MANCHESTER - 8
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Taxi times
RYR will need to learn the old EI and BA 1-11 Manchester slot-buster. Taxi for 23R, get abeam Pier A and declare to ATC ' we can take it from Golf'. Forget the figures in the FMS, throttles to the wall, airborne 3 minutes ahead. Saw a QF 747 do it once. Noice!
Roverman - think it would have been '24' not '23R' in those days.
Also remember doing turnrounds on Laker 1-11's in the early 80's to beat the night time runway closure that made Ryanair look like jessie's....
Also remember doing turnrounds on Laker 1-11's in the early 80's to beat the night time runway closure that made Ryanair look like jessie's....
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: , England
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
taxining time to and from t2 is around 15mins so how ryanair r going 2 get a 25min turn around is going 2 be the problem
Though from experience the only time taxiin at MAN has taken this long is during departures in the early morning summer runway queues/slots times etc. The average time it usually takes us after a roll-out on runway 23R to arriving on stand is 5-6 minutes max. Again ATC restrictions and aircraft in the way can slow it down but this can happen at any airport. If you have captain quick you could probably do it even faster!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: South of MAN, North of BHX, and well clear of Stoke ;-)
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah memories.
Remember once having Cathay B744 on a tight slot for AMS. He called up abeam what was the red top, and I offered him Link Charlie for departure, which he duly accepted.
Spectacular departure taken on the roll, but was called down to the 4th floor before the end of shift. Apparently, whilst all who saw it were impressed, the poor guy driving a set of steps round Pier Alpha was less than happy.
Rgds
Remember once having Cathay B744 on a tight slot for AMS. He called up abeam what was the red top, and I offered him Link Charlie for departure, which he duly accepted.
Spectacular departure taken on the roll, but was called down to the 4th floor before the end of shift. Apparently, whilst all who saw it were impressed, the poor guy driving a set of steps round Pier Alpha was less than happy.
Rgds
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW England
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A good deal for all concerned...
Roverman - spot on!
MO'L said a few months ago that FR needed to change their business model and start flying from some 'main' airports as well as the 'alternatives'.
Despite the impact of the recession, airports such as MAN don't handle 18-19M pax without a reason. And ask yourself - why did FR retain the DUB schedule if they were so set against MAN?
Likewise, MAG would be daft not to try to fill its quietest slots with some traffic, but not at costs that might prejudice its core business.
In addition, competition on some of the 'sun' routes might lead some based carriers like LS, ZB, EZY etc to 'sharpen' their pencils somewhat. In my view, on some routes these Lo-Cos are Lo-Cos in name only. I mean, £250+ to Rome with LS?
So yes, welcome back FR. A mutually beneficial arrangement at the present time.
But even if the rumours of based aircraft are true, I think that the business at MAN is diverse enough (which is one of the biggest strong points) to resist the siren calls of lots of FR based aircraft operating with sod-all margins for the airport.
The question is, what reaction / response will be forthcoming from LS, ZB and EZY?
We live in interesting times...
MO'L said a few months ago that FR needed to change their business model and start flying from some 'main' airports as well as the 'alternatives'.
Despite the impact of the recession, airports such as MAN don't handle 18-19M pax without a reason. And ask yourself - why did FR retain the DUB schedule if they were so set against MAN?
Likewise, MAG would be daft not to try to fill its quietest slots with some traffic, but not at costs that might prejudice its core business.
In addition, competition on some of the 'sun' routes might lead some based carriers like LS, ZB, EZY etc to 'sharpen' their pencils somewhat. In my view, on some routes these Lo-Cos are Lo-Cos in name only. I mean, £250+ to Rome with LS?
So yes, welcome back FR. A mutually beneficial arrangement at the present time.
But even if the rumours of based aircraft are true, I think that the business at MAN is diverse enough (which is one of the biggest strong points) to resist the siren calls of lots of FR based aircraft operating with sod-all margins for the airport.
The question is, what reaction / response will be forthcoming from LS, ZB and EZY?
We live in interesting times...
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Back Of Beyond
Age: 53
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Following the liquid ban in 2006, Manchester Airport invited catering companies to tender for a permanent presence on the airfield to try and address the issues that airside workers had getting food and liquid through security. Willow Catering won the contract and have been on the Tower Road for over two years. Sadly they have now decided that their presence at the airport is no longer commercially viable and they will be removing their catering van this week.
Why would I want to go to these lot, pay over the odds for crap food and drink, when I can bring my own food in, or go to Greggs and stop at Boots and get a drink (or drinks) at high street prices?
I reckon Willow catering was looking for a reason to pull the plug. All the staff travelled in from Liverpool as well as the stock. Could not have been making any money!
LCC's or not, on a route such as Rome where there is no direct competition on that city pair, not to mention competition to Rome from anywhere within a 100 mile radius means they can charge higher fares. Simple supply and demand. Even LCC's play by this theory.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Manchester
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAN-MAD
Good to see at long last the restoration of the MAN-MAD route, however 'RYR'
, this route surely would be better suited to flybe or IB on double daily rotations for business, leisure and transit via MAD? E175 size a/c?
, this route surely would be better suited to flybe or IB on double daily rotations for business, leisure and transit via MAD? E175 size a/c?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAN-MAD
Yes, I can't help feeling MAG management may have shot themselves in the foot on this one: with the BA/Iberia merger, the prospect of a MAN-MAD at 'proper' business schedules operates by Iberia or Air Nostrum under IB flight numbers (or even, perhaps, BA Cityflyer?) has got to be much closer than ever. Sure, it may take another 6-18 months for BA and Iberia to get their act in gear in this respect...but will the presence of Ryanair firmly close the door on this one?
Methinks this smacks a bit of MAG trying to bring in capacity at almost any cost (although I appreciate that, commercially, there will inevitably be a great deal more to it than that)...but for the sake of waiting a bit longer (when you're probably going to earn next to nothing from the FR operation anyway)...what would any of us really rather see: a once daily loco flight turning up at odd times or a decent nightstopper or double daily Iberia-marketed service with a raft of online connections possible?
Who is to say - it could all turn out very differently, of course, but there could be a fair amount of egg on face on the day that Iberia/BA announce 'feeder' services from EDI and/or BHX to MAD and Manchester is left out..
Methinks this smacks a bit of MAG trying to bring in capacity at almost any cost (although I appreciate that, commercially, there will inevitably be a great deal more to it than that)...but for the sake of waiting a bit longer (when you're probably going to earn next to nothing from the FR operation anyway)...what would any of us really rather see: a once daily loco flight turning up at odd times or a decent nightstopper or double daily Iberia-marketed service with a raft of online connections possible?
Who is to say - it could all turn out very differently, of course, but there could be a fair amount of egg on face on the day that Iberia/BA announce 'feeder' services from EDI and/or BHX to MAD and Manchester is left out..
Iberia have dipped their toe in & out of MAN-MAD & couldn't make it work even with a CRJ. I don't think BA / IB have any interest in connecting any of the regions with MAD. They could have done that before, the tie up with BA does not make it any more likely.
A solitary RYR flight that does not arrive into MAD until 2225 would not impact in that kind of market.
I won't be using any RYR service, but good luck to those who do want this kind of operation.
A solitary RYR flight that does not arrive into MAD until 2225 would not impact in that kind of market.
I won't be using any RYR service, but good luck to those who do want this kind of operation.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the prospect of a MAN-MAD at 'proper' business schedules operates by Iberia or Air Nostrum under IB flight numbers
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I note that the most commonly held misconception regarding the definition of "low-cost carrier" has resurfaced again on this thread (reference apparently expensive fares to Rome etc.).
The term "Low Cost" [airline] actually refers to the corporate cost base of the company. Think in terms of an investor or an accountant examining the company balance sheet. Ideally, a LCC can maintain profits in markets where margins are thin based on keeping its cost base (outgoings) to a minimum. In this case, the term "low cost" does NOT refer to what the passengers pay in terms of their fares. The "low cost" term has over time come to be misunderstood and misrepresented by the media, and for obvious reasons the airlines affected are in no hurry to set the record straight. If the punters mistakenly *assume* that Airline X is going to give them the cheapest possible deal, why would the company disabuse them of that notion?
What the customers actually experience is a "No Frills Carrier"; ie. a very basic level of service throughout their interaction with the company. The "no frills" experience is the key mechanism by which airline companies can reign in their costs and (hopefully) return a profit as a result. Note that LCC's use yield management techniques to maximize income from fares just like any other airline. When booking with one of these companies, you may indeed find a bargain deal. But conversely, you may also pay a surprisingly high fare if you book late on a popular route with limited capacity.
Please note that I am not criticizing this business model in any way; it works and has a legitimate niche in the market. However, I do think that it is beneficial for customers to realize that there is no automatic link between a 'low cost airline' and a 'low fare'. Try to dissociate the two concepts in your own mind when booking a journey. Low costs are what the airline enjoys; no frills is what the customers experience. The fare is another matter entirely!
Good bargain hunting and happy travels to all! SHED.
The term "Low Cost" [airline] actually refers to the corporate cost base of the company. Think in terms of an investor or an accountant examining the company balance sheet. Ideally, a LCC can maintain profits in markets where margins are thin based on keeping its cost base (outgoings) to a minimum. In this case, the term "low cost" does NOT refer to what the passengers pay in terms of their fares. The "low cost" term has over time come to be misunderstood and misrepresented by the media, and for obvious reasons the airlines affected are in no hurry to set the record straight. If the punters mistakenly *assume* that Airline X is going to give them the cheapest possible deal, why would the company disabuse them of that notion?
What the customers actually experience is a "No Frills Carrier"; ie. a very basic level of service throughout their interaction with the company. The "no frills" experience is the key mechanism by which airline companies can reign in their costs and (hopefully) return a profit as a result. Note that LCC's use yield management techniques to maximize income from fares just like any other airline. When booking with one of these companies, you may indeed find a bargain deal. But conversely, you may also pay a surprisingly high fare if you book late on a popular route with limited capacity.
Please note that I am not criticizing this business model in any way; it works and has a legitimate niche in the market. However, I do think that it is beneficial for customers to realize that there is no automatic link between a 'low cost airline' and a 'low fare'. Try to dissociate the two concepts in your own mind when booking a journey. Low costs are what the airline enjoys; no frills is what the customers experience. The fare is another matter entirely!
Good bargain hunting and happy travels to all! SHED.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, I do think that it is beneficial for customers to realize that there is no automatic link between a 'low cost airline' and a 'low fare'.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skipness - Ryanair may indeed offer more 'bargain' fare deals than other carriers. But there is still no *automatic* link to a low fare in a specific transaction. It is not safe for a customer to assume that a bargain tariff is assured with RYR or any other LCC. Regards. SHED.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No that's true, they do have a powerfully low cost base though. I too have been on the end of a heftilly priced last minute need for an FR seat....