PLYMOUTH -2
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Devon
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pax Numbers
I see today in the local press today that PAX numbers have decreased by 25% in the last 12 months.According to the Civil Aviation Authority figures, 132,514 passengers used Plymouth City Airport in 2005, a figure which dropped to 100,045 in 2006.Does anybody think Plymouths days are numbered as both Newquay and Exeters numbers have increased.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: sw uk
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, it seems as if it has probably peaked! Surely now is the time for ASW to approach Exeter with its new ownership and start to delevop routes and keep PLH for its niche services.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Devon
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The main reason that Air Wales stopped operating from PLH is the standard of handling that they received from ASW.
The airport and ASW are both owned by the same company. Air Wales had some very good routes from PLH but suffered badly as the ground handling personnel often deliberately delayed and disrupted departures.
A very sad state of affairs when you consider that Air Wales were the only scheduled operator at this airport and kept many staff in employment during the gap in between BA pulling out and ASW starting ops.
They deserve the demise that they are now experiencing. PLH is an awful airport....short runway, no radar, poor ATC, vintage fire trucks (one is 35 yrs old!!!!) and a shocking weather record.
As for Air Wales....they still operate 2 of their ATR 42 aircraft on ACMI lease work and if the rumours are true may well be back operating from CWL soon.
looks like the 'Janners' scored an own goal!
The airport and ASW are both owned by the same company. Air Wales had some very good routes from PLH but suffered badly as the ground handling personnel often deliberately delayed and disrupted departures.
A very sad state of affairs when you consider that Air Wales were the only scheduled operator at this airport and kept many staff in employment during the gap in between BA pulling out and ASW starting ops.
They deserve the demise that they are now experiencing. PLH is an awful airport....short runway, no radar, poor ATC, vintage fire trucks (one is 35 yrs old!!!!) and a shocking weather record.
As for Air Wales....they still operate 2 of their ATR 42 aircraft on ACMI lease work and if the rumours are true may well be back operating from CWL soon.
looks like the 'Janners' scored an own goal!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Devon
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nope.....from a flying point of view I actually enjoyed operating into PLH as it could be quite a challenge!!!.....been there over 300 times and only failed to get in twice....1st time couldn't see it, and second was gusting x wind >50kts
It was once on stand that it all went wrong.....just down to insufficient staff I guess.....but their attitude towards Air Wales was appalling.
It was once on stand that it all went wrong.....just down to insufficient staff I guess.....but their attitude towards Air Wales was appalling.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Devon
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Local Press letter
Below is a letter to the local newspaper help us put pressure on PCC.
The more we get the better.I know this is a local issue but there may some local people who post on this thread but even if youre not feel free to contact the email addresses below.
Tudor Evans is becoming like a smaller version of Tony Blair,
whereby he wants to leave office with a legacy.
It would appear he is willing to move heaven and earth to provide the
Life Centre, regardless of the horrendous costs of £26million. He is
also willing to pump a further £25million into transport, but we
doubt if any of that will be spent on extending the runway at
Plymouth City Airport.
Sutton Harbour Holdings (SHH) are doing their very best to keep Air
Southwest flying, despite the drop in passengers. Because of its
limited carrying capacity it simply cannot compete with the larger
budget carriers, hence the prices: but the company could go someway
to redressing that balance if the runway were extended to 1,319
metres.
We have it on good authority from SHH that they are fully behind
Plymouth Airport and believe that if Plymouth is to prosper then it's
essential it has larger aircraft, and that can only be done with an
extension. SHH are also in favour of other airlines operating out of
Plymouth, but very few are prepared to pay for the huge costs
involved in the extension of the runway. This puts Sutton Harbour
Holdings in a difficult situation, while Tudor Evans and his council,
the landlords, drag their heels.
The council has its priorities all wrong. Instead of spending money
on Life Centres and such like, they should put it where it is most
needed, at the airport, so supporting SHH, who are carrying the can
for the airport's failings.
If this city is to prosper, particularly with the future of the
Dockyard under the spotlight, it's essential transport links are
improved dramatically. This can only be done by air travel. We are
looking forward to the public of Plymouth and surrounding areas
supporting our initiatives in the important matter of Plymouth
Airport. We can be contacted at [email protected] and hilly-
[email protected] and would appreciate any help you could offer.
SID ANNING and IAN HILL
Plymouth
The more we get the better.I know this is a local issue but there may some local people who post on this thread but even if youre not feel free to contact the email addresses below.
Tudor Evans is becoming like a smaller version of Tony Blair,
whereby he wants to leave office with a legacy.
It would appear he is willing to move heaven and earth to provide the
Life Centre, regardless of the horrendous costs of £26million. He is
also willing to pump a further £25million into transport, but we
doubt if any of that will be spent on extending the runway at
Plymouth City Airport.
Sutton Harbour Holdings (SHH) are doing their very best to keep Air
Southwest flying, despite the drop in passengers. Because of its
limited carrying capacity it simply cannot compete with the larger
budget carriers, hence the prices: but the company could go someway
to redressing that balance if the runway were extended to 1,319
metres.
We have it on good authority from SHH that they are fully behind
Plymouth Airport and believe that if Plymouth is to prosper then it's
essential it has larger aircraft, and that can only be done with an
extension. SHH are also in favour of other airlines operating out of
Plymouth, but very few are prepared to pay for the huge costs
involved in the extension of the runway. This puts Sutton Harbour
Holdings in a difficult situation, while Tudor Evans and his council,
the landlords, drag their heels.
The council has its priorities all wrong. Instead of spending money
on Life Centres and such like, they should put it where it is most
needed, at the airport, so supporting SHH, who are carrying the can
for the airport's failings.
If this city is to prosper, particularly with the future of the
Dockyard under the spotlight, it's essential transport links are
improved dramatically. This can only be done by air travel. We are
looking forward to the public of Plymouth and surrounding areas
supporting our initiatives in the important matter of Plymouth
Airport. We can be contacted at [email protected] and hilly-
[email protected] and would appreciate any help you could offer.
SID ANNING and IAN HILL
Plymouth
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: E London and Plymouth
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I totally agree - a decision needs to be made asap.
Look at what was happening at the airport 10 years ago - Brymon flew to Gatwick, Bristol, Cork, Jersey, Guernsey; the old Air South West flew to Dublin, Cork and Manchester; there was a nightly mail flight; there was a busy Beechcraft service centre and the Navy did their flight grading operation.
20 years ago this July, the airport had a big open day with 146's. Dornier's, ATRs, Dash-8's and HS125s visiting.
Going back to 1982, Brymon flew to Gatwick, Heathrow, Cork, Guernsey, St Mary's, Morlaix, Brest
A few years ago Air Wales flew to Cardiff, Cork and Dublin.
Today there are just the Air Southwest flights, no service centre and the Naval Flight training flight has left. Most of the buildings are occupied by non airline companies.
The terminal is very smart inside and a lot better and cleaner than many - i.e. Exeter. It has the capacity to handle way more scheduled flights even with its limited apron space.
Look at what was happening at the airport 10 years ago - Brymon flew to Gatwick, Bristol, Cork, Jersey, Guernsey; the old Air South West flew to Dublin, Cork and Manchester; there was a nightly mail flight; there was a busy Beechcraft service centre and the Navy did their flight grading operation.
20 years ago this July, the airport had a big open day with 146's. Dornier's, ATRs, Dash-8's and HS125s visiting.
Going back to 1982, Brymon flew to Gatwick, Heathrow, Cork, Guernsey, St Mary's, Morlaix, Brest
A few years ago Air Wales flew to Cardiff, Cork and Dublin.
Today there are just the Air Southwest flights, no service centre and the Naval Flight training flight has left. Most of the buildings are occupied by non airline companies.
The terminal is very smart inside and a lot better and cleaner than many - i.e. Exeter. It has the capacity to handle way more scheduled flights even with its limited apron space.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Milton Keynes
Age: 39
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If they were to extend the runway would they end up knocking houses down? Isnt there some kind of factory (or something of that nature) on the 31 end?
I flew into Plymouth today in G-ROUP (C172) on a practice of my qualifying x-country and I found the ATC to be really good, clearly spoken and helpful.
While there I saw a Dauphin come in to land (twice) I think it had Royal Navy written on it. Is that based there?
I flew into Plymouth today in G-ROUP (C172) on a practice of my qualifying x-country and I found the ATC to be really good, clearly spoken and helpful.
While there I saw a Dauphin come in to land (twice) I think it had Royal Navy written on it. Is that based there?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Milton Keynes
Age: 39
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks very much for the information there. I had to hold on runway 13 as one landed behind me. Sadly no dash 8 in whilst I was there. 
Is the shorter runway a crosswind runway?
Is the shorter runway a crosswind runway?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Milton Keynes
Age: 39
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Without a doubt, but as it's shorter than 13 I wondered if it was only used in very strong winds (in a similar way that runway 23 was used at Heathrow until it was closed and designated as taxiway alpha)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: E London and Plymouth
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
06-24 is normally only used when the crosswind exceeds 15 knots. It is often used to park visiting aircraft - there is currently a Dash-7 visitor parked up - haven't seen one here in quite a few years. The Dash-8's used to be able to land and take off on 06-24 but I don't think they can anymore due to the width of the runway.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Milton Keynes
Age: 39
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey
Thanks very much for the info. You've answered my question and i'm very grateful.
Is the Dash 7 the British Arctic Survey aircraft? It wasnt there when I flew into plymouth on Thursday so I assume it must have arrived either Friday or Saturday.
Thanks very much for the info. You've answered my question and i'm very grateful.
Is the Dash 7 the British Arctic Survey aircraft? It wasnt there when I flew into plymouth on Thursday so I assume it must have arrived either Friday or Saturday.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Devon
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Plymouth City Airport must make more money to survive in the long term, according to a new council report.
A report to the city's Cabinet says Plymouth City Council is prepared to consider providing a longer runway at the airport.
But if the airport is to survive in the long term it must stem the current losses being made by the operators, the Sutton Harbour Group, and resolve the environmental issues highlighted by the Ombudsman, said the report.
One of the runways could be sold off for development in a long-term bid to stop it losing money. It is not yet clear what the sold land would be used for in future, although further details are expected to emerge shortly.
This is the latest
The sale of land at the airport would ?allow the council and operators to focus on the long-term future and address how the airport needs to develop in order to attract further scheduled airline operations and operate in profit and maximise its contribution to the Plymouth economy and community?, a council spokeswoman said this evening.
The report also says that the council is prepared to pay local residents compensation for the disturbance they have suffered because of the airport operations.
The compensation was recommended by the local government ombudsman in 2005 but the council has delayed making payments until now.
In 2005 the ombudsman said that the council should pay at least ?1,000 to households which have suffered ?severe disturbance? because of the airport.
A report to the city's Cabinet says Plymouth City Council is prepared to consider providing a longer runway at the airport.
But if the airport is to survive in the long term it must stem the current losses being made by the operators, the Sutton Harbour Group, and resolve the environmental issues highlighted by the Ombudsman, said the report.
One of the runways could be sold off for development in a long-term bid to stop it losing money. It is not yet clear what the sold land would be used for in future, although further details are expected to emerge shortly.
This is the latest
The sale of land at the airport would ?allow the council and operators to focus on the long-term future and address how the airport needs to develop in order to attract further scheduled airline operations and operate in profit and maximise its contribution to the Plymouth economy and community?, a council spokeswoman said this evening.
The report also says that the council is prepared to pay local residents compensation for the disturbance they have suffered because of the airport operations.
The compensation was recommended by the local government ombudsman in 2005 but the council has delayed making payments until now.
In 2005 the ombudsman said that the council should pay at least ?1,000 to households which have suffered ?severe disturbance? because of the airport.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: E London and Plymouth
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So "the council is prepared to pay local residents compensation for the disturbance they have suffered because of the airport operations." and the long term plans are to build more houses! The onwers of the new houses will complain that engine runs are waking them up at 5am in the morning and ask for compensation!
Even if they do this I can't see it happening for some time. They'd also have to do something about the BIH/WOW hangar. Would cost a lot to move it from the 06 end to somewhere else.
Even if they do this I can't see it happening for some time. They'd also have to do something about the BIH/WOW hangar. Would cost a lot to move it from the 06 end to somewhere else.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Devon
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the full report concerning the expanded reading when you take into account that SHH have an armaggeden clause but to sell the land for houses makes it a double edge sword as if they dont have enough problems with the houses that already exist around the airport.
07:30 - 21 September 2007
One runway at Plymouth airport is likely to be sold off for housing and other development in a bid to save the loss-making service.The operator, Sutton Harbour Holdings, wants to exercise a clause in its lease that allows it to redevelop the land and reinvest the money in the airport.
The Civil Aviation Authority says passenger numbers at the airport fell to 100,045 in 2006, from 132,514 in 2005.
At the same time Exeter Airport passenger numbers reached 982,804 from 847,544.
But business leaders said this could be seen as "the thin end of the wedge" leading to the end of the airport.
Mike Leece, chairman of Plymouth Chamber of Commerce, said: "No airline or airport is viable if people won't use the services but hopefully the money from the sale will enable Sutton Harbour Holdings to invest in new routes.
"This must not be seen to be the thin end of the wedge. The best way for the business community to respond is to use the service."
Dave Young, managing director of the Airport Business Centre, said he was cynical that the proposals would produce the best outcome for businesses in the city.
"My understanding is that the business community cannot rely on the airport the way it currently operates and have given up on it."
Guy Walker, from the Chamber of Commerce, said: "If this is the only way in which to develop the airport and routes we are going to be supportive.
"We want to be certain that the capital will be used to invest in the future of the airport."
The runway to be closed - designated 06/24 - is the shorter of the two and runs parallel with Tavistock Road. The deal must be approved by the city Cabinet, which meets next Tuesday.
A report to the Cabinet also recommends paying local residents compensation for the disturbance they have suffered because of the airport. The compensation was recommended by the local government ombudsman in 2005 but the council has delayed making payments until now.
The report recommends that negotiations continue on an option in the 150-year lease that would allow the airport operators to release the land for development and to provide investment in the airport.
The city council would not receive any of the proceeds of a sale, even though it is the ground landlord, according to Nallin Seneviratne, the city's head of asset management.
The sell-off would end the use of that runway by helicopters, and move the engine testing bay and maintenance hangar to an area that would lessen the effect on local residents, the council said.
Laurie Price of Mott MacDonald, an aviation consultancy, said that half a million people lived in the airport's catchment area and there was no reason why it could not make money.
More investment could help to attract other carriers, and the improved level of service would encourage passengers, he said.
Ian Bowyer, the Cabinet member for Budget and Asset Management, said: "These decisions are about enabling the airport to continue to operate and giving the headroom to Sutton Harbour Company and the city council to work together to develop the plan for the future of the airport and investigate whether there is a business case for future runway extension."
Nigel Godefroy, managing director of Sutton Harbour Group, said: "We are delighted to be working with the city council on this package of strategic measures which provide an excellent platform for a successful future for the airport, whilst at the same time working to overcome environmental concerns with our near-neighbours.
"This is a positive step to ensure that Plymouth City Airport and its vital air links continue to play an important part in supporting the city and the wider region."
Sutton Harbour Holdings has an "Armageddon clause" in its main lease which allows it to close the airport completely if it continues to lose money. The land would be sold off and the proceeds split between it and the council.
07:30 - 21 September 2007
One runway at Plymouth airport is likely to be sold off for housing and other development in a bid to save the loss-making service.The operator, Sutton Harbour Holdings, wants to exercise a clause in its lease that allows it to redevelop the land and reinvest the money in the airport.
The Civil Aviation Authority says passenger numbers at the airport fell to 100,045 in 2006, from 132,514 in 2005.
At the same time Exeter Airport passenger numbers reached 982,804 from 847,544.
But business leaders said this could be seen as "the thin end of the wedge" leading to the end of the airport.
Mike Leece, chairman of Plymouth Chamber of Commerce, said: "No airline or airport is viable if people won't use the services but hopefully the money from the sale will enable Sutton Harbour Holdings to invest in new routes.
"This must not be seen to be the thin end of the wedge. The best way for the business community to respond is to use the service."
Dave Young, managing director of the Airport Business Centre, said he was cynical that the proposals would produce the best outcome for businesses in the city.
"My understanding is that the business community cannot rely on the airport the way it currently operates and have given up on it."
Guy Walker, from the Chamber of Commerce, said: "If this is the only way in which to develop the airport and routes we are going to be supportive.
"We want to be certain that the capital will be used to invest in the future of the airport."
The runway to be closed - designated 06/24 - is the shorter of the two and runs parallel with Tavistock Road. The deal must be approved by the city Cabinet, which meets next Tuesday.
A report to the Cabinet also recommends paying local residents compensation for the disturbance they have suffered because of the airport. The compensation was recommended by the local government ombudsman in 2005 but the council has delayed making payments until now.
The report recommends that negotiations continue on an option in the 150-year lease that would allow the airport operators to release the land for development and to provide investment in the airport.
The city council would not receive any of the proceeds of a sale, even though it is the ground landlord, according to Nallin Seneviratne, the city's head of asset management.
The sell-off would end the use of that runway by helicopters, and move the engine testing bay and maintenance hangar to an area that would lessen the effect on local residents, the council said.
Laurie Price of Mott MacDonald, an aviation consultancy, said that half a million people lived in the airport's catchment area and there was no reason why it could not make money.
More investment could help to attract other carriers, and the improved level of service would encourage passengers, he said.
Ian Bowyer, the Cabinet member for Budget and Asset Management, said: "These decisions are about enabling the airport to continue to operate and giving the headroom to Sutton Harbour Company and the city council to work together to develop the plan for the future of the airport and investigate whether there is a business case for future runway extension."
Nigel Godefroy, managing director of Sutton Harbour Group, said: "We are delighted to be working with the city council on this package of strategic measures which provide an excellent platform for a successful future for the airport, whilst at the same time working to overcome environmental concerns with our near-neighbours.
"This is a positive step to ensure that Plymouth City Airport and its vital air links continue to play an important part in supporting the city and the wider region."
Sutton Harbour Holdings has an "Armageddon clause" in its main lease which allows it to close the airport completely if it continues to lose money. The land would be sold off and the proceeds split between it and the council.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Devon
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the statement today in the local press
The man in charge of Plymouth City Airport has defended plans to sell off part of the site for housing, saying it is the best way to safeguard the facility's future.
Nigel Godefroy, managing director of the Sutton Harbour Group, owners of Plymouth City Airport, said without the sale the airport would remain unprofitable, which could lead to it being shut down.
But Mr Godefroy, writing exclusively in today's Herald, said his firm did not want to sell off the site, or strip it of its assets. Instead, he wanted to see the airport 'stand on its own two feet'.
Mr Godefroy said: "The simple fact is that although tens of thousands of people use the airport each year, it does not generate enough income to cover its costs.
"That's why we have been exploring with the city council other ways of ensuring that the airport continues to play a vital role in supporting Plymouth's and the region's economy."
He added: "We would use proceeds from the development to invest in further developing the airport's facilities and services."
Nigel Godefroy writes: "The pages of the Herald have been buzzing with comment and speculation on the latest developments regarding Plymouth City Airport.
What doesn't seem to be widely understood, however, is that what we are proposing is good news! Good news for the airport, for its customers, for the city and for our shareholders.
Essentially we are exploring with the City Council an option to develop an area of surplus airport land, whilst also protecting both the current operations and future development of the airport and its air links.
For readers unfamiliar with the airport issue, let me explain. The Sutton Harbour Group took over the running of the airport in 2000 and we lease the site from Plymouth City Council.
We also own and operate low fares regional airline Air Southwest, which we set up to save Plymouth and Newquay's air links to London Gatwick when BA decided to axe the route in 2003.
Air Southwest will celebrate its fourth birthday later this month, having carried in excess of one million passengers. We're very proud of that achievement.
Although our airline is profitable, Plymouth City Airport isn't. There are many reasons for this. The loss of 727 Squadron, the closure of regional airline Air Wales and the decision by the Post Office to axe its mail flights have all contributed. These have all been beyond our control, influenced by external factors and nothing to do with the running of the airport or its facilities.
We have sought to grow passenger numbers by introducing a range of new routes and through continued investment in the airport terminal. As well as a four times daily service to Gatwick we fly to Manchester, Leeds Bradford, Bristol and Jersey.
More than 100,000 people used the airport last year, and the message back from those passengers is that they like the ease with which they can board and depart aircraft, which they can do in a matter of minutes. And of course for the city's businesses, for inward investment, and for tourism, the air links are a vital component in Plymouth's infrastructure.
We have also looked at other activities like increased use of the airport by helicopters, but these can exacerbate noise issues among our near neighbours and we are therefore constrained by the operating conditions by which we must abide.
The simple fact is that although tens of thousands of people use the airport each year, it does not generate enough income to cover its costs. That's why we have been exploring with the City Council other ways of ensuring that the airport continues to play a vital role in supporting Plymouth's and the region's economy.
Having been based in Plymouth for 160 years we are not now about to pull the plug on one of the city's greatest assets, which contributes an estimated £12 million a year to the local economy. Far from it.
Our negotiations with the City Council, which owns the freehold to the airport site, include the potential for developing land that is surplus to requirements. And it's important to stress that if we develop that land it will in no way hinder the future growth of the airport. In fact, we're only looking at around 18 acres from a total area of 123 acres, involving the closure of our secondary runway which is rarely used.
We would use proceeds from the development to invest in further developing the airport's facilities and services. This would include relocating engine testing facilities and the maintenance hangar further away from local residents and cease all helicopter activity on the secondary runway. This would reduce noise nuisance and address the majority of environmental concerns that have constrained our ability to expand activities.
That's good news for the airport, its customers, the city, the wider region and our shareholders.
Most importantly, it helps us offset our immediate losses, deals with environmental issues in the short-term and buys us time to grow services, test future demand and decide, with the City Council, whether a runway extension is viable in the long-term.
Several Herald readers have asked why we can't just get on with a runway extension and attract bigger planes and other airlines. It might seem an attractive option on the face of it but the costs range from £13 million to £24 million (at last year's prices - and constriction costs are rising 6% a year), and neither the private nor public sector would consider such an investment without evidence of demand.
And we can't test that potential demand until we can deal with the current losses and environmental issues. So what we're doing with the City Council is taking a stepped approach that gives us the building blocks to move forward.
Several commentators have said developing part of the airport is the 'thin end of the wedge'. Others have said we are selling the family silver, throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and even asset stripping. In fact what we're aiming to do is buy enough time to allow the airport to stand on its own two feet, and the deal we are discussing with the city council is the best opportunity to make that happen. Plymouth City Airport is a fantastic asset - just ask the 100,000-plus people who used it last year.
Plymouth, which is perhaps only now finding its confidence again for the first time since the war, needs - and deserves - its own airport. And that is why we are working with the City Council to ensure that Plymouth City Airport, and its popular and vital air links, are given the best possible opportunity to grow and prosper."
Nigel Godefroy, managing director of the Sutton Harbour Group, owners of Plymouth City Airport, said without the sale the airport would remain unprofitable, which could lead to it being shut down.
But Mr Godefroy, writing exclusively in today's Herald, said his firm did not want to sell off the site, or strip it of its assets. Instead, he wanted to see the airport 'stand on its own two feet'.
Mr Godefroy said: "The simple fact is that although tens of thousands of people use the airport each year, it does not generate enough income to cover its costs.
"That's why we have been exploring with the city council other ways of ensuring that the airport continues to play a vital role in supporting Plymouth's and the region's economy."
He added: "We would use proceeds from the development to invest in further developing the airport's facilities and services."
Nigel Godefroy writes: "The pages of the Herald have been buzzing with comment and speculation on the latest developments regarding Plymouth City Airport.
What doesn't seem to be widely understood, however, is that what we are proposing is good news! Good news for the airport, for its customers, for the city and for our shareholders.
Essentially we are exploring with the City Council an option to develop an area of surplus airport land, whilst also protecting both the current operations and future development of the airport and its air links.
For readers unfamiliar with the airport issue, let me explain. The Sutton Harbour Group took over the running of the airport in 2000 and we lease the site from Plymouth City Council.
We also own and operate low fares regional airline Air Southwest, which we set up to save Plymouth and Newquay's air links to London Gatwick when BA decided to axe the route in 2003.
Air Southwest will celebrate its fourth birthday later this month, having carried in excess of one million passengers. We're very proud of that achievement.
Although our airline is profitable, Plymouth City Airport isn't. There are many reasons for this. The loss of 727 Squadron, the closure of regional airline Air Wales and the decision by the Post Office to axe its mail flights have all contributed. These have all been beyond our control, influenced by external factors and nothing to do with the running of the airport or its facilities.
We have sought to grow passenger numbers by introducing a range of new routes and through continued investment in the airport terminal. As well as a four times daily service to Gatwick we fly to Manchester, Leeds Bradford, Bristol and Jersey.
More than 100,000 people used the airport last year, and the message back from those passengers is that they like the ease with which they can board and depart aircraft, which they can do in a matter of minutes. And of course for the city's businesses, for inward investment, and for tourism, the air links are a vital component in Plymouth's infrastructure.
We have also looked at other activities like increased use of the airport by helicopters, but these can exacerbate noise issues among our near neighbours and we are therefore constrained by the operating conditions by which we must abide.
The simple fact is that although tens of thousands of people use the airport each year, it does not generate enough income to cover its costs. That's why we have been exploring with the City Council other ways of ensuring that the airport continues to play a vital role in supporting Plymouth's and the region's economy.
Having been based in Plymouth for 160 years we are not now about to pull the plug on one of the city's greatest assets, which contributes an estimated £12 million a year to the local economy. Far from it.
Our negotiations with the City Council, which owns the freehold to the airport site, include the potential for developing land that is surplus to requirements. And it's important to stress that if we develop that land it will in no way hinder the future growth of the airport. In fact, we're only looking at around 18 acres from a total area of 123 acres, involving the closure of our secondary runway which is rarely used.
We would use proceeds from the development to invest in further developing the airport's facilities and services. This would include relocating engine testing facilities and the maintenance hangar further away from local residents and cease all helicopter activity on the secondary runway. This would reduce noise nuisance and address the majority of environmental concerns that have constrained our ability to expand activities.
That's good news for the airport, its customers, the city, the wider region and our shareholders.
Most importantly, it helps us offset our immediate losses, deals with environmental issues in the short-term and buys us time to grow services, test future demand and decide, with the City Council, whether a runway extension is viable in the long-term.
Several Herald readers have asked why we can't just get on with a runway extension and attract bigger planes and other airlines. It might seem an attractive option on the face of it but the costs range from £13 million to £24 million (at last year's prices - and constriction costs are rising 6% a year), and neither the private nor public sector would consider such an investment without evidence of demand.
And we can't test that potential demand until we can deal with the current losses and environmental issues. So what we're doing with the City Council is taking a stepped approach that gives us the building blocks to move forward.
Several commentators have said developing part of the airport is the 'thin end of the wedge'. Others have said we are selling the family silver, throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and even asset stripping. In fact what we're aiming to do is buy enough time to allow the airport to stand on its own two feet, and the deal we are discussing with the city council is the best opportunity to make that happen. Plymouth City Airport is a fantastic asset - just ask the 100,000-plus people who used it last year.
Plymouth, which is perhaps only now finding its confidence again for the first time since the war, needs - and deserves - its own airport. And that is why we are working with the City Council to ensure that Plymouth City Airport, and its popular and vital air links, are given the best possible opportunity to grow and prosper."