MANCHESTER - 8

[AircraftOperations]

Can non UK airlines get the okay to fly from China to airports outside of London.
BA and VS have got London sewn up and pretty sure they have a say in who can do China-UK. And if they won't operate to the "regions", then they will make it difficult for anyone else.

[OltonPete]

Feb pax up 9.95%

http://www.manchesterairport.co.uk/manweb.nsf/alldocs/650242EF412F65E9802579B5004D9816/$File/February+12.pdf

Total Feb pax 1174024

Even taking into account the extra day this year still up over 6%.

Cargo up, charter down a little and the only other blot was private ATM's.

Pete

[mybrico]

I must admit I struggle with why anyone would fly to HKG via the gulf rather than LHR or now LGW. Via the Gulf its 20 hours ( including transit) which is at least 5 hours longer. To Australia Gulf airlines have an advantage from UK regional airports but not on most other routes. I much prefer the transit at T5, my phone works without roaming changes and I am helping to keep aviation jobs in Britain. I suspect there is a link between the number of Gulf carriers at MAN and the lack of direct long haul. We should be more like Germany and restrict the activity of Gulf Airlines and build strong regional links.

[chaps2011]

British Airways have zero interest in operating from the regions all they want is everybody to go through fortress London


Ian

[Albert_Ross]

A few reasons for travelling via the Gulf (I don't travel to Hong Kong but I do travel to Africa)

(1) Schedule - I can fly overnight and get to my destination mid afternoon, have a quick debriefing when I get to my destination and then have a good sleep. This isn't always the case with flying via LHR
(2) Changing flights part way - I would rather do 8+8 than 1+12. This is a personal preference
(3) I don't need to use the phone in the Gulf, therefore roaming charges don't really apply. They're billed to the business in any case.
(4) Price - Gulf carriers are typically cheaper.
(5) If LHR is busy, why not use another UK airport.?
I suppose I could be 'patriotic' and destroy local jobs for MAN<->Gulf and move them to London, but why?

[pwalhx]

I flew HKG-DXB-MAN in January, including time in Dubai the transit was around 17 hours. I am not through my own choice, but because I am travelling with colleagues from the South, flying today MAN-LHR-HKG the transit time is 16 hours including waiting time in Heathrow. I would rather take the extra hour and go via Dubai with a far superior service.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Flag Waving ...

My views regarding unreliability of connections over LHR are well known on this forum; I will spare readers a repeat airing! Ultimately, choice of long-haul transfer routings come down to personal preferences.

However, I do want to challenge this notion that it is "patriotic" to use British Airways and Heathrow, and that this will "keep jobs in Britain".

Emirates is one of Airbus' largest worldwide customers. They have a huge commitment to the A380 programme, along with a history of buying A300, A310, A330 and A340 types. These purchases support quality manufacturing jobs here in Britain on a massive scale. Many of the jobs supported are located at nearby Broughton. Emirates also operate a call centre in the area, and support jobs directly at Manchester Airport. Their three daily services to and beyond the Gulf offer a connectivity to this region which is a major asset in attracting high value employment generally. All the jobs mentioned in this paragraph result in taxes being paid to the same British exchequer as those generated by employees at Heathrow.

E t i h a d Airways has selected Manchester as a 'focus city'. Twice daily services are offered from Manchester to Abu Dhabi and beyond, and the company has expressed an ambition to expand to 4x daily in the longer term. E t i h a d will shortly open a European customer support centre close to Manchester Airport ... I seem to recall 200 new jobs being mentioned but could be corrected on this. The airline is also a partner in the massive investment taking place in East Manchester in the form of the 'E t i h a d Campus' project in association with Manchester City FC. And once again, E t i h a d is a major Airbus customer, significantly contributing to employment at Broughton and across the UK. All the jobs mentioned in this paragraph result in taxes being paid to the same British exchequer as those generated by employees at Heathrow.

Qatar Airways is another big Airbus customer. They offer Manchester - Doha services upto twice daily; a temporary reduction to 10x weekly will commence shortly due to fleet deployment issues. They, and other long-haul carriers heading east, including PIA, Singapore Airlines and Bangladesh Biman also contribute to employment at Manchester Airport. All contribute to the attractiveness of this region to new employers who require great international airlinks. All the jobs mentioned in this paragraph result in taxes being paid to the same British exchequer as those generated by employees at Heathrow.

Meanwhile, all employees working at Manchester Airport itself owe their livelihoods to those carriers who commit to serve the airport with flying programmes. Those carriers which stick with MAN through the economic tough times as well as the good are particularly appreciated. And those employees who owe their livelihoods to a prosperous and successful Manchester Airport pay taxes to exactly the same British exchequer as their counterparts at Heathrow.

British Airways is a brand name of an international holding company (IAG). Their business model is to hub at LHR (and to a much lesser extent at LGW). Their main base suffers the misfortune of having insufficient runway capacity available to meet its true needs, which results in unreliability of connections on days when traffic flows must be reduced. Short-haul Shuttles bear the brunt of such disruption. BA onboard cabin service is generally good, but (in my opinion) does not exceed that offered by the Gulf carriers and SIA.

Please note that I have no problem with BA as a company pursuing exactly the corporate strategy which best suits its business needs. Its raison-d-etre is to make profits for IAG shareholders, not to boost civic pride in Manchester or elsewhere. BA is not a special case. It absolutely does not owe a living to Manchester, Birmingham or Glasgow; it is a private company, not a state flag-carrier. But conversely, residents of regional cities and their hinterlands do not owe a living to BA based upon the very limited offerings which the company makes available to them. They are one travel solution amongst many; to select them when they offer the most attractive deal / connection is logical. To select them because they have a Union Jack on the tail is madness.

So let's just get this whole 'patriotism' nonsense straight. When I book a flight with EK / EY I am supporting thousands of jobs in the North West. When I book with BA I am supporting significantly fewer. Whichever I book, taxes raised flow into the same pot. Now let's be serious here. When choosing flights, patriotic fervour does not enter my thinking! Convenient flight times, reliable connections, good service, price ... all valid considerations. But I put it to you ... when I press the "Book Now" icon on an Emirates or E t i h a d reservation from Manchester Airport, how can that conceivably be considered "unpatriotic"? And quite frankly, if any airline is prepared to offer me convenient service from Manchester, I am more than happy to take them up on the deal when travel needs suit. Even BA get my bookings from time to time ... but on a level playing field with the alternatives. Not because they are a 'patriotic' option!!!

[Mr A Tis]

I use Swiss or Lufthansa to HKG from MAN- and when i do, i am never the only pax to do so ( same for Shanghai).
BTW Etihad dont serve HKG.
Using LX or LH usually takes me about 16 hours.
Its all about choice.
Hong Kong airlines are a great airline, but this new LGW service is premium class only - i give it 6 months at best.

[Skipness One Echo]

Shed that's an epic post.
BA also have over a hundred Airbuses in the fleet, many more if you take Iberia into consideration as well, who fly the A340 in addition to a sizeable narrow bodied fleet. BA also chose Rolls Royce for many of their B777s and the whole B744 fleet. In addition BA will operate the Rolls Royce powered A380 which by value is around 50% British.

I know you like to lead the cheers for MAN and I applaud you for that, but the Gulf carriers have advantages in employment rights and even basic human rights in their home states that I would be wary of cheer leading for. This very erosion of employment protection gives them a competitve advantage in flying long haul at a low cost that a European legacy could not hope to attain.

If you want to see how great and benvolent Emirates are behind the scenes, I refer you to the two incidents with the A340 on departure in which both came close to crashing due to overtired and inexperienced crews not setting the power correctly! There is something to be said for high cost and regulation IMHO.

[TURIN]

It's all gone dark!

Ok, who forgot to pay the electric bill?

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

"Cheerleading"

Hi Skipness -

I am not for one moment suggesting that IAG do not make a significant contribution to the UK (and Spanish) economy; I am simply making the point that many other companies do as well. This list includes Emirates and E t i h a d in particular, as demonstrated by their provision of quality employment opportunities in the region surrounding Manchester Airport. Please be advised that I do not consider my post to be "cheerleading" for any carrier / airport. Perhaps you think it unforgivable for posters *not* to "cheerlead" for BA and LHR as you do? [Back at you, Mister!!!] :-)

I simply "cheerlead" for people to make rational travel choices guided by commercial realities rather than misguided patriotism. And I rebut the ludicrous idea that supporting quality services provided locally makes one some kind of anti-British traitor. I "cheerlead" for customer travel choice in the regions without being unjustly vilified by the usual LHR apologists for being "unpatriotic".

I have never suggested that Emirates is a model employer. However, many of BA's recent striking staff don't consider their airline to be one either. Neither do many former Dan-Air employees (and others). And indeed, if we were to scour the world for an airline which is a "perfect employer", I suggest that no such company would emerge. Emirates do have certain market advantages, but so too have many other companies. Britain's erstwhile flag-carrier has in the past used its formidable lobbying power at Westminster to great effect in suppressing competition from the regions. BA aggressively plays to its strengths. And not always fairly - ask Laker, Virgin. Please don't ask me to shed tears for them now because other companies play to their strengths too.

Best Regards. SHED.

[Skipness One Echo]

Fair point in many ways. The reason that BA had to take on BASSA is the result of the new airlines who don't offer generous benefits and pensions to staff, in truth BA had to introduce a 'B' Scale in Mixed Fleet which makes being cabin crew something young adults do for a few years then b*gger off from. No career suits the employer, cuts costs and makes flying cheaper for us as we assist in destroying ts & cs of staff by flying cheapest in most cases.

The idea that people 'fly the flag' just isn't a realistic proposition nowadays for too many. I do wonder if Qatar are really using fleet issues as cover, as MAN has three airlines battering lumps out of each other in that market and both Etihad and Qatar have been told to start behaving commercially and aim for profit with consistent return on investment.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Fair point re Qatar Airways. Expansion on the MEB3 Manchester routes has occurred at a breakneck pace over recent months with further capacity still anticipated by EK / EY. Whilst passenger uplift appears healthy, yields must be an issue at some point. We will see whether QR restores double daily frequency once their B787 deliveries start hitting the fleet. 10x weekly might be a blessing in disguise as we negotiate tougher economic times.

[Bagso]

The explosion of flights via the Gulf is not quite the "bloodbath" that you might suggest Skippy.

Manchester is thee largest City outside London by a long long way, the North West has a GDP as great as some countries in the EU, this is FACT, the demand is there ! Where once passengers relied on the services of what in most cases was an ill informed travel agent, you can now use search engines that can at least offer flights which depart from where demand originates ! As a consequence many of these passengers especially business pax have become much more savvy in relation to travel arrangements and will make their own mind up in terms of a product which suits them

The pax on the Gulf carriers havn't been manufactured out of thin air they simply believe that the product on offer is far superior to that offered by other airline options.

On a second point it never ceases to amase me that when a newsworthy item hits the headlines relating to Heathrow, many of the flights are infact barely half full !

What on earth is the point of 10 flights a day to say Hong Kong where the front end is reasonably full but the back end half empty ? I do not dispute an airline can actually make money on such routes but something is surely skewed if airlines have to operate flights in triplicate even where load factors are so poor.

....if figures quoted on "other forums" are to be believed ALL the loads Ex Manchester are at least more efficient by load factor ........front and back !

Finally if we are going to start asking questions about using a service based soley on human rights what about BA flights to various countries of dubious background ?

[washingtondave]

Baggage handling

The baggage handling at terminal 2 must be about the worst in the world. it took over 45 minutes from my flight docking to recover my suitcase from the carousel, when there was only one other carousel running, and therefore flight, to handle. This is terrible service. I am an infrequent traveller at Manchester, but each time I have used terminal 2 the level of service has been the same.

[TSR2]

it took over 45 minutes from my flight docking to recover my suitcase from the carousel,

Considering you have to clear immigration, 45 mins seems quite acceptable to me.

[johnnychips]

No, that's poor. I use MAN a lot (T1 and T3 admittedly) and have never had to wait so long.

[OltonPete]

QR/EY/EK

Maybe not a bloodbath but hardly stunning.

Forget yields and cargo as this is not in the public domain but these are my observations: -

January was a lot better for the three airlines but still over 33000 empty seats or the equivalent of two QR A332's flying empty every day of the month. Seats available were around 141000 giving an average load factor of 76%.

CAA figures - Doha 26526 Dubai 59468 and Abu Dhabi 21793

My figures using libhomeradar (rotations) and planespotters.net (configs): -

Doha 214 pax per flight or 73% (give or take 2%) - more A333's than A332's

Dubai 320 pax per flight or 81% - a few 489 seat A380's and 278 seat A332's

Abu Dhabi 176 pax per flight or 67% (give or take 2% due possible canx flight)

Based on 124 sectors for QR and EY (was one EY cancelled?) and 186 for EK.

At least the one with what appears to have the deepest pockets are the ones with the lower figures

Pete

[The96er]

it took over 45 minutes from my flight docking to recover my suitcase from the carousel,

The airline you used and hence, the respective handling agent will have been more of a factor than the airport itself.

[mickyman]

OltonPete

Have you any figures for other British airports to compare ?
or is the only airport that can be compared LHR ?

MM