MANCHESTER - 9
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: manchester
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I understand it, the area between T1 multi-storey and The Station will become a new multi-storey car park with the existing T1 and the existing T1 multi-storey becoming an enlarged T1 linked with T3.
I haven't seen plan myself but I would guess that the new car park will be built then the old one demolished. That area would become a new check-in and maybe security allowing for a much larger lounge area in the space currently occupied by the current lounge, security and check-in.
Could be wrong though!
Gavin.
I haven't seen plan myself but I would guess that the new car park will be built then the old one demolished. That area would become a new check-in and maybe security allowing for a much larger lounge area in the space currently occupied by the current lounge, security and check-in.
Could be wrong though!
Gavin.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ainsdale
Posts: 1,747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought the plans were to Built a satellite Terminal for Terminal 2 and an extension to the Pier in Terminal 3 and then Move all the carriers who use Terminal 1 to other terminals. Then demolish Piers B and C and rebuild them.
I don't see why the Main section (Check-In, Baggage Hall, Shopping Area) would be demolished if it was only refurbished about 3-5 years ago. I understand with the Piers though, they didn't get refurbished, well apart from the removal of the carpet in Pier B.
I don't see why the Main section (Check-In, Baggage Hall, Shopping Area) would be demolished if it was only refurbished about 3-5 years ago. I understand with the Piers though, they didn't get refurbished, well apart from the removal of the carpet in Pier B.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: MAN
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Davies & Regional Long Haul
Manfod
Davies wasn't critical of regional long haul as such. His comments on environmental issues were in the context of measures to encourage greater use of regional airports through policy levers such as differential APD. His number crunchers indicated that such policy levers would increase the numbers of long haul pax at regional airports, with a similar reduction at Heathrow (and Gatwick). However, the spreading of pax across airports would result in an increase in the numbers of flights (ie a reduction in average loads), presumably through the use of smaller aircraft at regional airports (not just Manchester, of course). Therefore, emissions per pax might be expected to rise.
It seems a pretty weak argument to me, as you could turn the argument around to say that there should be no long haul flights at all from regional airports and that we should all fly on full A380s from London...
Interestingly, the Davies analysis suggested that MAN would not the main beneficiary of such policy levers, with smaller regional airports getting the bulk of the increase in pax. However, his methodology is not at all clear, and I would question his conclusions in this respect.
Davies wasn't critical of regional long haul as such. His comments on environmental issues were in the context of measures to encourage greater use of regional airports through policy levers such as differential APD. His number crunchers indicated that such policy levers would increase the numbers of long haul pax at regional airports, with a similar reduction at Heathrow (and Gatwick). However, the spreading of pax across airports would result in an increase in the numbers of flights (ie a reduction in average loads), presumably through the use of smaller aircraft at regional airports (not just Manchester, of course). Therefore, emissions per pax might be expected to rise.
It seems a pretty weak argument to me, as you could turn the argument around to say that there should be no long haul flights at all from regional airports and that we should all fly on full A380s from London...
Interestingly, the Davies analysis suggested that MAN would not the main beneficiary of such policy levers, with smaller regional airports getting the bulk of the increase in pax. However, his methodology is not at all clear, and I would question his conclusions in this respect.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MANFOD
I will try and find the actual quotes, it wasn't in the final report I don't think but certainly mentioned by either Hansard Or in some of the other briefings.
Mr Brush is exactly correct although Davies in my view made some comments which were much more robust to the point of being highly disparaging, it is THAT which should have been challenged !
I sometimes think he was heavily influenced by BA and VS and simply regurgitated their comments.
They have no interest in business routes Ex MAN so naturally are not exactly going to wave the flag for any destinations outside London.
I did see one media launch which I think was for The London Chamber of Commerce a highly receptive audience of course, here he stressed the need for more runways given the 98% load factors being achieved !
This is what is highly worrying because it is of course complete drivel, he seems to have been advised that because slots are at 98% that translates to loads of a similar figure.
It is a strand of the review which I find perplexing. Infact every single time there is an incident or reference to a Heathrow flight the load factor appears appalling.
I know Skippy will quote CAA figs and correct me here but is galling when you hear details of such paltry loads I assumed that THIS is what Davies was going to try and FIX in order to make best use of available capacity.
The 777 that crashed short 152 pax
The A319 that made an emergency landing 75 pax on board
Last week we had an incident with a PIA 777, that had less than 60 passengers on it !
When "Airport Live" was on last year some of the boarding figures were appalling, Kate Humble enthused on one occasion about the passengers who would be jetting off in style to Jo Burg on an A340.... how many was it now 90 ?
Clearly this is not the full picture and I concede I am being highly selective BUT is that not the type of area that Davies should have looked at in detail ?
Is it not equally damaging to the environment to have half empty planes operating IN/OUT of LHR OR have we created a completely false situation where slots are operated simply because they appear on the balance as a tangible and highly prised asset. In effect it doesn't mean a fig what the load factor is as these are disguised by the intrinsic VALUE of the slot on the balance sheet AND do we need to build another RW simply to equalise that value ! Again where is the scrutiny ?
Back to Davies, he basically he stated that "flights from regional airports were highly detrimental to the environment and basically should be discouraged". That is not Mancunian spin btw !
It is somewhat at odds with his remit of "exploring ALL avenues in terms of providing UK airport capacity to meet demand, including best use of regional airports".
It would be interesting to see what the MAG spokesperson does actually say in respect of response to Davies because most of the arguments they put forward were in support of their stance on Stansted NOT Manchester.
Would highlighting inadequacies of the MAN strategy get us anywhere at a meeting of "local spotters" anyway, well probably not !
AND what is he actually going to say, ironically it is 12 months to the day since the STN deal went through....... precisely the moment when submissions by MAG relating to MAN fell off a cliff, disappearing almost without trace.
I will try and find the actual quotes, it wasn't in the final report I don't think but certainly mentioned by either Hansard Or in some of the other briefings.
Mr Brush is exactly correct although Davies in my view made some comments which were much more robust to the point of being highly disparaging, it is THAT which should have been challenged !
I sometimes think he was heavily influenced by BA and VS and simply regurgitated their comments.
They have no interest in business routes Ex MAN so naturally are not exactly going to wave the flag for any destinations outside London.
I did see one media launch which I think was for The London Chamber of Commerce a highly receptive audience of course, here he stressed the need for more runways given the 98% load factors being achieved !
This is what is highly worrying because it is of course complete drivel, he seems to have been advised that because slots are at 98% that translates to loads of a similar figure.
It is a strand of the review which I find perplexing. Infact every single time there is an incident or reference to a Heathrow flight the load factor appears appalling.
I know Skippy will quote CAA figs and correct me here but is galling when you hear details of such paltry loads I assumed that THIS is what Davies was going to try and FIX in order to make best use of available capacity.
The 777 that crashed short 152 pax
The A319 that made an emergency landing 75 pax on board
Last week we had an incident with a PIA 777, that had less than 60 passengers on it !
When "Airport Live" was on last year some of the boarding figures were appalling, Kate Humble enthused on one occasion about the passengers who would be jetting off in style to Jo Burg on an A340.... how many was it now 90 ?
Clearly this is not the full picture and I concede I am being highly selective BUT is that not the type of area that Davies should have looked at in detail ?
Is it not equally damaging to the environment to have half empty planes operating IN/OUT of LHR OR have we created a completely false situation where slots are operated simply because they appear on the balance as a tangible and highly prised asset. In effect it doesn't mean a fig what the load factor is as these are disguised by the intrinsic VALUE of the slot on the balance sheet AND do we need to build another RW simply to equalise that value ! Again where is the scrutiny ?
Back to Davies, he basically he stated that "flights from regional airports were highly detrimental to the environment and basically should be discouraged". That is not Mancunian spin btw !
It is somewhat at odds with his remit of "exploring ALL avenues in terms of providing UK airport capacity to meet demand, including best use of regional airports".
It would be interesting to see what the MAG spokesperson does actually say in respect of response to Davies because most of the arguments they put forward were in support of their stance on Stansted NOT Manchester.
Would highlighting inadequacies of the MAN strategy get us anywhere at a meeting of "local spotters" anyway, well probably not !
AND what is he actually going to say, ironically it is 12 months to the day since the STN deal went through....... precisely the moment when submissions by MAG relating to MAN fell off a cliff, disappearing almost without trace.
Last edited by Bagso; 1st Mar 2014 at 08:26.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: MAN
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LHR load factors
Bagso
I think you are being a bit too selective in quoting low loads at Heathrow. In fact the average load factor at Heathrow in 2013 was 76.4%, according to the airport's owners. As a year-round figure it's difficult to see this increasing much for reasons that Skipness and other airline types will be familiar with. Seasonality will always reduce annual LFs, with peak summer load factors in the mid-80s.
In relation to slot values, few airlines include these on their balance sheets - BA don't, for example. The airlines that do tend to be the more desperate ones, eager to shore up an otherwise dodgy balance sheet. FlyBe include them on the balance sheet, and I think that bmi used to do so - need I say more?
I think you are being a bit too selective in quoting low loads at Heathrow. In fact the average load factor at Heathrow in 2013 was 76.4%, according to the airport's owners. As a year-round figure it's difficult to see this increasing much for reasons that Skipness and other airline types will be familiar with. Seasonality will always reduce annual LFs, with peak summer load factors in the mid-80s.
In relation to slot values, few airlines include these on their balance sheets - BA don't, for example. The airlines that do tend to be the more desperate ones, eager to shore up an otherwise dodgy balance sheet. FlyBe include them on the balance sheet, and I think that bmi used to do so - need I say more?
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Monte Carlo
Age: 65
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clearly this is not the full picture and I concede I am being highly selective BUT is that not the type of area that Davies should have looked at in detail ?
Go and read some airline investor presentations such as the IAG one released this week. Get to grips with the differences between ASK and RASK and the importance of cabin mix, network connectivity etc etc etc. Airline's fly routes and carry the commercial risk so it's worth the effort to get to grips with their economics
Surely a preferable approach than barking at every passing car and blaming everyone from the council, MAG, Davies, MPs, airline comparison price sites, BA and "that London" because an airline route network that exists primarily in your own head isn't being operated.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Airline network in your own head"
"Barking at every passing car"
What on earth are you rambling on about this time North West.
Rather than immediately following my tag lines every sinlge time with inept comments please feel free to occasionally have a sensible discussion.
If you don't like the comments fine , no problem at all but then why not challenge, respond or argue them in a grown up manner ?
This is yet another occasion when all you seem to do is hang on to my coat tail, try just once to come up with some creative comments of your own!
"Barking at every passing car"
What on earth are you rambling on about this time North West.
Rather than immediately following my tag lines every sinlge time with inept comments please feel free to occasionally have a sensible discussion.
If you don't like the comments fine , no problem at all but then why not challenge, respond or argue them in a grown up manner ?
This is yet another occasion when all you seem to do is hang on to my coat tail, try just once to come up with some creative comments of your own!
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: leeds
Age: 77
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A couple of points.
1. Bagso writes as if Davies has reported. But actually he's halfway through. He's decided in his Interim Report that the UK needs more capacity and the place where it needs it is London and SE. Not many people have come out and said 'no,wrong, a full-on regional solution is available and credible'. Now he has to work out what the relative strength of the three options he put forward is. All those will have to be related to a base case in which even more has to be squeezed out of the toothpaste tube. This is where the question of what would happen at MAN, BHX and STN with LHR and LGW full up is really relevant --especially as there must still be a fair chance that's what we'll end up with.
2. Materiality is a big issue.Suppose that the market was opened at MAN and BHX in the way Mr Stringer was proposing. How much difference would that make? What routes and volumes would start up and succeed which currently have not? Is that difference likely to be material to the case for LHR3 or LGW2? My guess is it's within the margins of error of the traffic forecasts for Heathrow. National and international GDP per head, population and ticket price trends are what really drive demand. Supply will follow if the market is there.
1. Bagso writes as if Davies has reported. But actually he's halfway through. He's decided in his Interim Report that the UK needs more capacity and the place where it needs it is London and SE. Not many people have come out and said 'no,wrong, a full-on regional solution is available and credible'. Now he has to work out what the relative strength of the three options he put forward is. All those will have to be related to a base case in which even more has to be squeezed out of the toothpaste tube. This is where the question of what would happen at MAN, BHX and STN with LHR and LGW full up is really relevant --especially as there must still be a fair chance that's what we'll end up with.
2. Materiality is a big issue.Suppose that the market was opened at MAN and BHX in the way Mr Stringer was proposing. How much difference would that make? What routes and volumes would start up and succeed which currently have not? Is that difference likely to be material to the case for LHR3 or LGW2? My guess is it's within the margins of error of the traffic forecasts for Heathrow. National and international GDP per head, population and ticket price trends are what really drive demand. Supply will follow if the market is there.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Oslo, Norway
Age: 63
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So that we don't compare apples and pears, let's look at the differences between LHR's and MAN's scheduled terminal passenger numbers and to make a more complete picture let's also throw in LGW and STN. The latest month CAA has completed is December 2013, and from these reports it's very easy to find the average passenger per flight.
LHR = 159 passengers per flight
LGW = 133 passengers per flight
STN = 140 passengers per flight
MAN = 118 passengers per flight
If we translate this in to cabin factors in a BA Airbus A321 European versionwith 182 seats, these are the numbers we end up with.
LHR = 87.2%
LGW = 73.1%
STN = 76.9%
MAN = 64.7%
If we use Basilbush's average cabin factor, I have estimated the average aircraft to have around 214 seats - 25 seats more than in a Ryanair B738 and indentical to the number of seats in the brand new BA B788.
The highs and lows at MAN are much more season related than the three other airport we here looked at even though this was only for scheduled flights. Have we added the charter flights too in to the equation the difference had been even larger. With only scheduled flight the peak in August showed in 2013 the average flight at MAN to have 132 passengers (11% more than in December) while at LHR the average increased with 6% to 169 passengers per flight. If we use the Basilbush CF to eastimate the average sized aircraft at MAN we end up with an aircraft with 163 seats. Since we have LCCs at MAN and not at LHR I guess the average cabin factor at MAN will be higher than at LHR an hence the average aircraft will have less than 163 seats.
More to come later.
LHR = 159 passengers per flight
LGW = 133 passengers per flight
STN = 140 passengers per flight
MAN = 118 passengers per flight
If we translate this in to cabin factors in a BA Airbus A321 European versionwith 182 seats, these are the numbers we end up with.
LHR = 87.2%
LGW = 73.1%
STN = 76.9%
MAN = 64.7%
If we use Basilbush's average cabin factor, I have estimated the average aircraft to have around 214 seats - 25 seats more than in a Ryanair B738 and indentical to the number of seats in the brand new BA B788.
The highs and lows at MAN are much more season related than the three other airport we here looked at even though this was only for scheduled flights. Have we added the charter flights too in to the equation the difference had been even larger. With only scheduled flight the peak in August showed in 2013 the average flight at MAN to have 132 passengers (11% more than in December) while at LHR the average increased with 6% to 169 passengers per flight. If we use the Basilbush CF to eastimate the average sized aircraft at MAN we end up with an aircraft with 163 seats. Since we have LCCs at MAN and not at LHR I guess the average cabin factor at MAN will be higher than at LHR an hence the average aircraft will have less than 163 seats.
More to come later.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: MAN
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LN-KGL
One factor to bear in mind is that, at LHR, long-haul seat factors have generally been higher than those for short-haul. So in comparing LHR with other airports you do have to make an allowance for differences in traffic mix.
Of course you are right to point out that LCC seat factors will generally be higher than for legacy carriers, which will tend to offset this.
It just goes to show that comparing seat factors across airports can be hazardous, and that there is a danger in comparing apples with pears. Heathrow's hub status might be expected to result in a slight lowering of seat factors, particularly on short-haul, given the critical importance of frequency at a hub with a high proportion of business traffic. Conversely, an airport with a predominantly leisure traffic base (especially one with a lot of LCC traffic) might be expected to have high seat factors due to limited frequencies and lower average yields.
One factor to bear in mind is that, at LHR, long-haul seat factors have generally been higher than those for short-haul. So in comparing LHR with other airports you do have to make an allowance for differences in traffic mix.
Of course you are right to point out that LCC seat factors will generally be higher than for legacy carriers, which will tend to offset this.
It just goes to show that comparing seat factors across airports can be hazardous, and that there is a danger in comparing apples with pears. Heathrow's hub status might be expected to result in a slight lowering of seat factors, particularly on short-haul, given the critical importance of frequency at a hub with a high proportion of business traffic. Conversely, an airport with a predominantly leisure traffic base (especially one with a lot of LCC traffic) might be expected to have high seat factors due to limited frequencies and lower average yields.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Somewhere up there
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A fair point Basil
Having been an occasional LHR pax (but more likely to originate MAN) I have observed that when I fly long haul the flight is full, short haul not so.
As an example, I was on a Lufthansa flight to MUC last year when I was one of 33 pax on board an A320 (OK it was a Sunday morning).
Having been an occasional LHR pax (but more likely to originate MAN) I have observed that when I fly long haul the flight is full, short haul not so.
As an example, I was on a Lufthansa flight to MUC last year when I was one of 33 pax on board an A320 (OK it was a Sunday morning).
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is where the question of what would happen at MAN, BHX and STN with LHR and LGW full up is really relevant --especially as there must still be a fair chance that's what we'll end up with.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sir Howard's’ brief was not to decide on whether there is a need for additional runways in southeast England and if so, where; but rather to decide on a policy for the entire country. In other words, if there really is an absolute need for a ‘national hub airport’, where should it be with regard to the nation as a whole, not just the bit down in the bottom right hand corner.
the management (MAG) may be forgiven for wondering if they might have spent a little more time and effort tub thumping the case for the ‘home’ airport at Manchester, which already has two runways, oodles of spare capacity and the sort of traffic mix that many other airport operators can only dream of, and that of East Midlands airport, which is one of the most significant for cargo in the entire country but which barely rated a mention in MAG’s submission.
Source
The Davies Commission?s Interim Report on UK airports: the big loser remains UK competitiveness | CAPA - Centre for Aviation
It appears there are others who share my Tub Thumping attitude North West ...!
the management (MAG) may be forgiven for wondering if they might have spent a little more time and effort tub thumping the case for the ‘home’ airport at Manchester, which already has two runways, oodles of spare capacity and the sort of traffic mix that many other airport operators can only dream of, and that of East Midlands airport, which is one of the most significant for cargo in the entire country but which barely rated a mention in MAG’s submission.
Source
The Davies Commission?s Interim Report on UK airports: the big loser remains UK competitiveness | CAPA - Centre for Aviation
It appears there are others who share my Tub Thumping attitude North West ...!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry but the hub airport is always going to be in the South East, I am baffled why once again we are linking it to MAN or EMA? If MAN had oodles of capacity, at the wrong times by the way, then it doesn't need Davies to help it. Things are good at MAN, and getting better. New T1 development coming, new US routes starting, Air Canada returning. Bagso it's all bluster really isn't it? I genuinely fail to see what's driving you on this? What's your outcome in your ideal scenario, paint a likely picture?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Somewhere up there
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Bagso, this is getting a little tiresome.
Only a fool would say that the problems of runway capacity in the London Area can be solved by more flights at Manchester or anywhere else for that matter.
Also you're wrong in your assertion that EMA is the 'most significant for cargo in the entire country'. LHR is. Why? It's because most cargo is flown below deck on scheduled pax flights. You're getting confused with freight only flights.
Only a fool would say that the problems of runway capacity in the London Area can be solved by more flights at Manchester or anywhere else for that matter.
Also you're wrong in your assertion that EMA is the 'most significant for cargo in the entire country'. LHR is. Why? It's because most cargo is flown below deck on scheduled pax flights. You're getting confused with freight only flights.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hang on, what utter rubbish, it WASN'T my assertion !
... that's precisely why I provided the link !
Did anybody bother looking or can you not read ?
I'm simply stating that much wiser commentators than me have come to similar conclusions specifically about the nature of the Davies remit !
It should not just be about the issue of Runway 3 at Lhr !
Please do not misquote me !
... that's precisely why I provided the link !
Did anybody bother looking or can you not read ?
I'm simply stating that much wiser commentators than me have come to similar conclusions specifically about the nature of the Davies remit !
It should not just be about the issue of Runway 3 at Lhr !
Please do not misquote me !
Last edited by Bagso; 2nd Mar 2014 at 13:10.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: leeds
Age: 77
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I've read it. As far as I can see it says MAN should have spent more time thumping the tub for its home airport than for STN. CAPA don't begin to make a reasoned case out of that for some sort of max investment at BHX and MAN option.
I'm strongly in favour of building up Manchester over time as the North's hub to the world. At the moment the politicians in Yorkshire are trying to convince themselves that a better more centrally located airport to replace LBA is what Yorkshire needs. What a disaster that would be in terms of diluting the hub!
MAN has a good strong catchment area, plenty of runway capacity, a station and a motorway connection. The intercontinental links have progressively developed with the new routes dominating the occasional setbacks like Boston and Washington. Obviously it lacks a hub operator which is a shame but hey, this is a tough commercial market and BA has shareholders to think about. As the market develops, network and traffic growth will follow. What more do you want which will make a material difference to traffic and capacity requirements in the London airport system?
I'm strongly in favour of building up Manchester over time as the North's hub to the world. At the moment the politicians in Yorkshire are trying to convince themselves that a better more centrally located airport to replace LBA is what Yorkshire needs. What a disaster that would be in terms of diluting the hub!
MAN has a good strong catchment area, plenty of runway capacity, a station and a motorway connection. The intercontinental links have progressively developed with the new routes dominating the occasional setbacks like Boston and Washington. Obviously it lacks a hub operator which is a shame but hey, this is a tough commercial market and BA has shareholders to think about. As the market develops, network and traffic growth will follow. What more do you want which will make a material difference to traffic and capacity requirements in the London airport system?
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry but the hub airport is always going to be in the South East, I am baffled why once again we are linking it to MAN or EMA?
If MAN had oodles of capacity, at the wrong times by the way, then it doesn't need Davies to help it. Things are good at MAN, and getting better. New T1 development coming, new US routes starting, Air Canada returning. Bagso it's all bluster really isn't it? I genuinely fail to see what's driving you on this? What's your outcome in your ideal scenario, paint a likely picture?
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Foreign Charter ops at MAN
Some good and bad news regarding our usually plentiful 'foreign' (or slightly unusual) charter carriers this summer.
Small Planet (P7)
I think someone earlier in the thread asked about Small Planet routes.
For Olympic Holidays, they seem to have a Tuesday Chania, and Friday Corfu. Im not sure where else they are flying.
Germania (ST)
Germania seem to be basing 2 aircraft at Manchester this summer, based on the current schedules.
For example, Tuesday sees ST3595 arrive from HER at 1815, yet ST3616, also a flight to HER, departs at 1700.
There are a few days and few destinations that have this crossover, so will be interesting to see how it pans out.
Thomas Cook (Pegasus, Evelop, Nouvelair and British Airways)
There was due to be a Saturday Pegasus to Antalya, Evelop to Lanzarote, Nouvelair to Djerba and British Airways (citiflyer) to Mahon. All 4 of these flights now seem to have been dropped and replaced with sole TCX flights.
British Airways:
Sartadur Holidays normally use Citiflyer on Saturdays to Cagliari and Sundays to Olbia. Flybe were used part season last year and BA in the latter months, but this year there does not seem to be any option to fly from Manchester on the Sartadur website.
Flybe:
Have dropped all charter flying this summer. Other airports seem to have their flybe replacements publicised now, but Manchester seems to be very hard to track down. Have previously operated to Verona, Innsbruck, Almeria and others, but I can only (partly) find the info on the Innsbruck replacement, as mentioned below.
Austrian Airlines:
I have been reliably informed that Austrian will take over the former flybe charter to Innsbruck, with an A319 and in line with similar take overs of the LBA and BRS routes. Inghams still show flybe as operating, but as BE999 in both directions, but as a non-based flight pattern. Time will tell when Austrian will appear.
Freebird:
Are said to be operating up to 9 weekly flights as last summer, and have been operating Antalya this winter. However in line with the past 2 seasons, I have no idea who these flights are operating for nor find a timetable.
Onur Air:
Running at least 3 weekly flights to Dalaman with 1 continuing to Ercan.
Monday A 1930 D 2030
Saturday A 1125 D 1220 continues to Ercan
Saturday A 1900 D 2000
Tunisair:
Seem to be pullingManchester ops completely. Last summer ran a Saturday Enfidha alongside their TUN ops.
Long winded post but quite a long round up.
Small Planet (P7)
I think someone earlier in the thread asked about Small Planet routes.
For Olympic Holidays, they seem to have a Tuesday Chania, and Friday Corfu. Im not sure where else they are flying.
Germania (ST)
Germania seem to be basing 2 aircraft at Manchester this summer, based on the current schedules.
For example, Tuesday sees ST3595 arrive from HER at 1815, yet ST3616, also a flight to HER, departs at 1700.
There are a few days and few destinations that have this crossover, so will be interesting to see how it pans out.
Thomas Cook (Pegasus, Evelop, Nouvelair and British Airways)
There was due to be a Saturday Pegasus to Antalya, Evelop to Lanzarote, Nouvelair to Djerba and British Airways (citiflyer) to Mahon. All 4 of these flights now seem to have been dropped and replaced with sole TCX flights.
British Airways:
Sartadur Holidays normally use Citiflyer on Saturdays to Cagliari and Sundays to Olbia. Flybe were used part season last year and BA in the latter months, but this year there does not seem to be any option to fly from Manchester on the Sartadur website.
Flybe:
Have dropped all charter flying this summer. Other airports seem to have their flybe replacements publicised now, but Manchester seems to be very hard to track down. Have previously operated to Verona, Innsbruck, Almeria and others, but I can only (partly) find the info on the Innsbruck replacement, as mentioned below.
Austrian Airlines:
I have been reliably informed that Austrian will take over the former flybe charter to Innsbruck, with an A319 and in line with similar take overs of the LBA and BRS routes. Inghams still show flybe as operating, but as BE999 in both directions, but as a non-based flight pattern. Time will tell when Austrian will appear.
Freebird:
Are said to be operating up to 9 weekly flights as last summer, and have been operating Antalya this winter. However in line with the past 2 seasons, I have no idea who these flights are operating for nor find a timetable.
Onur Air:
Running at least 3 weekly flights to Dalaman with 1 continuing to Ercan.
Monday A 1930 D 2030
Saturday A 1125 D 1220 continues to Ercan
Saturday A 1900 D 2000
Tunisair:
Seem to be pullingManchester ops completely. Last summer ran a Saturday Enfidha alongside their TUN ops.
Long winded post but quite a long round up.