MANCHESTER - 8
I love this new category of "legacy airlines".
Hell's teeth I'm off to the bank to get a loan to start my own company.
LEGACY AIRLINES. - Air travel as it used to be.
Hell's teeth I'm off to the bank to get a loan to start my own company.
LEGACY AIRLINES. - Air travel as it used to be.
Careful what you wish for.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,069
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet Air Will Resume India-China Service Amid Good Growth, Mahadevan Says - Bloomberg
Surely it can only be a matter of time before MAN appears on the map somewhere?!
Even BHX would be a start!
Surely it can only be a matter of time before MAN appears on the map somewhere?!
Even BHX would be a start!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zooker,
Yes, I have a 2:1 in Management Bullshxt.
I think most of your points were answered by PQC and others, but to clarify mine, in Plain English:
Dinosaurs: this is not my phrase, I was pointing out how 'legacy' carriers have been daubed with this name by critics, with some justification. I think legacies are important and it's good to see them growing at MAN.
A 'sustainable marketing strategy' just means that MAN looks for airline business which is prepared to pay a rate which will produce an operating profit for the airport. This in turn ensures funds to improve airport facilities. MAN doesn't do heavy discounting of rates to attract business. As illustrated with Ryanair two years ago, MAN is wary of going after traffic growth by discounting, because in the longer term the revenues generated do not allow for reinvestment. We've seen what happens at several smaller regional airports when investment is needed - there is no choice but to put up rates, usually in the form of a development tax or supplement. Then you end up in court, or the traffic moves away. In a word- unsustainable.
Economic reality? Some examples. Airport infrastructure is VERY expensive to provide. In the pre-LCC era, smaller regional airports had plenty of spare capacity and so when LCCs came along they could offer it at knock-down rates. When the airports need to replace and update facilities there's not enough money coming in from the fees they've agreed. MAN doesn't do this, as explained above. By the way, MAN is entirely owned by local councils (and people like me who pay council tax to Manchester City Council). The public-sector owners have made much more of a financial success of their airport than some private sector operators. Has Peel made a profit? MAN's economic reality also applies to things like runways. Runway 2 is not open when it isn't needed, it was an investment for the long term growth of the airport. MAN has 3000m runways because today's aircraft in a northern European climate don't need the 4000m runways which the Germans keep building. Additional cost of the extra 1000m of runway, anything from £20M to £100M depending on the geography.
Not accepting mass diversions in snowy conditions is another economic reality, and the sign of a mature airport management. Look after your principal customers first and foremost. Don't disrupt the operation for the sake of a few extra quid. Help out in an emergency or distress, of course.
World class ATC. NATS are generally regarded as one of the top players. And by 2013 there'll be a brand new control tower to replace the ageing one. That's not cheap.
Diverse portfolio - I mean that MAN attracts and keeps a wide spread of business - legacies, charter, LCCs, freight. No other airport in the UK has such a wide range of business, with no dominant customer. This makes MAN less vulnerable to individual airline failures or changes in market trends.
Hope that explains.
Yes, I have a 2:1 in Management Bullshxt.
I think most of your points were answered by PQC and others, but to clarify mine, in Plain English:
Dinosaurs: this is not my phrase, I was pointing out how 'legacy' carriers have been daubed with this name by critics, with some justification. I think legacies are important and it's good to see them growing at MAN.
A 'sustainable marketing strategy' just means that MAN looks for airline business which is prepared to pay a rate which will produce an operating profit for the airport. This in turn ensures funds to improve airport facilities. MAN doesn't do heavy discounting of rates to attract business. As illustrated with Ryanair two years ago, MAN is wary of going after traffic growth by discounting, because in the longer term the revenues generated do not allow for reinvestment. We've seen what happens at several smaller regional airports when investment is needed - there is no choice but to put up rates, usually in the form of a development tax or supplement. Then you end up in court, or the traffic moves away. In a word- unsustainable.
Economic reality? Some examples. Airport infrastructure is VERY expensive to provide. In the pre-LCC era, smaller regional airports had plenty of spare capacity and so when LCCs came along they could offer it at knock-down rates. When the airports need to replace and update facilities there's not enough money coming in from the fees they've agreed. MAN doesn't do this, as explained above. By the way, MAN is entirely owned by local councils (and people like me who pay council tax to Manchester City Council). The public-sector owners have made much more of a financial success of their airport than some private sector operators. Has Peel made a profit? MAN's economic reality also applies to things like runways. Runway 2 is not open when it isn't needed, it was an investment for the long term growth of the airport. MAN has 3000m runways because today's aircraft in a northern European climate don't need the 4000m runways which the Germans keep building. Additional cost of the extra 1000m of runway, anything from £20M to £100M depending on the geography.
Not accepting mass diversions in snowy conditions is another economic reality, and the sign of a mature airport management. Look after your principal customers first and foremost. Don't disrupt the operation for the sake of a few extra quid. Help out in an emergency or distress, of course.
World class ATC. NATS are generally regarded as one of the top players. And by 2013 there'll be a brand new control tower to replace the ageing one. That's not cheap.
Diverse portfolio - I mean that MAN attracts and keeps a wide spread of business - legacies, charter, LCCs, freight. No other airport in the UK has such a wide range of business, with no dominant customer. This makes MAN less vulnerable to individual airline failures or changes in market trends.
Hope that explains.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And by 2013 there'll be a brand new control tower to replace the ageing one. That's not cheap.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,069
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
World class ATC. NATS are generally regarded as one of the top players. And by 2013 there'll be a brand new control tower to replace the ageing one. That's not cheap.
That's a good investment, whereabouts are they building?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
£25M.....hmmmm,
allegedly not much more than the cost of moving 2/3rds of the airport's ATC staff to Jockistan.
65m!!....near the hangars?....doesn't that infringe one of the obstacle surfaces?
Fog, missed approach, 05L. oo'errr!!
allegedly not much more than the cost of moving 2/3rds of the airport's ATC staff to Jockistan.
65m!!....near the hangars?....doesn't that infringe one of the obstacle surfaces?
Fog, missed approach, 05L. oo'errr!!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
£25M.....hmmmm,
allegedly not much more than the cost of moving 2/3rds of the airport's ATC staff to Jockistan.
allegedly not much more than the cost of moving 2/3rds of the airport's ATC staff to Jockistan.
Think all the airport's ATC staff are still there, it was the area control centre that moved. Still wierd hearing traffic departing off EGCC and calling "Scottish" on 128.050MHz. I remember when that was London.....
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 15th Dec 2010 at 17:12.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Lucky them "
Yep, allegedly they lost about 40 due to the unpopularity of the move.
Oddly enough (although it's only heresay), none of the senior managers who were advocates of the move are actually there.
Now, isn't that odd!
But. you are correct.
128.05 was the old Irish Sea frequency at LATCC.
Skipness VOR!...........eeee........that takes us back.
Early 1970s, the northern end of Amber One. Monster!!
"Yep, allegedly they lost about 40 due to the unpopularity of the move.
Oddly enough (although it's only heresay), none of the senior managers who were advocates of the move are actually there.
Now, isn't that odd!
But. you are correct.
128.05 was the old Irish Sea frequency at LATCC.
Skipness VOR!...........eeee........that takes us back.
Early 1970s, the northern end of Amber One. Monster!!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New ATC tower
Skipness,
The new tower will be over by the hangars. The future ATC requirement has been in discussion for 2-3 years, with various options considered. MAG Board has now decided to take a long term view, and committed a large sum to ensure a top class facility which will align with the airport masterplan. There will be an infringement of the Inner Horizontal Surface, as there usually is with major airport towers, because you must have good sightlines across the entire airport movement area. LHR is 87m, I think. MAN's will be less, but still tall. There'll be a study into the airspace implications, of course.
The new tower will be over by the hangars. The future ATC requirement has been in discussion for 2-3 years, with various options considered. MAG Board has now decided to take a long term view, and committed a large sum to ensure a top class facility which will align with the airport masterplan. There will be an infringement of the Inner Horizontal Surface, as there usually is with major airport towers, because you must have good sightlines across the entire airport movement area. LHR is 87m, I think. MAN's will be less, but still tall. There'll be a study into the airspace implications, of course.
What planet are you on zooker?
I worked for NATS for over 35 years.
None of the ATC staff that left/retired/ or moved to Scotland had anything whatsoever to do with ATC at MAN. Completely seperate enterty & seperate contract.
What the local ATC Managers thought about it was also irrelevant, the decision to move the unit was nothing to do with them. So, yes everyone moved around the company to various locations, not just the managers.
I worked for NATS for over 35 years.
None of the ATC staff that left/retired/ or moved to Scotland had anything whatsoever to do with ATC at MAN. Completely seperate enterty & seperate contract.
What the local ATC Managers thought about it was also irrelevant, the decision to move the unit was nothing to do with them. So, yes everyone moved around the company to various locations, not just the managers.
Are there any plans for another A380 stand(s)?
Also what's the crack with the SQ? Is it changing to go DCT Singapore?
Any news on the EK A380 twice daily?
A330etops
Also what's the crack with the SQ? Is it changing to go DCT Singapore?
Any news on the EK A380 twice daily?
A330etops
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr A Tis,
I think you are talking out of your Ar**hole.
Many of the people who left/retired/moved to Scotland had LOTS to do with ATC at Manchester Airport.
Manchester sub-centre, approach, (SCMA), and Aerodrome control was, (thanks to the late W.R.P. Perry DFC), the only fully integrated ATC unit in the UK.
It was not uncommon for controllers to exercise all 3 ratings during a single duty. Assistant and TELS skills were also shared accordingly.
I believe the unit also carried out an approach radar function for EGGP.
"MAG Board has decided to take along term view".
Sadly, 12 months too late. EGCCZQ/ZA/ZT has gone, and the professionals who operate the complex MTMA are now split into 2 groups, working for different 'business divisions', 235 miles apart, with no sense of a common team-based objective.
All this has been achieved through the combined efforts of non-aviation people, (Muirhead, Barron et al). These individuals have since disappeared off the radar.
And for what purpose?
Their own selfish, short-term gain, having trashed the lives and aspirations of many.
I think you are talking out of your Ar**hole.
Many of the people who left/retired/moved to Scotland had LOTS to do with ATC at Manchester Airport.
Manchester sub-centre, approach, (SCMA), and Aerodrome control was, (thanks to the late W.R.P. Perry DFC), the only fully integrated ATC unit in the UK.
It was not uncommon for controllers to exercise all 3 ratings during a single duty. Assistant and TELS skills were also shared accordingly.
I believe the unit also carried out an approach radar function for EGGP.
"MAG Board has decided to take along term view".
Sadly, 12 months too late. EGCCZQ/ZA/ZT has gone, and the professionals who operate the complex MTMA are now split into 2 groups, working for different 'business divisions', 235 miles apart, with no sense of a common team-based objective.
All this has been achieved through the combined efforts of non-aviation people, (Muirhead, Barron et al). These individuals have since disappeared off the radar.
And for what purpose?
Their own selfish, short-term gain, having trashed the lives and aspirations of many.
Last edited by ZOOKER; 15th Dec 2010 at 20:55.
Also what's the crack with the SQ? Is it changing to go DCT Singapore?
DUNCAN TOWN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAN ATC
Zooker,
The decision to move the ACC to Scotland was a NATS decision, and NATS alone. It had been on the cards for about 10 years, to my knowledge. MAG had no part in it, and hence the ACC did not feature in the considerations for replacing the tower. The tower is, and always was, about the Aerodrome and Approach functions for MAN alone.
The decision to move the ACC to Scotland was a NATS decision, and NATS alone. It had been on the cards for about 10 years, to my knowledge. MAG had no part in it, and hence the ACC did not feature in the considerations for replacing the tower. The tower is, and always was, about the Aerodrome and Approach functions for MAN alone.