MANCHESTER - 7
Snow ploughs/brushes/blowers etc are driven only by staff trained specifically to operate them - and are re-trained annually.
This includes the ops staff who have been doing so for some weeks now.
Staff for arriving diverts ... now let me see ... coach drivers if off pier comes to mind ... that seems to be the only directly employed by MAN staff that occur to me?
Others that get "taken into account when deciding" are
Handling agent pax services/ramp staff.
Customs & immigration.
Can't really think of any others who have a substantial impact on arriving flights.
I guess it's easier to knock than look for positives.
Personally I feel that all at MAN, MAPlc staff, handling agents, fuellers, caterers, cleaners etc have all made tremendous efforts to keep the show on the road.
If you look at all the last few winters I reckon MAN is one of the most reliably open and operating airfields in the UK.
Might be far from perfect in many ways but it strikes me that it's trying hard.
This includes the ops staff who have been doing so for some weeks now.
Staff for arriving diverts ... now let me see ... coach drivers if off pier comes to mind ... that seems to be the only directly employed by MAN staff that occur to me?
Others that get "taken into account when deciding" are
Handling agent pax services/ramp staff.
Customs & immigration.
Can't really think of any others who have a substantial impact on arriving flights.
I guess it's easier to knock than look for positives.
Personally I feel that all at MAN, MAPlc staff, handling agents, fuellers, caterers, cleaners etc have all made tremendous efforts to keep the show on the road.
If you look at all the last few winters I reckon MAN is one of the most reliably open and operating airfields in the UK.
Might be far from perfect in many ways but it strikes me that it's trying hard.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Manchester
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's right. MAN can't handle aircraft properly. Better tell that to the crew of CO110 and KU102 seeing that they spent relatively little amount of time beng handled here before going to LHR. Perhaps we might want to contemplate how the CO and KU crews had no trouble seemingly in keeping to their hours whereas BA feared they may exceed theirs
Well thats a simple one, the CO and KU were both splash and dash and diverted in due to holding for LHR, the BA aircraft were from LGW and XCD's has been issued telling of it closure until 1700z, so the staff would have run out of hours and the aircraft we have been unloaded.
The amount of diversions turned away from Manchester yesterday was 20 +, not only BA (glad we did after the way they treated us) but many others that ended up flying from the states to the u.k. then were forced to divert into Mainland europe as the request for Manchester was repeatedly turned down.
Makes you wonder..
Well thats a simple one, the CO and KU were both splash and dash and diverted in due to holding for LHR, the BA aircraft were from LGW and XCD's has been issued telling of it closure until 1700z, so the staff would have run out of hours and the aircraft we have been unloaded.
The amount of diversions turned away from Manchester yesterday was 20 +, not only BA (glad we did after the way they treated us) but many others that ended up flying from the states to the u.k. then were forced to divert into Mainland europe as the request for Manchester was repeatedly turned down.
Makes you wonder..
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Manchester
Posts: 891
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some of the early diversions did off load (G-OMYT an A330 rings a bell.)
There were loads of spare stands available.
Who was turning the aircraft away, handling agents or airport authority ?
If I remember correctly, it was quite normal for BA to spread out the diversion alternates so as not to overload any one location. PIK, GLA, EDI, etc
I remember many years ago when a massive fleet of coaches turned up for major diversion session, and trains chartered specially. Is there the will anymore to take on challenges or is it easier to tell people to go away
There were loads of spare stands available.
Who was turning the aircraft away, handling agents or airport authority ?
If I remember correctly, it was quite normal for BA to spread out the diversion alternates so as not to overload any one location. PIK, GLA, EDI, etc
I remember many years ago when a massive fleet of coaches turned up for major diversion session, and trains chartered specially. Is there the will anymore to take on challenges or is it easier to tell people to go away
I guess this could go around in ever decreasing circles 
I would think the thought process required for considering diversions is pretty straight forward.
If I think it through I'd arrive at something like:
1. Runway availability.
2. Parking availability (not just at the time of diversion but giving consideration to how long the divert might be expected to take up space)
3. Impact of diversion A/C parking on MAN planned movements.
4. Ramp handling ability (Handling agent/fuellers/cleaners etc).
5. Terminal Capacity. (Passenger flow numbers (arrivals only or arrivals/departures) against building capacity/check-in desk availability etc. Bear in mind there is no longish term capacity to "store" transit passengers - so it's stay on board or be "landed").
6. Handling agent ability to accept diversion.
7. Control authorities willingness/ability to deal with pax numbers and origins.
8. Coach availability - airside for remote parking.
9. Coach/hotel availability - landside for HOTAC of PAX or onwards tranport. (If the roads or coaches are advised as not available and hotels are full etc).
If it were me taking the decision I'd be factoring in how the resident carriers/handling agents have reacted in the recent past to acceptance of diversions. Have they welcomed all comers with open arms or complained & beaten up MAPlc for being greedy and accepting diverts at the expense of service delivery to the regular services.
Same holds true for handling agents. Are they confident that their carriers will not apply service penalty hits when they struggle to meet normal targets - bear in mind the struggle might be because of dealing with someone elses diverts.
So while aviance (read Servisair) are busy dealing with 20 BA diverts what will Tomsonfly think of being told they will suffer.
Perhaps if you were Thomsonfly you might just tell them you expect their daily bread & butter to be looked after ahead of the sometimes visitor?
For me personally I can see why 20+ BA diverts still sitting there the next morning might be a problem. With LGW closed (at the time of divert) .. perhaps no firm opening time and the thought that crews going out of hours might ground the a/c I think I'd be wary......
Maybe, just maybe, perhaps that's why the splash & dash visitors have less problem.
I would think the thought process required for considering diversions is pretty straight forward.
If I think it through I'd arrive at something like:
1. Runway availability.
2. Parking availability (not just at the time of diversion but giving consideration to how long the divert might be expected to take up space)
3. Impact of diversion A/C parking on MAN planned movements.
4. Ramp handling ability (Handling agent/fuellers/cleaners etc).
5. Terminal Capacity. (Passenger flow numbers (arrivals only or arrivals/departures) against building capacity/check-in desk availability etc. Bear in mind there is no longish term capacity to "store" transit passengers - so it's stay on board or be "landed").
6. Handling agent ability to accept diversion.
7. Control authorities willingness/ability to deal with pax numbers and origins.
8. Coach availability - airside for remote parking.
9. Coach/hotel availability - landside for HOTAC of PAX or onwards tranport. (If the roads or coaches are advised as not available and hotels are full etc).
If it were me taking the decision I'd be factoring in how the resident carriers/handling agents have reacted in the recent past to acceptance of diversions. Have they welcomed all comers with open arms or complained & beaten up MAPlc for being greedy and accepting diverts at the expense of service delivery to the regular services.
Same holds true for handling agents. Are they confident that their carriers will not apply service penalty hits when they struggle to meet normal targets - bear in mind the struggle might be because of dealing with someone elses diverts.
So while aviance (read Servisair) are busy dealing with 20 BA diverts what will Tomsonfly think of being told they will suffer.
Perhaps if you were Thomsonfly you might just tell them you expect their daily bread & butter to be looked after ahead of the sometimes visitor?
For me personally I can see why 20+ BA diverts still sitting there the next morning might be a problem. With LGW closed (at the time of divert) .. perhaps no firm opening time and the thought that crews going out of hours might ground the a/c I think I'd be wary......
Maybe, just maybe, perhaps that's why the splash & dash visitors have less problem.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Warrington
Age: 45
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lufthansa to start MAN-STR
LH 4890 12.04.2010 29.10.2010 STR 08:10 10:05 MAN CLD CR7 1:55
LH 4890 18.04.2010 24.10.2010 STR 11:45 13:40 MAN CLD CR7 1:55
LH 4891 12.04.2010 29.10.2010 MAN 10:45 12:30 STR CLD CR7 1:45
LH 4891 18.04.2010 24.10.2010 MAN 14:20 16:05 STR CLD CR7 1:45
Join Date: May 2005
Location: U.K
Posts: 782
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would seem Emirates diverted in and off loaded yesterday without incident. No staffing issues apparent although they were of course afforded a stand!!!!!
BA were offered 7 widebody stands yesterday on the previso that there'd be strictly NO offloads !!
No point in letting facts get in the way of a good rumor I guess 
Emirates normal stand (31) has been clear pretty much from the start.
The next door (29) used for the second EK was (I think) cleared about 2/3/4 days ago.
By the time 29 was cleared all the stands regularly used/needed (at least the pier stands) by Flybe were clear.
In fact I wouldn't mind betting that MAPlc are probably keener on Flybe than BA these days
I'm waiting for Flybe to update their name to FlyBeAirways .......
Followed by dropping the Fly bit becoming BeAirways ....
A little later abbreviating this to BEA ......
The circle of life ...
Emirates normal stand (31) has been clear pretty much from the start.
The next door (29) used for the second EK was (I think) cleared about 2/3/4 days ago.
By the time 29 was cleared all the stands regularly used/needed (at least the pier stands) by Flybe were clear.
In fact I wouldn't mind betting that MAPlc are probably keener on Flybe than BA these days
I'm waiting for Flybe to update their name to FlyBeAirways .......
Followed by dropping the Fly bit becoming BeAirways ....
A little later abbreviating this to BEA ......
The circle of life ...
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
strictly NO offloads
Get in there and spend, spend, spend!!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Manchester
Posts: 891
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Offloads wont be spending anything because there is very little in the way of shops for incoming PAX, the only way diverted passengers would grace the "shopping centre" is if they were put up overnight locally and continued their journey the next day, I think this is what happened to the KLM MD11 recently.
I Have Control
Join Date: May 2004
Location: North-West England
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAN ostriches...enjoy!
Cleared to a remote at LGW yesterday. Couldn't park though, due snowclearing. Had to wait. 2 minutes. The field had received very heavy snow, which had turned wet. Something a professional can judge better than enthusiastic amateurs.
Our livelihood depends in part upon such skills.
The criticisms of most detractors suggest that none of you actually fly aircraft for a living. So be it. If you did, and were based, albeit temporarily at a dump like MAN, you would have cause for complaint. You would be less fierce in your defence of the indefensible.
I used to love the place. I was a spotter there as a kid, and flew out of MAN on business countless times. Even trained (Ravenair) there. Happy memories. But present experiences are dire. Complaints in public may ultimately help the situation. Official complaints are handled in an ineffectual and PC manner.
Finally I enjoyed the ridicule concerning being involved in a conversation with an LX pilot. Dialogue is permitted between colleagues in this business. I even got to chat with the Cabin Crew, who were much more attractive!
Our livelihood depends in part upon such skills.The criticisms of most detractors suggest that none of you actually fly aircraft for a living. So be it. If you did, and were based, albeit temporarily at a dump like MAN, you would have cause for complaint. You would be less fierce in your defence of the indefensible.
I used to love the place. I was a spotter there as a kid, and flew out of MAN on business countless times. Even trained (Ravenair) there. Happy memories. But present experiences are dire. Complaints in public may ultimately help the situation. Official complaints are handled in an ineffectual and PC manner.
Finally I enjoyed the ridicule concerning being involved in a conversation with an LX pilot. Dialogue is permitted between colleagues in this business. I even got to chat with the Cabin Crew, who were much more attractive!
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Manchester
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cleared to a remote at LGW yesterday. Couldn't park though, due snowclearing. Had to wait. 2 minutes
You must have been one of the lucky ones...you see EGKK shut at about 5am and didnt open again until 1645....so i am presuming that you flew in after 1645 when the XCD stated 6 per hour ?? If thats the case i would have expected that the stand was clear already...after all the had just shut for 12 hours following an inch of snow.
P.S, you dont have to be a pilot to know what you are talking about when it comes to the conditions, other peoples jobs include operating on a snow covered field and having to cope....or did you just think it was the jockies ???
You must have been one of the lucky ones...you see EGKK shut at about 5am and didnt open again until 1645....so i am presuming that you flew in after 1645 when the XCD stated 6 per hour ?? If thats the case i would have expected that the stand was clear already...after all the had just shut for 12 hours following an inch of snow.
P.S, you dont have to be a pilot to know what you are talking about when it comes to the conditions, other peoples jobs include operating on a snow covered field and having to cope....or did you just think it was the jockies ???
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So our resident Biggles flew into Manchester Tuesday, this coincided with what I presume was la late LX late morning /lunchtime flight or the div ex BHX...(odd that they got off but heyho )
....you then got your car from staff west , presumably drove at speed to LGW despite utter chaos all day on the motorway nr LGW...
still manged to post to PP mid afternoon (?)
....then managed to get some sleep, before getting up at say 3am (?) to check-in for a VERY VERY early flight getting out of LGW ( must have been before 5am),
...at which point LGW was sno closed, you then managed get back to LGW after it opened at circa 1600 ?
hmmmmm.....careful Holmes it may be a trap !
....you then got your car from staff west , presumably drove at speed to LGW despite utter chaos all day on the motorway nr LGW...
still manged to post to PP mid afternoon (?)
....then managed to get some sleep, before getting up at say 3am (?) to check-in for a VERY VERY early flight getting out of LGW ( must have been before 5am),
...at which point LGW was sno closed, you then managed get back to LGW after it opened at circa 1600 ?
hmmmmm.....careful Holmes it may be a trap !
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another good month for EK in December looking at the CAA stats released to day: over 44000 pax. At least 80% full. Capacity or frequency increase can't be too far away (perhaps it can be brought forward?!)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EK 017/018 A380 effective September (anyone else could confirm this?)
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/13182735-post121.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/13182735-post121.html
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: England
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funny hearing how them not able to take diverts. I remember visiting MAN a loooong time ago one Saturday afternoon and the place was literally rammed full of widebodies diverted from LHR. Walking along the viewing deck on top of the B pier was just widebody after widebody.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: stockport uk
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
manflyer.
ah! memories eh! the good ole days, i can remember wagging skool in the late 70s to watch the divs come in at the airport, like you say some days it was rammed with aircraft from all over. didnt they park a pan-am 747 on the grass once due to lake of space?
ah! memories eh! the good ole days, i can remember wagging skool in the late 70s to watch the divs come in at the airport, like you say some days it was rammed with aircraft from all over. didnt they park a pan-am 747 on the grass once due to lake of space?
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Stockport
Age: 69
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(didnt they park a pan-am 747 on the grass once due to lake of space)
I have never heard that one before, hope they didn`t as it would probably still be there
today as the ground would not support it
Ian B
I have never heard that one before, hope they didn`t as it would probably still be there
today as the ground would not support it
Ian B