SOUTHAMPTON
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stewyb
Stands 13/14 seem to be used for equipment parking or bis jets,I'm not sure they could accommodate anything bigger then Saab 2000 for example,however incorporating them into a large stand would make an ideal 320 stand.I can recall seeing a 321 parked nose out on stand 13/14 a few years ago.
Stands 13/14 seem to be used for equipment parking or bis jets,I'm not sure they could accommodate anything bigger then Saab 2000 for example,however incorporating them into a large stand would make an ideal 320 stand.I can recall seeing a 321 parked nose out on stand 13/14 a few years ago.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great to see EZY starting flights from SOU, as others have said it will be interesting to see if Geneva is just the start of the Orange... Nonetheless, it is a welcome addition for the Ski season, especially as Flybe have cut flights and capacity in recent years.
I believe the A320's EZY have are in fact better performance wise than most of their A319's, as many of the latter have a restricted MTOW and de-rated engines to lower operating costs, not to mention EZY weren't flying many longer routes when they first got them. Guess it is also worth pointing out that they only use the A320 on the longer Canaries routes from SEN.
I believe the A320's EZY have are in fact better performance wise than most of their A319's, as many of the latter have a restricted MTOW and de-rated engines to lower operating costs, not to mention EZY weren't flying many longer routes when they first got them. Guess it is also worth pointing out that they only use the A320 on the longer Canaries routes from SEN.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: In the doghouse (usually)
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great news for SOU. Being plugged into the EZY network coupled with their marketing and brand awareness should really put the airport on the map for those people who perhaps aren't aware of it at the moment, particularly towards London.
I hope we'll see more routes to come for next summer. Another advantage is that with EZY having so many bases across Europe and the UK flights could operate into SOU from many different potential locations without any aircraft having to be based.
I do wonder if this will hole Powdair below the waterline though (at least at SOU), or whether they'll benefit from the (hopefully) increased numbers of people looking at ski routes to Switzerland out of SOU? Their flights don't operate on the same days as EZY from what I can see.
I reckon we're now going to see some significant airside investment at SOU in order to cement EZY's position there over the next couple of years, and really expand the airport's appeal in order to start taking traffic from the two closest (pretty much full) London airports. Interesting times ahead.
I hope we'll see more routes to come for next summer. Another advantage is that with EZY having so many bases across Europe and the UK flights could operate into SOU from many different potential locations without any aircraft having to be based.
I do wonder if this will hole Powdair below the waterline though (at least at SOU), or whether they'll benefit from the (hopefully) increased numbers of people looking at ski routes to Switzerland out of SOU? Their flights don't operate on the same days as EZY from what I can see.
I reckon we're now going to see some significant airside investment at SOU in order to cement EZY's position there over the next couple of years, and really expand the airport's appeal in order to start taking traffic from the two closest (pretty much full) London airports. Interesting times ahead.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not quite sure what you are saying? I was pointing out that only the A320's fly the Canaries routes from SEN as the EZY A319's can't without a significant restriction. I presume the other routes are a mix, but only the longer routes need it from a performance point of view.
GiveMeABreak
Whilst what you say about the range of routes flown by the A320 from SEN is not wrong, adfly's post is not so much wrong as ambiguous. Change the order of two words and the intent of his post is clearer, hence :
Guess it is also worth pointing out that they use only the A320 on the longer Canaries routes from SEN.
The example shows well the capability of the A320 compared with the EZY A319 when operating from a limiting runway. FAO seems the limit to which EZY will task their A319 from SEN.
Whilst what you say about the range of routes flown by the A320 from SEN is not wrong, adfly's post is not so much wrong as ambiguous. Change the order of two words and the intent of his post is clearer, hence :
Guess it is also worth pointing out that they use only the A320 on the longer Canaries routes from SEN.
The example shows well the capability of the A320 compared with the EZY A319 when operating from a limiting runway. FAO seems the limit to which EZY will task their A319 from SEN.
Last edited by Tagron; 11th Jul 2017 at 20:12. Reason: Paragraphing
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South
Age: 43
Posts: 765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The grinning goon mentioned in an interview that they would be announcing plans for investment in the autumn. It seemed to be linked to the long mooted commercial development on the north east side of the airport rather than any investment airside though. I have heard nothing about the relief road so can't see any movement happening on that front yet.
It does seem like they really do have the final ultimatum to put their hand in their pocket to ensure the infrastructure is in place to enable the airport to grow. I am amazed that the management team haven't noticed that planes land at their airport on time and leave late 99% of the time and not had the sense to rectify this. Planes having to use the runway as a taxiway is astounding in this day and age especially as it could be fixed by the laying of some Tarmac. Hardly a massive undertaking! SOU and EZY could develop a very fruitful relationship with the affluent south of England on SOUs doorstep looking to do city breaks or hit the beaches or slopes. However the elephant in the room is the fact many opportunities to make investment have already been and gone and that SOU is owned by a pension fund. Their business plan is for a small and steady return. SOU can plod along and meet that target. I will therefore not hold my breath but hope I am proved wrong.
It does seem like they really do have the final ultimatum to put their hand in their pocket to ensure the infrastructure is in place to enable the airport to grow. I am amazed that the management team haven't noticed that planes land at their airport on time and leave late 99% of the time and not had the sense to rectify this. Planes having to use the runway as a taxiway is astounding in this day and age especially as it could be fixed by the laying of some Tarmac. Hardly a massive undertaking! SOU and EZY could develop a very fruitful relationship with the affluent south of England on SOUs doorstep looking to do city breaks or hit the beaches or slopes. However the elephant in the room is the fact many opportunities to make investment have already been and gone and that SOU is owned by a pension fund. Their business plan is for a small and steady return. SOU can plod along and meet that target. I will therefore not hold my breath but hope I am proved wrong.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Up in the clouds
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The grinning goon mentioned in an interview that they would be announcing plans for investment in the autumn. It seemed to be linked to the long mooted commercial development on the north east side of the airport rather than any investment airside though. I have heard nothing about the relief road so can't see any movement happening on that front yet.
It does seem like they really do have the final ultimatum to put their hand in their pocket to ensure the infrastructure is in place to enable the airport to grow. I am amazed that the management team haven't noticed that planes land at their airport on time and leave late 99% of the time and not had the sense to rectify this. Planes having to use the runway as a taxiway is astounding in this day and age especially as it could be fixed by the laying of some Tarmac. Hardly a massive undertaking! SOU and EZY could develop a very fruitful relationship with the affluent south of England on SOUs doorstep looking to do city breaks or hit the beaches or slopes. However the elephant in the room is the fact many opportunities to make investment have already been and gone and that SOU is owned by a pension fund. Their business plan is for a small and steady return. SOU can plod along and meet that target. I will therefore not hold my breath but hope I am proved wrong.
It does seem like they really do have the final ultimatum to put their hand in their pocket to ensure the infrastructure is in place to enable the airport to grow. I am amazed that the management team haven't noticed that planes land at their airport on time and leave late 99% of the time and not had the sense to rectify this. Planes having to use the runway as a taxiway is astounding in this day and age especially as it could be fixed by the laying of some Tarmac. Hardly a massive undertaking! SOU and EZY could develop a very fruitful relationship with the affluent south of England on SOUs doorstep looking to do city breaks or hit the beaches or slopes. However the elephant in the room is the fact many opportunities to make investment have already been and gone and that SOU is owned by a pension fund. Their business plan is for a small and steady return. SOU can plod along and meet that target. I will therefore not hold my breath but hope I am proved wrong.
I am interested in knowing your punctuality source!?
Facts? RJ doesn't do facts.
The CAA do - based on the percentage of flights operating early to 15 mins late in 2016, SOU came eighth out of the 26 reported (79.41%)
The CAA do - based on the percentage of flights operating early to 15 mins late in 2016, SOU came eighth out of the 26 reported (79.41%)
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South
Age: 43
Posts: 765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Destinationsky: Of course it's my opinion, isn't that what a forum is founded on? If we all just copied and pasted links to facts I am not sure much conversation would break out.
SWBKCB: Stats are often misleading. In fact you can probably find a stat that proves an argument and a stat that proves the oposite side of the argument. Look at the arrival and departures on any day and you will see my point. It stands to reason that if an aircraft landing has to turn 180 degrees and then backtrack down the runway that departures are going to progressively back up whilst waiting for a free runway. The departures also have to backtrack the runway and turn 180 degrees before taking off. I am not sure why you find any of my opinions contentious as they pretty much echo the sentiments of the other posts on here.
SWBKCB: Stats are often misleading. In fact you can probably find a stat that proves an argument and a stat that proves the oposite side of the argument. Look at the arrival and departures on any day and you will see my point. It stands to reason that if an aircraft landing has to turn 180 degrees and then backtrack down the runway that departures are going to progressively back up whilst waiting for a free runway. The departures also have to backtrack the runway and turn 180 degrees before taking off. I am not sure why you find any of my opinions contentious as they pretty much echo the sentiments of the other posts on here.
RJ - yes it is all about opinions, but just making things up and repeating them doesn't make it true.
You all also said:
No it doesn't - this would only hold true if the runway was running near/at capacity so there was a constant stream of a/c waiting to arrive and depart. I would expect that the airport and airlines factor this into their schedules so that it isn't a problem. If it was, the airlines would be making a noise about ("We would love to fly to X, Y, Z, but...").
You all also said:
It stands to reason that if an aircraft landing has to turn 180 degrees and then backtrack down the runway that departures are going to progressively back up whilst waiting for a free runway.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also the CAA stats are based on the time off blocks, not the time airborne, so if it pushes back on schedule but is then late due to back tracking aircraft then this would be reflected on its arrival time, which RJ said was running on time most of the time. Also how long must an aircraft wait at the hold for an aircraft to land and backtrack? 90 second? It's not as big a problem that is being made out, not until, as SWBKCB alludes to, capacity is reached.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAA May Stats
SOU handled 176,331 passengers in May, representing a significant increase of 15% on last year. Domestic routes almost all showing strong growth. Few routes broken down below. BMI seem to be doing well on MUC now, it is right on their average load factor, so as long as the fares are stacking up I imagine they are happy with the route.
Cork - 48 pax / 67%
Dusseldorf - 49 pax / 63%
Lyon - 39 pax / 51%
Munich - 25 pax / 51% (Based on all E145, actual % will be a little higher)
Paris CDG - 57 pax / 73%
Data from here: https://www.caa.co.uk/Data-and-analy...-data-2017-05/
Cork - 48 pax / 67%
Dusseldorf - 49 pax / 63%
Lyon - 39 pax / 51%
Munich - 25 pax / 51% (Based on all E145, actual % will be a little higher)
Paris CDG - 57 pax / 73%
Data from here: https://www.caa.co.uk/Data-and-analy...-data-2017-05/
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Up in the clouds
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rivet Joint - You are entitled to your opinion but if it is based on facts that are assumed or incorrect or just blind made up, that is when the issue occurs.
You bang on about the same things time and time again, making them out to be such a large issue when in fact they are not. As has already been alluded to, the back track is not ideal but it is not a limiting factor as the runway has a lot more capacity. Adding a piece of tarmac would improve the issue but do you have any concept on how much that would cost?! Then add that to the logistics of actually doing it and the planning consent, we are talking tens of millions and how quickly would you make that back? I'll give you a clue, not very! Airlines won't suddenly flock to the airport after laying a piece of asphalt, there is a lot more to it than that. EZY have been on the cards for a long long time but now the market conditions are correct for them to start.
Life in aviation is not as black and white as you think.
You bang on about the same things time and time again, making them out to be such a large issue when in fact they are not. As has already been alluded to, the back track is not ideal but it is not a limiting factor as the runway has a lot more capacity. Adding a piece of tarmac would improve the issue but do you have any concept on how much that would cost?! Then add that to the logistics of actually doing it and the planning consent, we are talking tens of millions and how quickly would you make that back? I'll give you a clue, not very! Airlines won't suddenly flock to the airport after laying a piece of asphalt, there is a lot more to it than that. EZY have been on the cards for a long long time but now the market conditions are correct for them to start.
Life in aviation is not as black and white as you think.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 882
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Destinationsky
As I mentioned earlier, I understand that runway resurfacing is due in 17/18 and would be a lot cheaper and the right time to add a northern taxiway at this point. In past posts this has also been discussed when it was agreed that SOU could have done this during the last runway makeover as a job lot and at considerably less cost. If the airport wants to grow in the future alongside the likes of easyJet, then this has to be completed sooner rather than later!
As I mentioned earlier, I understand that runway resurfacing is due in 17/18 and would be a lot cheaper and the right time to add a northern taxiway at this point. In past posts this has also been discussed when it was agreed that SOU could have done this during the last runway makeover as a job lot and at considerably less cost. If the airport wants to grow in the future alongside the likes of easyJet, then this has to be completed sooner rather than later!
With the advent of EZE and the probable departure of BEE 195s would this not be a time to start thinking outside the box (or Stand!), bin Stand 1 and then share the resultant space between the current Stands 1-5 to provide four A320 capable Stands?
I believe I am right in saying that a northern taxiway would need to join Rwy20 from the east (there is not enough space the other/terminal side, as things currently stand), so it would still involve a runway crossing (maybe at the current northerly entry point?), then parallel taxiway on the eastern side.
This would fit with establishing parking stands to the NE of the runway, which I believe was part of past Masterplans?
This would fit with establishing parking stands to the NE of the runway, which I believe was part of past Masterplans?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 882
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the short term, the likelihood is they will form the taxiway from stand 14 straight out to the runway with a small back track. With regards to stand space, again a quick fix would be to convert 1-5 to 3 or 4 A319/A320 stands, especially as you say with Flybe removing E175/E195 from this winter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Up in the clouds
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes I agree that it is cheaper to do a taxiway when there already is a batching plant on site. Thing to be careful of is that the resurface date has already been put back a number of times previously because the surface state has not warranted it.
