEVEL PLAYING FIELD

[Skipness One Echo]

In fairness to the original concept of Stansted as a new London airport, Luton did not have the same space to expand as Stansted and the vision of a new build multi runway airport does have attractions. In truth though the only way to pay for it was to allow BAA to charge more at their proftable airports through LHR and LGW and channel the money into STN redevelopment. In doing so they also took their eye off the ball at both airports to the point where preT5, Heathrow was falling apart at the seams due to investment in shopping malls and nothing else.

With an eye on the future and T5 going up, BAA fell out of love with STN given their only major customer was FR who had them by the balls. Once Air UK went the way of the dodo, STN became loco central and the market it had been built to serve never materialised. The end product is a good airport in the wrong place with more facilities than it's main customer wants to pay for.

It was the last shot at a strategic aviation policy.
The market never wanted STN, the government and the BAA tried to buck the market and paid the price.

[boeing_eng]

A good summary there Skipness…….Its more than ironic that LTN now needs what STN has plenty off – space (inside and outside!)

On the subject of cross-subsidies, of course some of us remember when the CAA upheld LTN’s compliant that STN had poached traffic using subsidies (but were basically powerless to do anything about it!) Its also worth recalling that until around 1998, STN had never made a penny for 25 years!

It does seem that what is happening now at STN is almost going round full-circle to when the new terminal complex opened in the early 1990’s At that time it was branded a white elephant with only a handful of Air UK schedules and some Scandinavian charters at weekends serving the airport!

[Flightmech]

Why was there an Air Asia X A330 in STN on Monday night? Saw it depart around 1900. Was it doing the regular KUL flight due lack of available A340 and if so anyone know where it tech-stopped on the way?

[Flightmech]

The way the BAA security are going on since 0600Z Tuesday morning no one will want to work at STN soon anyway. Its not the procedure, its the attitiude that goes with it

[daz211]

AirAsia.

Well looks like the move is going ahead ...

I sent another E-mail to AirAsia, asking them if they could find out from the people who would know about a move to LGW, This time this is what I got back.

AirAsia Hello again Darren, unfortunately we have no information about a move to Gatwick. I have spoke to our route and development team and they have no infomation about any move from Stansted to Gatwick.

However my mate has found out that AirAsia WILL MOVE to Gatwick, Not in September but on the 23rd October.

[True Blue]

I posted on the gatwick thread back in February about Air asia moving to Lgw. This was based on a story in the Sunday Times that Air asia was moving to Lgw and "had big plans for Gatwick". So could the article have been right and what plans might Air asia have for Lgw?

True Blue

[SENFLYER]

STN Doomed?

Well Stansted may as well concentrate on Corporate Aviation, Freight and try and recover some heavy maintenance operations as it's destined to become a ghost town as far as pax are concerned with the exception of FR. With a fair chunk of EZ off to SEN and D7 confirmed by STN MD off to LGW the STN Commercial Dept must have closed up and gone home until the airport's sold!

[LTNman]

Don’t know why things have turned bad for the Essex outpost. Even though it pains me Stansted is a fine airport. Its terminal and stand locations are much better than Luton, its road layout is second to none and it has a rail station by the terminal. OK it might be a slow train ride to London but then you don’t have to catch a shuttle bus to a parkway station as per Luton.

Luton is the Heathrow of corporate jet traffic and is the busiest executive jet airport in the UK with every inch of FBO parking packed in up to 5 aircraft deep but why is that? Stansted is only 2 miles further out from London than Luton and also has a motorway close to the airport. With Luton’s 6am traffic jam nightmare which affects access to the airport why would the rich and powerful want to use Luton when Stansted has free flowing traffic to a private part of the airport.

OK Stansted might not be in a good location if you are travelling anywhere other than London but then it is meant to be a London airport.

[STN Ramp Rat]

Luton is the Heathrow of corporate jet traffic and is the busiest executive jet airport in the UK with every inch of FBO parking packed in up to 5 aircraft deep but why is that?

because Luton is closer to the bits of london people want to go to (the west end). Stansted is closer to the City.

[boeing_eng]

LTNman....To answer all your questions:

Location, Location, Location!

As far as the Corporate Jets go, apart what has already been mentioned about LTN's proximity to the West End (compared to STN), Milton Keynes is also a factor with companies like Coca Cola, Mercedes, BP and VW all having UK HQ's there.

[PPE]

Luton is rammed but with small jets. Stansted has the space and is spread out and it too has its rammed moments however most of these are BIG biz jets!

I'm sure the LLA and BAA would be much more interested in corporate business if the passengers were going through the shops in the terminal.

[ConstantFlyer]

LTNman....To answer all your questions: Location, Location, Location!

Quite right, boeing_eng. In fact, that's the main problem with a lot of airports in the UK. Wartime RAF bases, from which a lot of present day airports developed, were often placed in out-of-the-way places on purpose. What we need today are airports that are multi-modal transport hubs. My solution would be to build new airports on top of railway stations in city centres.

Despite its location, I was pleased to see on my last visit to Stansted that the network of local bus and medium-distance coach services had expanded and looked surprisingly comprehensive. Even so, I still needed a lift to get to the part of Hertfordshire to which I was travelling.

[LTNman]

My solution would be to build new airports on top of railway stations in city centres.

Don't think that would go down too well with the locals.

[Falcon666]

As a regular passenger through STN this year (not by choice though) i wouldnt disagree with anything that has been said.
From a location point of view i would use LTN or EMA anytime but i would concede that travelling through LTN these days isnt a pleasurable experience due to the fact it is running at 90% capacity.
I remember people saying when EL AL moved its operations from STN to LTN that it wouldnt last-but it did and is doing well.
Then came Blue Air flying to Bucharest,they moved into direct competion with Wizz at LTN but still it is successful.
LTN i think is vulnerable though.A lot will depend on what happens at LTN in the future.Sure ,there is a clear case for expansion there.Should it happen ,i think yes .Will it happen, thats up to the council and Albertis to sort out.
If LTN was to lose Wizz to STN that would be a hammer blow but could happen.But maybe airlines are just too scared in facing up to Ryanair.Maybe Ryanairs base there is just too big , a virtual monopoly.With Easy maybe moving routes to SEN that will make it even worse for decent competion.
As an airport though i would be asking its management a few questions.Are BAA really interested in STN now?-thats up for debate.
Maybe the quicker it goes the better but what will the new owners change.Are the costs of running STN just too high?.Why are so many airlines moving/have moved from what is an apparently a good airport?Certainly there are interesting times ahead in the south east right now

[daz211]

I think BAA is running STN to the ground, in the hope that some how, some where, some day, they can try and say it is unfair to make them sell it as the value of the sale is way below the value of the land, If this is not the case I think the whole management should be sacked and a new direction of lower fees should be put into place giving new Airlines and new routes very low fees and to top that give any longhaul routes break even prices on using the Airport. there needs to be a big push on getting Airlines from Gatwick and Luton.
BAA has lost all direction for one reason or another and the sooner the Airport is sold the better..

[Skipness One Echo]

there needs to be a big push on getting Airlines from Gatwick and Luton.

The market prefers Gatwick as they seem to be able to make more money in that catchment area, hence you might have to offer unusutainable landing and handling for them to make money, Stansted would bleed cash. The growth of Ryanair has masked a major issue in that Stansted never really hacks it as a major first choice London airport. Every time Gatwick has some space the airlines flee South leaving LTN and STN serving their own markets by the lkes of easyJet. Ryanair makes STN look much better than it would otherwise be and then the question arises how much does Stansted make out of Ryanair?

If it's not a lot, it's a vicious cycle.

[bunatern]

what will air berlin do having dropped hannover from lgw,surely they will not just run nuremberg from lgw will they move that service back to stn or will more stn services move down south.

[pabely]

With Air Berlin movin closer to One World I cannot see them coming back to STN unless BA & AA have plans, it's an odd alliance....even at LGW.

[IJM]

My solution would be to build new airports on top of railway stations in city centres.

Well that would lead to some interesting approaches / take offs!

Does anyone recall the fictitious plans someone drew up for a new airport in Central Park, NYC? (I assume they were fictitious!).