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

LEEDS 5

Old 12th Jun 2016, 10:00
  #2641 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think it would be fitting for someone in office to apologise to Thomson and their customers for them having to operate (multiple flights) from another airport to the one they chose to fly from. I would like to apologise to Thomson who have repeatedly given the airport a chance.

As a proud Leeds originating inhabitant I find what the region offers in terms of modern, efficient and sensible 21st century civil air transport needlessly deficient and quite frankly embarrassing. Nobody expects perfection but can we not aim just a little bit closer to sensible?
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 11:06
  #2642 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Jet2 seem to like the place
paully is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 11:26
  #2643 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by paully
Jet2 seem to like the place
Yes well some of Jet2's customers will not be that happy having to trek back from another airport miles away in thick hill fog well after midnight after long journeys from Spain.

Jet2 do like the place but I'm sure they'd like an alternative that can actually stay open in mid Summer for their planes to land.

It's amazing that some of the local spotters criticise Thomson! A 4 hour + heavily delayed flight through the night with tired passengers all the way from Rhodes that was delayed because the previous LBA flight from Greece was also diverted to MAN in the night in yes you've guessed it - low cloud. 25 minutes of holding at LBA in the early morning with no chance of thick low cloud lifting and then they get criticised for their 'operational decisions'! But then they cannot understand why they don't base another plane at LBA!
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 11:30
  #2644 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As you well know, Thomsons for some reason regularly divert to MAN when it suits them and its often convenient to blame Leeds weather. The event you are alluding to has a bit of a hole in Thomson`s (and yours) argument. The aircraft ahead and the one behind it managed to land there without problem. The question you could pose is why did Thomsons inconvenience their passengers and not for the first time..
paully is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 11:37
  #2645 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
3 successive days of aircraft diversions in mid June - not mid January! You wont hear the local lib dem MP talk about this though, just that he wants a train line building up the hill to add an extra 2 million passengers to an airport on a tiny hill top that cannot handle modern aircraft due to its tiny runway and fog in the middle of Summer!

The only airport that has markings for 777s and yet none has actually landed! When were they built again? Don't worry though because the Dreamliner can operate from LBA when it gets built - what's that I here? It's already built and been flying for years!
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 11:48
  #2646 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by paully
As you well know, Thomsons for some reason regularly divert to MAN when it suits them and its often convenient to blame Leeds weather. The event you are alluding to has a bit of a hole in Thomson`s (and yours) argument. The aircraft ahead and the one behind it managed to land there without problem. The question you could pose is why did Thomsons inconvenience their passengers and not for the first time..
When you understand the reasons (which you probably never will) then you will understand why some aircraft will be able to land and some will not - just as the 3 LS aircraft diverted the night before. Perhaps he wasn't willing to ar$ around at a ridiculous airport with reduced fuel just like LS the night before and BE the morning after.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 11:58
  #2647 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What you will find is that ALL airlines do things 'that suits them' - its how they make some money. The more things they can do that suits them the more money they will make. One of the main things that really really suits airlines is being able to land because the airport has not been built on a hill top.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 14:16
  #2648 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 8,541
Received 87 Likes on 59 Posts
What you will find is that ALL airlines do things 'that suits them'
Like continuing to operate from Leeds, despite the odd weather issue?
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 15:12
  #2649 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Leeds, UK & Cork, Ireland
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Most likely that the Thomson aircraft & crew combination were not certified for the approach required and the following aircraft was. There may also me differences in minima, which allowed the following aircraft to land.

It's not a conspiracy. It's not operationally easier to have aircraft on one side of the Pennines and passengers on the other. It's costly for the airline, to shuffle aircraft, passengers and crew around. The captain made a call that he/she couldn't safely get into LBA on that occasion, or was limited by minima. It happens at every airport, everywhere. The only airline that never diverted is the airline that never flew.
brian_dromey is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 15:34
  #2650 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Nobody is saying it is a conspiracy. It is a failure. It is something that can be improved. Yes it happens at all airports but it happens at LBA much more frequently than those airports and unlike some regions we can change that for the better. You are wrong it is operationally easier to have aircraft on one side of the Pennines because that airport works more efficiently and is not built on a 700ft hilltop with a short runway.

Yes airlines will continue to operate from LBA but these events reduce the profitability and that is exactly why some routes end prematurely and many are never started. It also affects the fare price and hence the demand.

In any walk of life you try to improve. I don't want Yorkshire air transport to be near the bottom of the league I want it to be pushing the top of the league.

If and when your flight to Cork has to divert that costs money and somebody has to pay (either directly or indirectly). Guess who it is? So when you're choosing which flight to take you may very well chose the airport with the cheaper fare.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 15:53
  #2651 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 8,541
Received 87 Likes on 59 Posts
Here we go again

I don't want Yorkshire air transport to be near the bottom of the league I want it to be pushing the top of the league
How are you going to manage that? Let me guess, build a new airport in a better location maybe? How do you pay for that? Because...

...that costs money and somebody has to pay (either directly or indirectly). Guess who it is?
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 16:03
  #2652 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by SWBKCB
Like continuing to operate from Leeds, despite the odd weather issue?
The problem with this statement is you are not measuring against anything. Yes LS are big at Leeds but how much bigger would they be with a bigger catchment, more accessible airport, longer runway and better weather. Efficiency drives down cost. Guess who saves?
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 16:22
  #2653 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by SWBKCB
Here we go again



How are you going to manage that? Let me guess, build a new airport in a better location maybe? How do you pay for that? Because...
I certainly don't mind paying my taxes if it goes toward any project that will benefit 9 million people in the North East and Yorkshire in the long term. I'm a bit miffed that taxes were spent on a runway extension where half of it cannot be used for landing. A private project though at this stage so all 9 million of us can smile. It will transform the North East.

It's a good point though - somebody has to pay! You either pay the extra fare price for the fewer and less frequently flown routes from a less than ideal airport / or you pay to travel to an airport that maximises efficiency through location and airfield characteristics or you pay to have that latter airport slowly developed in your own region through taxes. Whichever option the public pays. But with the latter option you are investing in your own region and get immediate payback. Nobody pays me back for travelling to Manchester and parking for a simple flight to Florida - that is the definition of flight tax.

Last edited by LEEDS APPROACH; 12th Jun 2016 at 16:52.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 16:45
  #2654 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 8,541
Received 87 Likes on 59 Posts
Paid for through taxes? So you want to pay for a new facility with public money to compete with existing private operations? Are you a lawyer??

If it is a private project how will it be paid for? Increased charges to airlines? They may save a bit through efficiency gains from fewer diversions, but I would have thought not enough to cover the extra charges required.

Surely the cost of paying for a new airport will...

....reduce the profitability and that is exactly why some routes end prematurely and many are never started. It also affects the fare price and hence the demand.
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 17:25
  #2655 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Remember this is LBA thread. Taxes for the roads, piggy bank for the airport - just like NCL etc. At last no more journeys to Edinburgh and Manchester for us North Easterners.

And now back to 208M AMSL.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 21:44
  #2656 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Leeds, UK & Cork, Ireland
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I accept the point that LBA has many physical limitations, both the airfield and the terminal building are sub-optimal. I accept that the region shouldn't be settling for sub-optimal, but the decision to move to Leeds East cant be seen in isolation. Leeds East is not well located for the West Yorkshire region as a whole (its too far east for Huddersfied, Halifax and Bradford - risking leakage to MAN), the weather isn't a lot better, the runway is short, has no ILS capability and there no surface links (but installation would be relatively easy). Essentially, LEA would be a brand new airport - which could be sorted out IF the airport weren't privatised, or LEA were owned by Bridgepoint, IF the government weren't hellbent on underfunding all infrastructure and public service in the country and IF you ignore the 25 million passenger a year neighbour, well connected to the region by road and rail, with services across the UK, Europe, massive growth to North America and now Asia. MAN is about to commence its own transformation project which will make it even more attractive to airlines and passengers.

I don't get your point about ORK. ORK is also an airfield with similar typography, weather and crosswind problems. Even worse its a Cat II airfield, with little hope of ever becoming Cat III due to the typography. ORK feels similarly hamstrung by limitations around the airfield, runway sruface and length. So, although the terminal is far superior to LBA, the airfield itself still has its share of issues and there are numerous diversions to Shannon and Dublin each year - winter and summer. Yes, there is a risk that "my" LBA-ORK may become MAN-SNN on a given day.

LBA and ORK are similar in many ways, both have heavyweight neighbours. Both have to accept their role is supportive, allowing major markets to access the regions by air, with smaller aircraft, less frequently. They also allow the region to reach popular destinations, often the "bucket and spade" market. As bad as things may appear, there are neighbors who are worse off. Waterford and HUY spring to mind.
brian_dromey is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 22:52
  #2657 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 6 miles 14
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Leeds Approach. You keep banging on about LBA short runway."a runway extension only half of which can be used for landing"
You do realise that in general aircraft need much less runway to land than to take off I assume? 5900ft is suffice for most aircraft. As for Thompson they seem to have higher minimas than say Jet2 and Ryanair whilst using the same aircraft. That is not LBAs fault there is a CAT3 ILS though only CAT1 on 14. You constantly belittle LBA for being on a hill. Have you ever looked at LTN or BRS? They seem to do ok as does LBA. Why dont you just stump up the Millions needed to upgrade Leeds East and make its runway as long as LBA then maybe see if you can move the main conurbations in Yorkshire a little closer....
HOODED is offline  
Old 13th Jun 2016, 06:10
  #2658 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by brian_dromey
I accept the point that LBA has many physical limitations, both the airfield and the terminal building are sub-optimal. I accept that the region shouldn't be settling for sub-optimal, but the decision to move to Leeds East cant be seen in isolation. Leeds East is not well located for the West Yorkshire region as a whole (its too far east for Huddersfied, Halifax and Bradford - risking leakage to MAN), the weather isn't a lot better, the runway is short, has no ILS capability and there no surface links (but installation would be relatively easy). Essentially, LEA would be a brand new airport - which could be sorted out IF the airport weren't privatised, or LEA were owned by Bridgepoint, IF the government weren't hellbent on underfunding all infrastructure and public service in the country and IF you ignore the 25 million passenger a year neighbour, well connected to the region by road and rail, with services across the UK, Europe, massive growth to North America and now Asia. MAN is about to commence its own transformation project which will make it even more attractive to airlines and passengers.

I don't get your point about ORK. ORK is also an airfield with similar typography, weather and crosswind problems. Even worse its a Cat II airfield, with little hope of ever becoming Cat III due to the typography. ORK feels similarly hamstrung by limitations around the airfield, runway sruface and length. So, although the terminal is far superior to LBA, the airfield itself still has its share of issues and there are numerous diversions to Shannon and Dublin each year - winter and summer. Yes, there is a risk that "my" LBA-ORK may become MAN-SNN on a given day.

LBA and ORK are similar in many ways, both have heavyweight neighbours. Both have to accept their role is supportive, allowing major markets to access the regions by air, with smaller aircraft, less frequently. They also allow the region to reach popular destinations, often the "bucket and spade" market. As bad as things may appear, there are neighbors who are worse off. Waterford and HUY spring to mind.
LEA is well located for not just West Yorkshire but the whole of Yorkshire and the North East and would have a catchment population much bigger than the whole of Eire - and so I completely disagree with you about that. I have completed reams of research on catchment area study for both private and public transport and the potential therein. You really must do proper research on this rather than just spout. For instance how long does it take on the train to go from Huddersfield to abeam LEA against how long on the train from Huddersfield to MAN? [btw nobody uses the train from Huddersfield to LBA] I have proved the case with fact and figures on that thread time and time again. As for risk of leakage - the leakage is actually happening right now from not just Huddersfield, Bradford and Halifax but from Leeds, Sheffield, Hull and York etc etc as well as those towns you mention and many others simply because of where LBA is located (miles from the motorway and main rail network) and its very poor airfield characteristics (as I look out now it is in LVPs for the 4th day on the trot). Leakage like no other area in Europe! The weather is a lot better over the year at LEA.

Cork airport and its population catchment are miniscule compared to a well located airport within Yorkshire and it is ridiculous to compare them. Yes the weather is pretty similar at Cork and LBA.

The reason why Manchester airport (the big neighbour you mention) has done so well is hugely down to abject failure to place an airport in the correct location within Yorkshire. That is now very slowly going to change. I don't accept a failing hospital or train station in this region and therefore I don't see why anyone who cares about Yorkshire should accept a failing airport (just as they wouldn't do in Manchester, Birmingham or Edinburgh for example). We most certainly can do better and we must do better.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 13th Jun 2016, 06:24
  #2659 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by HOODED
Leeds Approach. You keep banging on about LBA short runway."a runway extension only half of which can be used for landing"
You do realise that in general aircraft need much less runway to land than to take off I assume? 5900ft is suffice for most aircraft. As for Thompson they seem to have higher minimas than say Jet2 and Ryanair whilst using the same aircraft. That is not LBAs fault there is a CAT3 ILS though only CAT1 on 14. You constantly belittle LBA for being on a hill. Have you ever looked at LTN or BRS? They seem to do ok as does LBA. Why dont you just stump up the Millions needed to upgrade Leeds East and make its runway as long as LBA then maybe see if you can move the main conurbations in Yorkshire a little closer....
You do realise that if an aircraft cannot land at an airport it wont be able to take off from that airport? Therefore landing distance (LDA) takes precedence unless you build the planes at the airport which is exactly what they used to do. We have moved on from Lancaster bombers though and 6400ft perpendicular to prevailing wind is completely insufficient for a modern 21st century large populated city region.

Different airlines have different minimas - absolutely correct! Therefore the airport satisfies all those minimas. So yes it is the airport's fault! You make the airport able to do the job. That's what Leeds City Region need to do - make their airport able to do the job.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 13th Jun 2016, 09:11
  #2660 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 6 miles 14
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Oh boy..LBA is not 6400ft it's 2250m or 7380ft. I'm sorry I must be simple, how is it LBAs fault that TOM use different Minima on their 738s to both Jet2 and Ryanair? The aircraft is certified to a CAT3 limit by Boeing if TOM decide not to use the lowest minimas available whereas others do how can the airport do anything??
HOODED 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.