STANSTED - 2

[compton3bravo]

You are joking ´´If all people in business were like him´´ - all I can say is God help us - vile man and that is an understatement!

[FRatSTN]

But if all business people were like him then the economy would not be in the state it's in. He runs one of the only highly profitable companies out there at the moment.

[Facelookbovvered]

Nothing much wrong with STN

I think STN is actually not bad for a BAA airport, sure LGW is now in a different league since BAA sold it, but STN works, what drags it down, how can i put this is the FR experience, it even has a "luggage repacking area complete with scales (€1 fee !!)" yes it caters for the horde of guest workers from Eastern Europe that pick our veg from Eastern England, to spend a couple of hours in the terminal is to watch a third world experience of low expectation & delivery in terms of customer service, with families putting extra clothes on, re packing and sharing out luggage to achieve the same average bag weight that they started out with!!

From what i can see the people who can afford to fly go with Easyjet, the rest go with Ryanair.

STN's problem is that FR call the shots now, will a new owner have the balls to say to FR that the fee take it or leave it? It will always be difficult to attract new business knowing that FR will jump on any competition in a flash, sometimes less is more.

[DublinPole]

with families putting extra clothes on, re packing and sharing out luggage to achieve the same average bag weight that they started out with!!

But that isn't exclusive to Ryanair is it?

Weight limits for hand luggage per person exist on many airlines.

[FRatSTN]

It will always be difficult to attract new business knowing that FR will jump on any competition in a flash, sometimes less is more.

I'm not even sure if that is even an issue. Ryanair likes the secondary airports generally speaking, so any airline that will offer a primary airport is not likely to get any direct competition from Ryanair. Remember also that Gatwick has more EasyJet now than Stansted does Ryanair and yet that doesn't seem to be an issue with loads of direct competition here, there and everywhere.

Furthermore, EasyJet have recently abandoned some of the most popular sun destinations in the last year or so because they are now going from Southend which leaves Stansted with Ryanair as the only option on a lot of those routes like Alicante, Barcelona and Faro. I don't the competition from Ryanair was to blame for this, they have had Ryanair alongside them on those routes for several years. Instead, it's just their interest in Southend, in which Stansted now pays the price.

If a new owner really wanted to get things going, they should try and get Jet2 in. I know Jet2 seem very reluctant to go to London airports but they do use Stansted for cargo flights and do compete strongly with Ryanair already and have tried taking on some of their routes elsewhere and have been successful. Also with EasyJet ditching those key routes creating a large slump in the capacity, what better time is there for Jet2 to try and get in and fill that space.

[adfly]

Easyjet's presence at Gatwick might be larger than Ryanair's at Stansted but the important thing to consider is the proportion of flights this makes up overall, around 35-40% in EZY's case and around 70% in Stansted's case. Easy are also directly competed with on far more routes out of Gatwick by BA, Monarch, Flybe, Thomson, Aer Lingus, Thomas Cook and numerous foreign airlines. Ryanair at Stansted have some routes that overlap with Easyjet and some where Thomson/Thomas Cook compete fairly indirectly, so the scale of the dominance is very different.

[FRatSTN]

And the proprtion of all flights from Gatwick that go to Alicante, Malaga, Palma, Tenerife etc. are a heck of a lot higher than all those from Stansted. The point I'm trying to make is that Gatwick is already overcrowded with many airlines offering the same routes. In a lot of respects, this is of course a good thing as it means more competition and more traffic and choice for passengers but at the same time, Stansted is very underserved and needs more competition from other airlines and most importantly, more competition with other airports, which is the whole point of the sale.

[adfly]

It does need the competition I agree, and the sale will help this but its also a case of airlines going where its most attractive. And I'm not so sure about the competition on the mentioned routes...

From Gatwick:

Alicante:

EZY - 31 weekly
BA - 21 weekly
Monarch - 11 weekly
Thomson - 2 weekly
Norwegian - 1-3 weekly
Thomas Cook - 1 weekly

Malaga:

EZY - 42 weekly
BA - 27-34 weekly
Monarch - 12 weekly
Thomson - 3 weekly
Norwegian - 3 weekly

Palma:

EZY - 36 weekly
Thomson - 19 weekly
Monarch - 14 weekly
Thomas Cook - 9 weekly
Norwegian - 1 weekly

Tenerife:

Thomson - 10 weekly
Thomas Cook - 9 weekly
EZY - 8 weekly
Monarch - 8 weekly
BA - 5 weekly
Norwegian - 4 weekly
Iberworld - 1 weekly (For Thomas Cook)


Now at Stansted we have:

Alicante:

Ryanair - 14 weekly
EZY - 12 weekly (Until 16th July)

Malaga:

Ryanair - 15 weekly
EZY - 9 weekly

Palma:

Ryanair - 11 weekly
EZY - 11 weekly
Thomson - 3 weekly
Thomas Cook - 1 weekly
Iberworld - 1 weekly (For Thomas Cook)

Tenerife:

Ryanair - 7 weekly
Thomson - 2 weekly
Thomas Cook - 2 weekly

Easyjet are the largest airline on a number of the routes from Gatwick but they have a lot of competition, so they probably only account for around 1/3 or less of the flights/passengers on each route. With Ryanair at Stansted that percentage is generally nearer to 1/2 or 2/3. I could see Jet 2 at Stansted though, the bigger question being, would they risk entering the London market especially being less known further south and having to compete with a much larger scale of MOL's army than anywhere up north?!

[Barling Magna]

I can't see Jet2 entering into the London market. If they did, I don't think they would choose Stansted because they wouldn't want to compete with Ryanair. They would be better advised to choose Luton or Southend, in my opinion. But it's unlikely to happen.

[LGS6753]

FR at STN

Perhaps I should explain why STN is in the wrong place, as you seem blinded by the intensity of your own support for the place.

STN has a poor rail connection with central London, in comparison with Gatwick, Heathrow, City and Luton. There are fewer trains, and the journey takes longer. I don't think the average passenger considers the shuttles at LTN and LGW in their calculations. There is only one intermediate station, and there are no trains to other destinations other than a slow, hourly service to Birmingham (that takes over 3 hours).
Gatwick has frequent and fast trains to London, the south coast and Bedford, as well as links through Guildford to Reading. Luton has frequent trains to London (24 mins), Brighton, Bedford, and the East Midlands cities all with intermediate stops. Heathrow and City have the best links to London.

STN is on the M11, a congested motorway that links London with Cambridge and nowhere else. It only joins one other motorway, and that's the M25. Southend is similarly poorly connected by road. Heathrow is very close to the M4, M25 M40 and M3. Gatwick is less well linked to the motorway system, but Luton is close to the M1, M40 and M25. It's as close the A1(M) as STN.

The most important measure, and that used by planners, is the 1- and 2-hour road travel catchment areas. By this important measure, LHR has the largest 1 and 2 hour catchment population, and Luton is second. Due to its position in sparsely-populated east anglia, STN ranks poorly.

Where SEN scores is shorter flight times for most destinations, less congested airspace, quicker taxying times, and an uncongested terminal. It is also hugely cheaper for airlines than STN. I suspect that its catchment area is larger than STN, but have not been able to confirm this.

In the light of these well-researched facts and conclusively-argued case, I reiterate my point:

It's current role, and the only one it will have in the foreseeable future is to take the London area traffic that can't be accommodated at other, better-connected and better-situated London airports (Heathrow, Gatwick, Luton, City and even Southend).

[FRatSTN]

If the "average passenger" as you put it doesn't consider the shuttle times to/from the rail stations then I really don't think they would consider the aircraft taxiing times at Southend! In fact I think you will find that Heathrow is going to be worst in that case as it takes a heck of a lot longer to get out of the place. Gatwick's rail times may be 10 or so minutes faster than those from Stansted but you could easily save 10 minutes if you want to go to anywhere to the east London by an underground connection as the train takes you to Liverpool Street smack bang in the centre and a stones throw from Bank station with the gratest range of Underground lines. Instead, Gatwick goes to Victoria which is further west. Great if you want Westminster, Embankment and the rest of the typical stuff, but not so great with more central and eastern areas. I'm not saying that Stansted has better rail connections, it depends on the situation to some extent, but I agree that they need improvement, but they are not going to prevent the airport from growing in their current form.

As for Luton, their rail services are only a few minutes shorter most of the time with the exception of the very fast East Midlands Trains service which only runs once an hour. Furthermore, Stansted has a train every 15 minutes, whereas Luton Airport Parkway can have 2 within 5 minutes and nothing for another 20 or 25. That's great in terms of proving more capacity, but it's no good for the passenger who is unfortunate enough to wait 20 minutes after spending the last 15 waiting and catching a bus from the airport in the first place. Luton is also served on a more commuter type line, Stansted has the Stansted Express direct from the airport terminal and therefore is more suited for the needs of a business traveller in most respects.

Also, your point that the M11 is such a congested motorway compared to the others, ie the M1 and M25 in particular that are renowned for their congestion problems only weakenes your argument and I say was false information and/or instead a salvaged opinion in an attempt to further strengthen your view.

[nt639]

LTN Airport Station

But LTN doesn't have a railway station, it is a bus journey from the airport, unless its snows of course! & then if the airport is actually open you are then cut off at the top of a hill & have to walk to the staion as the busses can't make it up the hill!

[LTNman]

And nor does Gatwick's North terminal have a station but that does not seem to do it any harm.

I seem to remember having to catch some sort of train to get from the piers to the terminal at Stansted which involved a long wait in a long queue but that was in the days when Stansted was popular.

Luton’s standard daytime rail service to and from London is 7 trains per hour.

1 non stop,
4 semi-fast (stops twice)
2 all station stopping service.

The advantage of Gatwick and Luton is the vast number of stations served directly without having to change trains or hop on the underground. I stopped counting when I got to 80 stations with various train companies that serve Luton directly.

I have no doubt that the only reason Easyjet have moved part of their Stansted operation to the inconvenience of London’s east coast airport and a rail service that runs only 18 hours a day in each direction is that savings were to be made. Time will tell if they stay there when the discounts end and no doubt Stansted’s new owners will be keen to get easyjet out of Southend.

[FRatSTN]

Stansted has satellite 1 serviced by a 2 minute monorail ride (which therefore never involves Ryanair flights) simply as a people mover as it's too far for passengers to walk. This is an issue at most airports and the majority tend to deal with it by cramming people on a shabby old bus that drives at 10 miles per hour that takes people to/from the terminal.

It's all well and good to say that Luton is served directly by rail services but at the same time, is it not more viable to catch a much more regular service to St Pancras and get to tube from there to your final destination anyway? I would imagine that it is.

Also on a final note:
HAPPY NEW YEAR everybody! Hope 2013 brings everything you want.

[LTNman]

Those 7 trains all serve St Pancras and its Underground network of the Northern line, Victoria Line, Piccadilly Line, Hammersmith & City and the Metropolitan

Some of those trains also have direct links to the District Line, Jubilee line and the Bakerloo line via stations at Blackfriars, Elephant & Castle and London Bridge.

The truth is all of Londons airports are well connected once you hit the Underground.

[Musket90]

FRaSTN - I thought at STN the monorail/transit also served satellite 2 which does involve some Ryanair flights.

[mikkie4]

ryanair fly domestic flights from sat 2

[pamann]

As in Derry? As that (I think) is the only domestic route they now serve. I know that I have flown international on FR from satellite 2 at some point in the last couple of years.

[canberra97]

Muskett90

Ryanair do operate some flights out of SAT 2 with their domestics but the monorail does not serve SAT 2 as there is a direct walkway from the terminal building.

[daz211]

Sat 2 from what I remember has 2 levels an international level
And a domestic level.
The domestic level is served by a walk way to and from
The terminal building and the international level is served
By the transit system.