Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

LEEDS 5

Old 25th Jan 2015, 22:19
  #2361 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 6 miles 14
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Leeds Approach. I know the declared distances and just gave you some. No one is saying it's ideal but modern ac performance is loads better. 5900ft is not half of 7380ft whether like it or not. Luton is shorter than Leeds and manages nicely thank you. You are still dreaming, CF would work if Millions were spent and LBA was forced to close. LBA is owned and operated by Bridgepoint. Who will compensate them and stump up the millions needed to develop another airfield in these days of austerity?? Face facts airports are closing not opening these days.
HOODED is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2015, 22:31
  #2362 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by LAX_LHR
Leeds Approach,


You are looking at this project far too simplistically. Population does not automatically mean people will use it.


Just look at BHX, huge city on its doorstep, huge industry areas, easily accessible to millions more yet handles just shy of 10million per year, with outlying areas using LHR/MAN/EMA/LTN/STN and BRS. That's a fraction of its potential thanks to the other airports.


So explain to me why CF would be so vastly different? Like I say, you have a far too simplistic 'Yorkshire pride' view on this, and you seem to be answering rather defensively against any critics, which quite frankly puts many off and I'm wondering why Ive even bothered t be frank.
Of course I have oversimplified because the basic principles are set in stone. Big population, reliable 'fit for purpose' airport, easily accessible.

Population of the West midlands 5.3 million BHX 10 million passengers.
Population of Yorks and the Humber 5.3 million LBA 3.2 million passengers

This has very little to do with Yorkshire pride. I don't mind critics at all but how can anyone argue with these figures? How can anyone dispute the airfield characteristics of Yeadon airport?

We have the perfect double whamy in Yorkshire- wrong location for accessibility of an airport and poor airfield characteristics. Sort those two factors out and then you will see.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2015, 22:34
  #2363 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: -
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Shut LBA and move everything to DSA, problem solved...

Then rename it to Robin Hood Doncaster Sheffield Leeds Yorkshire Airport!
gilesdavies is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2015, 22:42
  #2364 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by HOODED
Leeds Approach. I know the declared distances and just gave you some. No one is saying it's ideal but modern ac performance is loads better. 5900ft is not half of 7380ft whether like it or not. Luton is shorter than Leeds and manages nicely thank you. You are still dreaming, CF would work if Millions were spent and LBA was forced to close. LBA is owned and operated by Bridgepoint. Who will compensate them and stump up the millions needed to develop another airfield in these days of austerity?? Face facts airports are closing not opening these days.
What is Luton's LDA then (both runways)? Runway into prevailing wind. What is the LBA LDA (both runways)? 90 degrees to prevailing wind.

Some of the figures you gave before were nonsense. If you read my post again I stated that nearly half the 2000 ft extension cannot be used to land from the North. Check runway displacements.

Modern aircraft are much better of course but the airlines will not risk LBA because the accessibility/location of the airport is poor and a sizeable proportion of passengers find easier to go to MAN where tickets prices are lower because of the reliability/efficiency of MAN airfield.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2015, 22:52
  #2365 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by HOODED
Leeds Approach. I know the declared distances and just gave you some. No one is saying it's ideal but modern ac performance is loads better. 5900ft is not half of 7380ft whether like it or not. Luton is shorter than Leeds and manages nicely thank you. You are still dreaming, CF would work if Millions were spent and LBA was forced to close. LBA is owned and operated by Bridgepoint. Who will compensate them and stump up the millions needed to develop another airfield in these days of austerity?? Face facts airports are closing not opening these days.
You make a very good point about compensation. Certainly there would be property owners that would require to be compensated. From my point of view the benefits to Yorkshire economically and culturally for many years to come would by far out weigh any compensation figures. How many millions of pounds have been spent or plan to be spent on an airport that is millions of passengers behind where it should be? How many billions of pounds would have been kept in Yorkshire if CF had been developed earlier?
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2015, 23:05
  #2366 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 6 miles 14
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Leeds Approach. Apologies I have just re read your post. What you state is true. Luton does indeed have slightly better LDAs as they have not been forced by the CAA to displace thresholds as part of the approval of a runway extension. Remember when 33 had the threshold on the end? With a soft RESA built the threshold on 32 could go back to its original position but 14 is stuck where it is. As you clearly know it's not landing but take off that requires the length, that's when you are heaviest. Engine out after take off is a potential problem on 32 if you are heavy. LBA is a compromise. Crosswinds become a problem when the wind is high. How many times a year is this? It happens at other airports too even when the have prevailing wind direction runways. FYI BHX is also a NW/SE runway. LBA has problems yes but it does ok and should do better. Road/Rail access improvements were promised when the Airport was sold but that money was never spent where it should have been. Leeds is now a major financial city and deserves an Airport to match. Sadly it won't get one. Live with it.
HOODED is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2015, 08:35
  #2367 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Clarty Waters, UK
Age: 58
Posts: 945
Likes: 0
Received 30 Likes on 18 Posts
Originally Posted by LEEDS APPROACH
I don't mind critics at all but how can anyone argue with these figures? How can anyone dispute the airfield characteristics of Yeadon airport?
We can argue with them because you treat the figures far too simplistically. In your mind population = big airport therefore case proven, and everything else - the the money, the economics, the competitive environment is dismissed as insignificant, a minor detail that can be overcome with a bit of "political will".

Very few, I think, would dispute the non-ideal location of Yeadon. What most of us appreciate, though, is that it despite it's shortcomings it works sufficiently well that the barriers to entry for Church Fenton are enormous.
Andy_S is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2015, 13:30
  #2368 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: leeds
Age: 77
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The figures need to be looked at carefully and interpreted. Just a few points.

The 2011 Census had the population of W Midlands Planning Region at 5.6 million not 5.3m.

Birmingham is also the most attractive airport for a chunk of surrounding territory outside WM such as mid-Wales, N Oxfordshire. By contrast even CF would not be clearly the best located airport for Sheffield,certainly not the affluent parts of Sheffield.

Looking at Bristol and E Mids as the best comparators to Leeds and looking at the CAA stats, I reckon an all singing all dancing relatively unconstrained airport would be doing a couple of million pppa more than Yeadon. Given that would never be a purely commercial proposition, how much public money is it worth spending to achieve that? A fraction of what it would cost IMHO.
anothertyke is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2015, 13:32
  #2369 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Andy_S
We can argue with them because you treat the figures far too simplistically. In your mind population = big airport therefore case proven, and everything else - the the money, the economics, the competitive environment is dismissed as insignificant, a minor detail that can be overcome with a bit of "political will".

Very few, I think, would dispute the non-ideal location of Yeadon. What most of us appreciate, though, is that it despite it's shortcomings it works sufficiently well that the barriers to entry for Church Fenton are enormous.
Oh my friend from clarty waters! Population does = big airport. Name anywhere in the world where that very basic principle doesn't follow. Of course you can have big airports where the population is not that big with hub airports but generally wherever there is a lot of people they need to be moved.

What sometimes skews this is political weighted decision/mistake making. I think only someone with an interest in MAN would say that LBA works sufficiently. It simply does not. The economics of CF do stack up-as we move forward in time it would be the most efficient airport in Yorkshire, it would be the most easily accessible airport to all of Yorkshire, it would keep passengers and money in the Yorkshire region. That is real issue here - the effect it would have on another region's airport where millions of Yorkshire people at present are being forced to travel to.

The barriers to developing Church Fenton are huge but logically and economically as we go forward it would be the right thing to do, not for MAN airport but for the whole Yorkshire region. The evidence is utterly overwhelming and anyone who cannot see it I think has a vested interest elsewhere.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2015, 13:42
  #2370 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The evidence is utterly overwhelming and anyone who cannot see it I think has a vested interest elsewhere

Leeds Approach,


You're not getting it are you?


You keep saying 'the evidence is overwhelming', which, you claim includes logically and economically.


Please can you point me to this 'overwhelming economic evidence' that you so lovingly elude to, as so far, you keep spouting 'population, population, population'.


How much will it cost to develop CF? How much will it cost to compensate bridgepoint? How much to develop the transport links? What is the propensity to fly level in the 1 hour catchment? What is the yield potential of flights? How much are you going to charge airlines to re-coup the construction and compensation costs? How do you expect airlines to match the 'lower bulk prices' of MAN with the fees?


These are just some of the many, many questions that you need to answer before anyone remotely takes you seriously, yet, you seem to be avoiding the question with 'but, but, but, the population, please will SOMEONE THINK OF THE POPULATION'.
LAX_LHR is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2015, 13:43
  #2371 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by anothertyke
The figures need to be looked at carefully and interpreted. Just a few points.

The 2011 Census had the population of W Midlands Planning Region at 5.6 million not 5.3m.

Birmingham is also the most attractive airport for a chunk of surrounding territory outside WM such as mid-Wales, N Oxfordshire. By contrast even CF would not be clearly the best located airport for Sheffield,certainly not the affluent parts of Sheffield.

Looking at Bristol and E Mids as the best comparators to Leeds and looking at the CAA stats, I reckon an all singing all dancing relatively unconstrained airport would be doing a couple of million pppa more than Yeadon. Given that would never be a purely commercial proposition, how much public money is it worth spending to achieve that? A fraction of what it would cost IMHO.
If the airport at CF had been developed when the runway extension at LBA was constructed (combined with the run down of LBA at that time) CF would be doing between 7 and 8 million passengers now (conservative estimate). The point is though go forward 50 years with CF against 50 years with LBA and the loss to Yorkshire without CF would be staggering (but great for MAN).

Politicians will keep an underperforming unsuitable airport bobbling along for as long as they can.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2015, 13:46
  #2372 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: leeds
Age: 77
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't disagree but as numerous others have said, we are where we are. By the way I for one have no vested interest.
anothertyke is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2015, 14:07
  #2373 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I personally am getting fed up with this thread about the so-called merits of an airport at Church Fenton which is never going to happen and is not needed anyway.
Can we get back to real news stories or even rumours if somewhat credible about the airport that does serve Yorkshire.
rpmac is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2015, 14:14
  #2374 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 6 miles 14
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I also have no vested interest in MAN and I hate the leakage of Yorkshire fliers to MAN. I just look at the situation realistically. I'd love someone with very deep pockets to come in and buy CF from its current owner who wants it as a GA site. Develop it, extend the runways, build a terminal and associated roads, put in taxiway capable of taking the big stuff, upgrade the lighting, put in ILS (Cat 3 please on at least 1 runway due Vale of York Fog.....yes I used to work at CF, Linton and Leeming oh and Finningley too). Then buy out Bridgepoint. Great all sorted. Now where are we going to find someone with all that money to spend for little return? How do you make a million in aviation?....Start with 2 million!
HOODED is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2015, 14:47
  #2375 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Big population

Big population=big airport. Yes, but the airport isn't necessarily right next to the big population. For example Rotterdam/Den Haag/Utrecht in the Netherlands - a sizeable population and much industry. Rotterdam has a small airport for local needs, the main airport being Amsterdam Schipol.
This works fine with fast road and rail connections.

Leeds/Bradford/West Yorks has a local airport with better services than Rotterdam. The main airport is Manchester which has good and improving road and rail links. No need spending more money at Church Fenton to provide something which is already available. Can you honestly expect CF to have anything like the range of flights MAN has. Ever?
roverman is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2015, 17:22
  #2376 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Clarty Waters, UK
Age: 58
Posts: 945
Likes: 0
Received 30 Likes on 18 Posts
Originally Posted by LEEDS APPROACH
Population does = big airport. Name anywhere in the world where that very basic principle doesn't follow.
To use your own words, it's a very basic principle. That's how you're using it - as a very basic principle. I don't deny the basic principle but my point was that there are a multitude of other factors that need to be taken into consideration. That's why I say you're being too simplistic.

Originally Posted by LEEDS APPROACH
I think only someone with an interest in MAN would say that LBA works sufficiently. It simply does not.
The operative word here is "sufficiently". No one denies LBA's limitations, but despite it's constraints it is a thriving regional airport. It works "sufficiently" well that there is very little enthusiasm in investing a lot of time and money in closing the place down and setting up shop somewhere else.

I am not remotely interested in MAN btw. I've actually gone on record on PPRuNe as being opposed to MAG's takeover of STN. But that's another story.
Andy_S is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2015, 16:15
  #2377 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: East Yorkshire
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Can we forget about Church Fenton, please. There are far too many Yorkshire folk using MAN as it is. If Church Fenton is to be "Yorkshire's" airport, there will be another million.
GdLSF is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2015, 18:08
  #2378 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by LAX_LHR
Leeds Approach,


You're not getting it are you?


You keep saying 'the evidence is overwhelming', which, you claim includes logically and economically.


Please can you point me to this 'overwhelming economic evidence' that you so lovingly elude to, as so far, you keep spouting 'population, population, population'.


How much will it cost to develop CF? How much will it cost to compensate bridgepoint? How much to develop the transport links? What is the propensity to fly level in the 1 hour catchment? What is the yield potential of flights? How much are you going to charge airlines to re-coup the construction and compensation costs? How do you expect airlines to match the 'lower bulk prices' of MAN with the fees?


These are just some of the many, many questions that you need to answer before anyone remotely takes you seriously, yet, you seem to be avoiding the question with 'but, but, but, the population, please will SOMEONE THINK OF THE POPULATION'.
I think it's you that doesn't get it. Your only legitimate argument is the cost of it. It would be at the centre of the whole of Yorkshire and IF LBA was to be politically withdrawn it would be the airport of choice for virtually all of the Yorkshire population. It would be easier to get to from all points of the compass. The stats show that outside of Leeds city region virtually nobody uses LBA- in that regard it is similar to NCL - It cannot pull passengers from other regions (only certain routes can be done because the catchment is very finite). If an airport was established at Church Fenton it would not only be the airport of choice for the whole of Yorkshire but it would also pull passengers from heavily populated neighbouring regions from all directions (exactly what MAN does). LBA will never be able to do this because of its inaccessible location. Even if it had a motorway and rail link to it - in aviation terms it is probably the worst civil airport in Britain. Ask a pilot.

You talk about compensating the owners of LBA but who compensated EMA when finningley was developed? - Nobody. If you put a better product in a better place market forces will ensure that it is a success. It is quicker to get to tadcaster from Sheffield, Middlesbrough, hull, Doncaster, Huddersfield, wakefield, Barnsley, York, Southern and Eastern Leeds, The entire county of North Yorkshire, the entire county of South Yorkshire, the entire county of East Yorkshire, Southern Bradford, Kirklees etc than it is to get to LBA. This can be proven very easily on a pc. CF is also on 2 of the countries most major railway lines and is planned to be on HS2. Which railway line is LBA on?

The propensity to fly is irrelevant as they will be the same people who are flying from LBA plus millions more. The yield will be higher because the demand will be higher. Airlines will not have to factor in frequent diversion costs into their ticket prices and as finningley has shown despite being a brand new airport it still offers knock down deals for airlines to base. The difference is CF would pull from all of Yorkshire and not just Doncaster and Rotherham. The evidence is there- you just have to have a knowledge of demographics, catchment areas, motorway and rail routes. Accessibility is key as the RYR bigwig said last week. It is true.

You talk about who will pay for CF but what about the 40+ years that Yorkshire has lost millions of pounds each year because of LBA's real and perceived inaccessibility? People outside of Leeds and Bradford are just not interested in the slog to get there and a poxy mile long link road will change very little. This will continue for another 50 years. Billions of pounds helping to prop up a neighbouring regions economy. I am afraid my friend it is you that just cannot see that LBA is not serving the Yorkshire population properly or perhaps you can?
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2015, 18:25
  #2379 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Leeds Approach,


There you go again waffling about population, avoiding pretty much every question I asked.


For the record, your argument about compensation for EMA is null and void, EMA wasn't closed for the benefit of Finningly, which is what you want to happen in the LBA/CF debate.


The fact that you still waffle on about 'population, population, population' means that the chance to take you seriously has long diminished.


Good day with your cloud cuckoo 'dont worry about cost' scenario, the chance of LB being closed to develop CF is like the chance of anyone taking you seriously.....none existant.
LAX_LHR is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2015, 18:30
  #2380 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Andy_S
To use your own words, it's a very basic principle. That's how you're using it - as a very basic principle. I don't deny the basic principle but my point was that there are a multitude of other factors that need to be taken into consideration. That's why I say you're being too simplistic.



The operative word here is "sufficiently". No one denies LBA's limitations, but despite it's constraints it is a thriving regional airport. It works "sufficiently" well that there is very little enthusiasm in investing a lot of time and money in closing the place down and setting up shop somewhere else.

I am not remotely interested in MAN btw. I've actually gone on record on PPRuNe as being opposed to MAG's takeover of STN. But that's another story.
It is not thriving - it is underperforming massively because it is in the wrong position to serve the WHOLE of Yorkshire and neighbouring regions. It is using up the Leeds city region population but outside of that region passengers are choosing more accessible airports (not with a short runway on a hill). The east of the pennines has a population greater than Scotland and therefore there is no reason (other than propping up MAN) why Yorkshire should not have (and can profitably support) an airport of its own that can be easily reached and can properly do the job in aviation terms. MAN would obviously be the main airport for the North but Yorkshire would have a smaller version. NW politicians would fight tooth and nail to stop this happening.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.