MANCHESTER - 8

[Hamburg 2K8]

Link to NATS doesn't work, saying object not found. Is the link correct?

Have MAN said anything about replacing Pier B in the future? Also, next time I fly from T1 at MAN, will I be able to walk down Pier B and have a nosey at Gate 12? So Gate 12 is the waiting area at the end of Pier B and the pre-boarding area is the extension?

[bjones4]

The chart has been moved from the previous location, Try this one;

http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/pamsl..._2_EGCC_2-3_en

[Hamburg 2K8]

Cheers bjones4, that worked that time.

[AircraftOperations]

What was the AN-124 doing at MAN over the weekend?

Loaded in or out?
What was it carrying?
From where and to where?

Any answers would be gratefully received.

[Betablockeruk]

Your tag suggests you should know

1) Out, struggled to climb. But excellent to see pronounced vapour trails and pressure cloud above wing.
2) Something heavy....
3) In from India, out to Azerbaijan

[Bagso]

... to think we secured the EK A380 before JFK got it back, and before HKG and some of the other large airports, Im sorry but thats a major coup!

That's because Emirates (and indeed Etihad and Qatar) have recognised the massive amount of trade they can shift back and forth from the North West through their hubs to destinations not currently served direct from Manchester..... the A380 along with increased frequency is "hopefully" a long term statement of intent in this regard !

True AMS /MUC don't have the A380 BUT Munich does not need them, it already has direct service, (sometimes double daily), to places like Tokyo, Bangkok, Seoul, Beijing, Shanghai, Delhi, Hong Kong, JoBurg, Mumbai !

Many airlines use their European hubs to connect to these cities but Emirates appears to be about to shift numbers on an "industrial scale".

With regard to the A380 route comparisons, Amsterdam is clearly a different proposition, but it is worth exploring the Frankfurt/Munich model, Manchester does compare to MUC both economically and geographically, it is not dissimilar to the Heathrow/Manchester relationship. Unlike the UK however, the German Government and national airline set up a structure to support major intercontinental flights without "total" centralisation at one major hub, Frankfurt.

In the UK and at Manchester especially, Emirates have recognised the void, long may it continue, but please lets not roll over happy with what is nothing more than a "sprinkling" of intercontinental direct flights !

The "regional" argument that diminishes Manchester is presumably based on comparing our route structure with places like Birmingham, Bristol and Newcastle ? but if this is the case it is a poor argument.

These cities are indeed very much "regional", that is a part my complaint with the local media, they are inward looking. Within the EU, the US, and Asia, Manchester is very much a "major international city", Emirates have recognised this and indeed the demand, sadly its own citizens so often fail to see its wider international image and are happy to embrace the "eeeh by gum , whippet and cloth cap culture". (As an aside local media so often then reinforce this stereotypical image. The idiotic weatherman on Granada is a case in point !)

The comparison put forward re Manchester should actually be with a major "International City" and indeed gateway and that is Munich !

I well understand the "commercial hub interests" that prevail at Heathrow but an underlying policy that pretty much sucks "total UK demand" into an airport already at Max capacity and constrained by numerous other factors is at some stage doomed to end in failure. The doom-mongers suggest losing traffic to CDG, AMS etc but I would be more than happy to see a fleet of Emirates A380 operating hourly Emirates flights Ex Manchester if that is the way forward , that said, new government could do worse than look at the German model !

[wanna_be_there]

Bagso, some good points in there.

Firstly, true MUC does have more direct routes, but MAN/LHR cant really be compared to FRA/MUC because of the distances involved. Yes, MAN and LON are 2 seperate cities with their won seperate catchments, but LHR/MAN are much much closer together than MUC/FRA. It is so easy to hop on a plane direct to LHR, or with the rail improvements, now the train can be done quickly also.
With this, much of the MAN catchement can get on a direct intercontinental route with relative ease, and this will always be the issue.

The only way I can see MAN getting a 'piece of the pie' so to speak is the new ruling that allows no more growth in the south. Whatever people may think of MAN, it is in the best postition to accept new traffic, due to the fact T2 can handle many more daytime and nighttime flights, good all round transport links, large scale maintence facilities, cargo terminal, 2 runways, 3 terminals to choose from and so on.

Now, this regional arguement, I think this is where people get a little ahead of themselves. LON is the capital, Manchester is a region of the UK. Man is not the main UK airport so hence, is a regional airport. Even business thinks MAN is a regional:

Emirates: Manchester will become the world's first regional airport to have a regular A380 service
Man airport: Manchester airport is the busiest regional airport in the UK
Awards: Best UK Regional Airport in the Globe Travel Awards

These are taken from news sources, very easy to find on the interweb. MAN is a regional, and even if it grows to be the biggest in the UK, will always be a regional. Its nothing to be ashamed of, it doesnt mean we will be doomed to always wearing flat caps and owning whippets.

[AircraftOperations]

Thanks for that Betablocker. I guess if I had some MAN or Antonov ops contacts, I wouldn't need to ask here.
I was told that it departed to a UK airport, which sounds unusual - especially if it was empty coming in.
Thanks.

[OltonPete]

Emirates

Is there any hint that 1/9/10 will bring an announcement of the third
daily service?

The three class version for a yield point of view is great assuming
there is plenty of take-up at full fare (rather than upgrades) but
without a third daily service surely EK are running the risk of handing
economy pax over to QR & EY?

Are they hoping that the overspill will book bhx/ncl?

If BHX gets two 442 seat 77W's (in reality it will be a mix of 427/428
and 442 no doubt) then there will be more capacity offered than at Manchester with its 517 and 364 seat offering.

With Manchester now over 50000 a month pax and the maximum capacity
around 54000 it does seem odd to risk pushing pax away although I
understand it is the front end which makes or breaks a service or it this
case, the upper deck!

Pete

[wanna_be_there]

Oltonpete

The 3rd daily is pencilled in for either March or May next year. EK has now got 2 problems now that the A380 is on the afternoon service:

-There is actually 1 less economy seat on the A380 than the current B77W, so obviously no increase in capacity for Y pax
-Cargo has taken a HUGE hit as the A388 isnt as capable of uplift as the B77W

Emirates is taking a huge gamble in upping MAN's premium service, sacrificing Y and Cargo loads for F/J, so I hope it pays off for them (Ive heard so far, it has)
The EK21/22 is pencilled for a 3 class B773 (not specifically for F uplift, but the fact it offers best cargo and Y increase compared to the A332), and last I heard was going to be a 0625a/0935d.
A year ago or so, the main man for EK did a talk to the TAS memebers at MAN, saying that on introduction of the A380, Skycargo would start a 4 weekly service. As it was a while ago now, I genuinly dont know the status of that plan.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Just a suggestion here that we don't get too hung up on the 'capital/regional' label. Many of the world's most successful airports are not capital city operations, eg. Chicago, Frankfurt, New York x 3, Sydney, Toronto, Atlanta, Milan, Zurich, Munich, Barcelona and many more.

What really counts is the business opportunity offered by the catchment area feeding a particular proposed route. The population density, the GDP of the region, ease of airport access, disproportionate ethnic demand for certain routes (eg. MAN-ISB). These are typical elements which airlines examine, not capital city status (although some capitals do offer an enhanced wow/glamour factor). Does anybody here expect Canberra, Bern, Ottawa, Cardiff (or even Washington DC) become global superhubs anytime soon? "Capital City" refers to the seat of political legislature and is just one factor in the attractiveness of an airport.

Many capital cities are superhubs, of course. London being a case in point. Perhaps it is more important to be the home base of a major airline, as is the case with LHR (BA) capital city, and FRA (LH) provincial city. The "capital" factor is not the overriding one, although taking the case of London in particular as a 'global city', there are many iconic tourist haunts, big business HQ's etc. related to capital status which boost its attractiveness. But the region surrounding MAN is also relatively prosperous by global standards and has much to commend it to airline companies.

But MAN's Achilles Heel is that it is not home-base to any major airline company. None of the major alliance groupings hub in any significant way at MAN. These are the true advantages which LHR, FRA, MUC, CDG etc hold over MAN. Note that two of those airports serve political seats of government and two do not. The "capital city/regional city" label is a sideshow distracting from the factors which actually drive airport success. MAN has many positive factors to commend it to the airlines. Unfortunately, being a major alliance hub is not one of them. That is why we will not match MUC's offerings in the foreseeable future. LH supports MUC as BA dismisses MAN.

SHED.

[Ian Brooks]

You should say Lufthansa supports MAN as BA dismisses MAN

Ian B

[jpthomas72]

Many of the world's most successful airports are not capital city operations (...) FRA, MUC (...)

. Don't use German airports as an example though, this is a very long story and has mostly historical reasons (post-WWII). E.g. Munich was the capital of the Bavarian kingdom. Frankfurt nearly became the capital of West Germany, and is the financial powerhouse. Also, Berlin (with a little help from the Federal Government) is building the brand-new airport, which will overtake Dusseldorf, and maybe on the long run even Munich. Without WWII and the Wall, no doubt Berlin would have Germany's biggest airport. Stuttgart would be a remote village, all manufacturing would be in Berlin etc...

[AndyH52]

Shed, very true those aren't capital cities (though many are regional capitals within their countries) however with the notable exception of Frankfurt and Zurich the places you list all have a population in their metropolitan areas more than twice that of Manchester - in the case of New York (x 3?) nearly four times, another significant factor which airline route planners take in to account. They are also generally much further away from their nearest city 'competitors' and so have an even wider catchment area. By the time you throw in the fact that roughly 20% of the population live in the London metropolitan area the chances of securing a more extensive long haul network - or as you rightly point out a based long haul carrier - reduce even further. The advent of the B787 might help in the coming years but other regional airports may be hoping the same thing.

Changing subject, can anyone shed any light as to why the fire cover at MAN is only NOTAM'd as CAT 10 (i.e. sufficient to cover A380 ops) until late October? Surely it should be a permanent change - assuming the A380 operation isn't just seasonal?

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

jpthomas72 / AndyH52,

I am not in disagreement with you. Many airports serve cities which have substantial populations, administer a region, or have historical claims to capital city status. As do the German examples listed by jpthomas. But still, they are not capital cities today. That is the point. Whether or not they are the seat of government today is incidental for the purpose of exploring their potential for profitable air services. "Capital City" is a concept best left to politicians and their cronies. "Prosperous Conurbation" is of far more interest to the economics of the airline industry. And Greater Manchester is a prosperous conurbation supported by other similar population centres nearby. So lets not get distracted by the capital / regional labels. Successful airports can be located in both capital and provincial locations.

By the way, the New York x3 was not a reference to population size; I was alluding to its support of three major airports in JFK, LGA and EWR. I should have expressed that point more clearly.

Ian Brooks, you are right to acknowledge LH's support for MAN. Unfortunately, they do not currently offer a hub-and-spoke operation at MAN in the way they are able to do at MUC. That is not a criticism of them; it is simply the reality of the marketplace at the present time.

SHED.

[clareview]

Surely the issue is not whether a city is a capital, a regional centre or whatever but its ability to provide both inbound or outbound passengers in sufficient numbers in all cabins to make a decent profit - Canbera is a capital but the magnet in that part of Australia is Sydney, similarly Madrid is a capital but other spanish cities do nearly as well (sun, sea and sand).

Surely the issue for Manchester is, for regional routes, Liverpool nearby, and, as has been said, no airline or alliance using it as a hub? In addition, the fast train to London must be becoming more and more of an issue.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Well put, Clareview. My point exactly. SHED.

[Bagso]

Emirates etc

Some very interesting and thought provoking comments re "shed" etc

I must confess I thought the prospect of a third daily EK would be overkill BUT there is just a chance that EK might infact be the saviour of Manchester.

The extra publicity that the A380 generates should theoretically be a really great platform for the airport to publicise and market long haul service via Dubai. Pity our new MD could not have been pitched in earlier to front this !

As I said previous if we cannot generate direct service I would gladly settle for an eventual hourly service to Dubai !

Pity they could not offer services to the US and Canada.....!

Just out of curiosity would this growth diminish if EK joined Star Alliance or OneWorld ?

Meanwhile maybe the term "Provincial Capital" could be used henceforth, somewhat "republican" but certainly sounds more 2010 than 1910 to me.....!

[ib26uk]

I`m going to along to MAN next week to see the Emirates A380 come in

Manchester Airport should be very proud of this amazing achievement

[Mr.Bloggs]

Saw quite a few 380's going about their business at LHR these last 2 days. Not exactly a miracle, just a big plane. MAN needs BA back, not EK.