Too many airports in UK?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too many airports in UK?
Due to the poor road and rail infrastructure in the past - airports in almost every town and city are trying to secure airlines to serve their very local and very small catchments.
as road and rail connections improve the need and desire to fly from ones own regional airport may reduce; as choice is greater at bigger hubs.
isnt is better to have less airports and more quality links and schedules? Coventry, Kent, Southend and Carlisle all battling for airlines, but how likely is it they will ever see anything of significance.
Questions also hang over the futures of Durham, Humberside, and Swansea airports.
as road and rail connections improve the need and desire to fly from ones own regional airport may reduce; as choice is greater at bigger hubs.
isnt is better to have less airports and more quality links and schedules? Coventry, Kent, Southend and Carlisle all battling for airlines, but how likely is it they will ever see anything of significance.
Questions also hang over the futures of Durham, Humberside, and Swansea airports.
Due to the poor road and rail infrastructure in the past.
That's a none starter as the roads are still poor.
Teesside to Teesside airport 10 to 15 minutes anywhere else is more than an hour unless you travel at silly o clock.
That's a none starter as the roads are still poor.
Teesside to Teesside airport 10 to 15 minutes anywhere else is more than an hour unless you travel at silly o clock.
I dont know if you can assume that, just because an airport is small it will be pushed into closing and further uses of the site.
Surely its about being a known profit maker. HUY for example has the niche traffic which also warrents a service to AMS and ABZ due to the offshore petro chemicals and shipping links in the Humber area. I think MAG have reluctantly accepted that HUY has a track record of returning a profit, albeit a negligable one. Until recently Durham Tees could be the same but i feel they have been putting all their eggs in one low cost basket.
Swansea has no airservices and Carlisle and Southend have struggled to attract passenger traffic in recent years.
I would have thought that an airport with stable services could see through this trough in traffic and can better place itself in a position of growth when things pick up.
I think also its all down to who ownes the airports aswell as to which direction they should go in if a profit cannot be forseen.
Surely its about being a known profit maker. HUY for example has the niche traffic which also warrents a service to AMS and ABZ due to the offshore petro chemicals and shipping links in the Humber area. I think MAG have reluctantly accepted that HUY has a track record of returning a profit, albeit a negligable one. Until recently Durham Tees could be the same but i feel they have been putting all their eggs in one low cost basket.
Swansea has no airservices and Carlisle and Southend have struggled to attract passenger traffic in recent years.
I would have thought that an airport with stable services could see through this trough in traffic and can better place itself in a position of growth when things pick up.
I think also its all down to who ownes the airports aswell as to which direction they should go in if a profit cannot be forseen.
Last edited by pug; 22nd Mar 2009 at 13:38.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Land of the Northern Lights
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nearly choked on my coffee readin that. Excellent road and rail services eh. Benbecula, Stornoway, Kirkwall and Sumburgh are all small airports.Try taking the road or rail to Inverness or Aberdeen from one of these exotic locations.
Mind you the MOD did try to to give me a rail warrant from Sumburgh to Kent
went down really well when i told them nearest rail station was probably in Bergen.
Mind you the MOD did try to to give me a rail warrant from Sumburgh to Kent
went down really well when i told them nearest rail station was probably in Bergen.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Barton Upon Humber
Posts: 1,984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Questions also hang over the futures of Durham, Humberside
I know there has been a lot of doom and gloom up at MME recently, but how much of that is the press stirring things? As for HUY, I would read pugs post. There is more to an airport than the number of passenger flights
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too many Airports
The reasons for this go back to the 1930's - When every "air minded" not "air headed" County Council wanted an aerodrome. - I cite the example of Wolverhampton, Walsall, Coventry (a slightly different - case, having been a site of aeroplane and engine manufacture) and Birmingham all having their own airports. The legacy remains to this day. e.g. Blackpool, Liverpool and Manchester all within a 30/35 Mile chain - Brum, East Mids and Coventy - even worse a classic waste of space. At least Wolverhampton Airport featured in a 1950's Film featuring Jack Hawkins and a Bristol Freighter. For the (brum) locals take a look at the compass triangulation point on the top of Barr Beacon. The air fields directions are shown on the brass plate under the Concrete Dome.
Good interlinked train services between hubs is the way forward - Geography is against us in the UK
( PS I seen to think that the Bar Beacon Dome may be fenced off - correct me if I'm wrong)
CAT III
Good interlinked train services between hubs is the way forward - Geography is against us in the UK
( PS I seen to think that the Bar Beacon Dome may be fenced off - correct me if I'm wrong)
CAT III
Last edited by Guest 112233; 23rd Mar 2009 at 12:18. Reason: I'm not sure about the Dome
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is an interesting post. Perhaps the situation is rather one of 'too many airports trying to do the same thing' i.e. compete with each other to attract broadly the same business in overlapping catchment areas. This is a result of opening up the industry to relatively unconstrained market forces and the 'muddying' of Government policy towards the provision of air services in the UK. Hence we see LPL/MAN/LBA offering similar short-haul lo-co services; ditto BHX/EMA, MME/DCS. Whilst the result appears superficially to be good consumer choice, in the medium-to-long term the profitably of any of these operations is marginal for the airports concerned and the fragmentation of traffic weakens opportunities for massing traffic at regional hubs. This damages the prospects for supporting long-haul routes at locations such as MAN and BHX, who have been the main losers.
A clearer strategy is needed, more akin to that offered under the 1978 White Paper rather than the muddled 'everyone grows' assumptions of the 2003 version. This will mean limiting the operation of certain types of air service to specific airports, something which doesn't sit comfortably with the current free market thinking. Open Skies sounds good but has some unpleasant side effects, particularly in the longer-term. Problems arise when the smaller regional airports strive to rival the larger regionals. The cut-price deals they offer to locos draws traffic away from the legacy regionals until they need to put prices up to realistic, sustainable levels to fund infrastructure. Meantime the damage has been done to the larger regionals who have lost services, including long-haul, and so ultimately the whole region is disadvantaged.
Good surface access to airports is important too, and it is generally the larger regionals which offer this - MAN has excellent road and rail, also BHX. Few others can offer such good, sustainable access from around the country. The airports which have good access and are close to major centres of population make the greatest sense as the key regional hubs. The smaller airports such as HUY, Carlisle, BLK, SEN etc can service niche markets profitably. That is their contribution to UK air services.
A clearer strategy is needed, more akin to that offered under the 1978 White Paper rather than the muddled 'everyone grows' assumptions of the 2003 version. This will mean limiting the operation of certain types of air service to specific airports, something which doesn't sit comfortably with the current free market thinking. Open Skies sounds good but has some unpleasant side effects, particularly in the longer-term. Problems arise when the smaller regional airports strive to rival the larger regionals. The cut-price deals they offer to locos draws traffic away from the legacy regionals until they need to put prices up to realistic, sustainable levels to fund infrastructure. Meantime the damage has been done to the larger regionals who have lost services, including long-haul, and so ultimately the whole region is disadvantaged.
Good surface access to airports is important too, and it is generally the larger regionals which offer this - MAN has excellent road and rail, also BHX. Few others can offer such good, sustainable access from around the country. The airports which have good access and are close to major centres of population make the greatest sense as the key regional hubs. The smaller airports such as HUY, Carlisle, BLK, SEN etc can service niche markets profitably. That is their contribution to UK air services.
Roverman, i agree with your post. Surely the smaller regionals which are trying to aim at the long-haul sector should look at the threat of thinning out routes all together and in the long term saturating the market?
Clearly places such as MAN and BHX will be more sustainable in the future because of the large and diverse population centres they serve. The lack of any 'real' hub airport means that places like AMS can continue to offer an alternative to the land access journeys to MAN or LHR. My example of HUY is that many of the pax will be on time sensitive journeys due to the offshore business and shipping, meaning a high frequency to AMS is viable, same with NWI and to an extent DTV. Any other travellers not prepared to pay a premium or not constrained by time, are open to choice and would likely be prepared for the 1-2 hour journey to a UK major such as MAN or BHX (most people in the North and Midlands are never further than 2 hours from one of these) NCL being further may benefit and that could become a 'major' for the North East in the future.
Clearly places such as MAN and BHX will be more sustainable in the future because of the large and diverse population centres they serve. The lack of any 'real' hub airport means that places like AMS can continue to offer an alternative to the land access journeys to MAN or LHR. My example of HUY is that many of the pax will be on time sensitive journeys due to the offshore business and shipping, meaning a high frequency to AMS is viable, same with NWI and to an extent DTV. Any other travellers not prepared to pay a premium or not constrained by time, are open to choice and would likely be prepared for the 1-2 hour journey to a UK major such as MAN or BHX (most people in the North and Midlands are never further than 2 hours from one of these) NCL being further may benefit and that could become a 'major' for the North East in the future.
roverman - excellent post
One thing puzzles me - namely why the likes of HUY, BLK, MME, etc are insistent on aiming doggedly for LCC traffic, when economics suggest that they are frequently being used as pawns by the LCCs and that these airports will struggle to make LCC traffic profitable.
Carlisle is a long way from population centres - Glasgow, Newcastle and Manchester are just too far away and too well served with their own airports. Cumbria is a large country with a low population density. Carlisle does however have the advantage on being on a major north-south road and rail route and being a good potential cargo site. Therefore why all the spin and fluff about flights from Carlisle to Spain (even if it sounds good in the local newspaper) ? Why not instead a 'We want to focus purely on freight' ?
One thing puzzles me - namely why the likes of HUY, BLK, MME, etc are insistent on aiming doggedly for LCC traffic, when economics suggest that they are frequently being used as pawns by the LCCs and that these airports will struggle to make LCC traffic profitable.
Carlisle is a long way from population centres - Glasgow, Newcastle and Manchester are just too far away and too well served with their own airports. Cumbria is a large country with a low population density. Carlisle does however have the advantage on being on a major north-south road and rail route and being a good potential cargo site. Therefore why all the spin and fluff about flights from Carlisle to Spain (even if it sounds good in the local newspaper) ? Why not instead a 'We want to focus purely on freight' ?
davidjohnson6, may i correct you slightly, HUY has never realy brushed on the LCC market. I have heard many reasons for this, one is that they realised that LCC was always going to be unsustainable. If you see the masterplan released a couple of years ago you will see that they would welcome a LCC providing it was relative to sustainability and wouldnt flood seats on the current market.
MME is one airport which you can see now has made the wrong decision to replace its charter flights with lo-co equivelants. The loss of these this year has resulted in a loss of around 60% of flights. Not sure of the situation at BLK, LS seem to have stayed for some time there now.
As for Carlisle, arent Stobarts only alowed to use the airport as a freight hub? I thought the new passenger terminal plans had been scrubbed due to a dispute with the local authorities?
MME is one airport which you can see now has made the wrong decision to replace its charter flights with lo-co equivelants. The loss of these this year has resulted in a loss of around 60% of flights. Not sure of the situation at BLK, LS seem to have stayed for some time there now.
As for Carlisle, arent Stobarts only alowed to use the airport as a freight hub? I thought the new passenger terminal plans had been scrubbed due to a dispute with the local authorities?
pug - you're right on HUY and LCCs.
While LS are sticking with BLK, I'm yet to be convinced that the economics of LCC operations can be more than marginal - but this is probably best reserved for the Blackpool thread.
Regarding Carlisle, there's been quite a bit in the press about Ryanair being interested in doing some flying, as well as discussion as to whether the runway can or will be able to handle a B737 (or similiar sized airframe for LCCs for that matter). I don't however know how much of these column inches have ultimately originated from Dublin seeking free publicity (or lazy journalism), or whether someone in Carlisle is trying to promote the idea.
While LS are sticking with BLK, I'm yet to be convinced that the economics of LCC operations can be more than marginal - but this is probably best reserved for the Blackpool thread.
Regarding Carlisle, there's been quite a bit in the press about Ryanair being interested in doing some flying, as well as discussion as to whether the runway can or will be able to handle a B737 (or similiar sized airframe for LCCs for that matter). I don't however know how much of these column inches have ultimately originated from Dublin seeking free publicity (or lazy journalism), or whether someone in Carlisle is trying to promote the idea.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for your comments, pug and others. Just to emphasise my point with some examples - BLK has a good niche market in GA services to support the Irish Sea gas rigs, fish from Fleetwood, the nuclear industry at Heysham, and flying training in a good coastal location. Locos at BLK just draw traffic away from MAN and fragment the North-West hub mass. The Fylde and north Lancashire have frequent trains to MAN with a journey time of about an hour, as well as the M6, giving this area very good access to comprehensive air services.
HUY is doing well with the fishing flights, North Sea rig helicopters, and niche domestic services.
SEN has aircraft maintenance, freight and club flying. CVT can still offer niche services as a base for specialist freight and government contract flying which would just get in the way at BHX.
MAN, and to a smaller extent BHX, are best placed to offer hubs with a range of mainstream scheduled and charter services. But they will struggle as long as their markets and mass are eroded by duplication of services at nearby small regionals.
Complementary, not Competing, airports - this is the sustainable way to offer good all round air services for the UK.
HUY is doing well with the fishing flights, North Sea rig helicopters, and niche domestic services.
SEN has aircraft maintenance, freight and club flying. CVT can still offer niche services as a base for specialist freight and government contract flying which would just get in the way at BHX.
MAN, and to a smaller extent BHX, are best placed to offer hubs with a range of mainstream scheduled and charter services. But they will struggle as long as their markets and mass are eroded by duplication of services at nearby small regionals.
Complementary, not Competing, airports - this is the sustainable way to offer good all round air services for the UK.
Playing devil's advocate....
Who would decide what flying should be done by each airport ? If there is no credible threat to an airport from a competitor with lower prices, there is no incentive to improve efficiency, target a product offering and keep prices low - more profitable instead to act as a local monopoly
Purely as an example, the existence of Doncaster airport being able to credibly attract LCCs gives an added incentive to Leeds airport to keep itself on its toes.. Were it not for this, I doubt that Jet2 would have been quite so succesful at LBA.
Who would decide what flying should be done by each airport ? If there is no credible threat to an airport from a competitor with lower prices, there is no incentive to improve efficiency, target a product offering and keep prices low - more profitable instead to act as a local monopoly
Purely as an example, the existence of Doncaster airport being able to credibly attract LCCs gives an added incentive to Leeds airport to keep itself on its toes.. Were it not for this, I doubt that Jet2 would have been quite so succesful at LBA.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
David,
Fundamentally it comes down to a different way of thinking about the role of airports in the wider UK economy. We have moved from a centrally controlled environment where air services to/from particular airports were limited by bilateral agreements between countries, a system which generally favoured national flag carriers, to a more or less free for all. Some of this is EU driven, but not all.
This has not been altogether beneficial, despite the apparent increase in 'consumer choice'. As I said- Complementary, not Competing, is the way to avoid duplication and fragmentation of mass at regional hubs. I take the point about efficiency. There are mechanisms which the UK Government can apply through the CAA Economic Regulation Group. Caps on airport charges are applied at the London airports and have only just been removed from Manchester after 15 years, now that it is recognised that MAN has serious competition in the North. MAN has also lost many of its legacy and long-haul services, largely as a result of relaxed access to anywhere (including LHR). Such losses are to the detriment of the northern economy
Fundamentally it comes down to a different way of thinking about the role of airports in the wider UK economy. We have moved from a centrally controlled environment where air services to/from particular airports were limited by bilateral agreements between countries, a system which generally favoured national flag carriers, to a more or less free for all. Some of this is EU driven, but not all.
This has not been altogether beneficial, despite the apparent increase in 'consumer choice'. As I said- Complementary, not Competing, is the way to avoid duplication and fragmentation of mass at regional hubs. I take the point about efficiency. There are mechanisms which the UK Government can apply through the CAA Economic Regulation Group. Caps on airport charges are applied at the London airports and have only just been removed from Manchester after 15 years, now that it is recognised that MAN has serious competition in the North. MAN has also lost many of its legacy and long-haul services, largely as a result of relaxed access to anywhere (including LHR). Such losses are to the detriment of the northern economy
Last edited by roverman; 23rd Mar 2009 at 17:17.
I believe that long-haul flights from MAN will recover along with an economic recovery, i agree that MAN is losing its critical mass to airports like LPL and LBA but these airports have little chance of expanding into long-haul, at least not to the extent that MAN can.
Usind Doncaster airport as an example, i dont believe management have been able to find a niche upon which to build a stable sustainable pax business there, Peel seem intent on driving large amounts of people through the terminal for revenue, same at MME and LPL. Only LPL seems to be having the desired effect.
Perhaps Peel should have stuck with SZD and found some niche business routes which would have helped the South Yorkshire economy rather than building DSA which only appeals to the leisure pax therefore saturating that market for most of Yorkshire...
Usind Doncaster airport as an example, i dont believe management have been able to find a niche upon which to build a stable sustainable pax business there, Peel seem intent on driving large amounts of people through the terminal for revenue, same at MME and LPL. Only LPL seems to be having the desired effect.
Perhaps Peel should have stuck with SZD and found some niche business routes which would have helped the South Yorkshire economy rather than building DSA which only appeals to the leisure pax therefore saturating that market for most of Yorkshire...
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the opening of DCS has taken airport capacity in the north beyond what is realistically required, even without a recession. A properly co-ordinated approach to airport capacity would have identified this oversupply, and would have either ruled out the development of DCS, or, recognising its advantages in terms of location and site potential, would have used it to replace HUY/EMA. Such a policy has been made almost impossible now though, because individual airports are seen as assets 'belonging' to particular cities, and are very often owned by different companies. Strategic planning is difficult in a privatised and de-regulated transport system, as witnessed by the chaotic state of UK bus and rail services.
Last edited by roverman; 23rd Mar 2009 at 20:20. Reason: grammar!
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: BOH - UK
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roverman - forgive me, but it all does rather sound like "poster from Manchester advocates that airports that compete with MAN be capped / restricted to allow MAN to prosper"
DSA has saturated an already busy market. It has never been, never was, and never will be neccessary.
When the main terminal at STN was opened in 1991, it was regarded as a white elephant. Now there is serious talk about building an additional runway
DSA is probably 10 or more years before its time..... but eventually an extra runway somewhere near Doncaster will be needed.