MANCHESTER - 9
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bagso, Ryanair serve Carcassonne 2 x weekly from LPL in s2014 along with Bergerac and Nimes. Limoges is 3 x weekly. I doubt we'll see any of those routes duplicated at MAN, at least by Ryanair.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bagso, Ryanair serve Carcassonne 2 x weekly from LPL in s2014 along with
Bergerac and Nimes. Limoges is 3 x weekly. I doubt we'll see any of those routes duplicated at MAN, at least by Ryanair
Bergerac and Nimes. Limoges is 3 x weekly. I doubt we'll see any of those routes duplicated at MAN, at least by Ryanair
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, I didn't want to risk upsetting our Liverpool friends by suggesting the routes could, or should, be moved, so I left it at them not being duplicated at MAN.
A good point about Zadar though
A good point about Zadar though
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, I didn't want to risk upsetting our Liverpool friends by suggesting the
routes could, or should, be moved, so I left it at them not being duplicated at MAN
routes could, or should, be moved, so I left it at them not being duplicated at MAN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North West UK
Age: 69
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FR routes
LAX LHR I'm sure you will find that FR will operate their routes to and from those airports which give them the best deals and the recent wholesale chopping and changing of routes is testament to that. Deliberate baiting of other posters - which you are not averse to - is not required on this forum, kindly desist.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zadar has had 2 failed attempts at EMA, failed at LPL who says MAN won't go
the same way....
the same way....
It may not have 'failed' from LPL, it may just be a case that route worked, but MAN could offer better fees, even more passengers or a simple reason such as the route could not fit into the LPL based operation but MAN had the space for it.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Monte Carlo
Age: 65
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately for MAN those AMS/LHR connections and indeed local pride work against it !
The Yorkshire Post would i'm sure rather broadcast that they have a thrice daily connection to LHR than implore people to drive over to Manchester !
It is simply not seen as the major airport "For The North" as it was in the 80s.
The Yorkshire Post would i'm sure rather broadcast that they have a thrice daily connection to LHR than implore people to drive over to Manchester !
It is simply not seen as the major airport "For The North" as it was in the 80s.
In the case of MAN, had the powers that be contrived a way to share a sense of ownership across the North it might have been a different story. It seems obvious to say, but if you want it to be ' the airport for the North' there should have been some strategy in place to make it so. Some of the people I came in to contact with in the 90s were so dismissive of anywhere that wasn't MAN it was shocking.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
North West
Some interesting points.
Its a similar debate to that mentioned a few postings back re a regional assembly, and I agree Liverpool, Sheffield, Leeds, Bradford and Manchester would doubtless all squabble.....
BUT is gaining consensus to your point of view not a part of the issue and indeed the trick of politics ?
Gil Thompson turned this into an art form effectively galvanising support from a broad swathe of MPs across the North of England who either did not realise or did not know that the main beneficiary of the "Stop Stansted" protest of the time was actually Manchester !
Yes MPs will support local initiatives and indeed local airports, BUT if you take a map of UK constituencies, count the number within the true Manchester Airport catchment area (....not the silly 22m pax in 90min rule) and then exclude those within the catchment of other airports.....it leaves a solid base of 150 MPs based within 45mins of MAN whose direct support could /should be relied on !
I hope I am wrong but on the face of it MAG appear to have side-lined the Honourable members as a lever to obtaining more support / publicity etc in respect of promoting Manchester as a central cog in the UK capacity debate!
To me its a missed opportunity as highlighted last week by the impassioned member for Holmfirth !
I would have expected at least a few of the members, especially in respect of Davies and the comments raised at the select committee hearings to be somewhat more vocal.
Whilst not disputing the findings in respect of RW3 at LHR at least a mention or two recognising MANs existence and the expansion taking pace re Airport City would have been welcomed.
Based on the Davies proposals it appears that MAN simply does not exist, and is not a factor in this debate, despite more than a modicum of interest this year from SAUDIA, AirCanada/Rouge (well its a start), USAir and if rumours are to be believed FlyNas !
Could you have imagined GT being so servile in this debate, er I think not !
---------------------------------------------
Not Manchester news as such but reported on Dublin thread that ET (Ethiopian Airlines) is looking at ADD-DUB-LAX from next January. Presumably 787s. Relates to MAN because of possible objections by the "national airline" who won't operate route themselves so therefore will block anybody else operating !
Can anybody here an echo .....?
-----------------------------------------------
If anybody has read Baron Frankals blogs in the M E N but they always have been very enlightening, always sang praises of NWest and rebalancing of economy ! Quite a clever chap.
Baron Frankal blog: Taking a longing look at London - Baron Frankal - Manchester Evening News
...anyway he is now on board of MAG as a new strategic director !
Some interesting points.
Its a similar debate to that mentioned a few postings back re a regional assembly, and I agree Liverpool, Sheffield, Leeds, Bradford and Manchester would doubtless all squabble.....
BUT is gaining consensus to your point of view not a part of the issue and indeed the trick of politics ?
Gil Thompson turned this into an art form effectively galvanising support from a broad swathe of MPs across the North of England who either did not realise or did not know that the main beneficiary of the "Stop Stansted" protest of the time was actually Manchester !
Yes MPs will support local initiatives and indeed local airports, BUT if you take a map of UK constituencies, count the number within the true Manchester Airport catchment area (....not the silly 22m pax in 90min rule) and then exclude those within the catchment of other airports.....it leaves a solid base of 150 MPs based within 45mins of MAN whose direct support could /should be relied on !
I hope I am wrong but on the face of it MAG appear to have side-lined the Honourable members as a lever to obtaining more support / publicity etc in respect of promoting Manchester as a central cog in the UK capacity debate!
To me its a missed opportunity as highlighted last week by the impassioned member for Holmfirth !
I would have expected at least a few of the members, especially in respect of Davies and the comments raised at the select committee hearings to be somewhat more vocal.
Whilst not disputing the findings in respect of RW3 at LHR at least a mention or two recognising MANs existence and the expansion taking pace re Airport City would have been welcomed.
Based on the Davies proposals it appears that MAN simply does not exist, and is not a factor in this debate, despite more than a modicum of interest this year from SAUDIA, AirCanada/Rouge (well its a start), USAir and if rumours are to be believed FlyNas !
Could you have imagined GT being so servile in this debate, er I think not !
---------------------------------------------
Not Manchester news as such but reported on Dublin thread that ET (Ethiopian Airlines) is looking at ADD-DUB-LAX from next January. Presumably 787s. Relates to MAN because of possible objections by the "national airline" who won't operate route themselves so therefore will block anybody else operating !
Can anybody here an echo .....?
-----------------------------------------------
If anybody has read Baron Frankals blogs in the M E N but they always have been very enlightening, always sang praises of NWest and rebalancing of economy ! Quite a clever chap.
Baron Frankal blog: Taking a longing look at London - Baron Frankal - Manchester Evening News
...anyway he is now on board of MAG as a new strategic director !
Last edited by Bagso; 26th Jan 2014 at 12:42.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airport Catchment Areas
Just a friendly reminder arising from the very interesting discussion developing above. We are again starting to fall into the trap of presuming an airport's catchment area to be some geographical district we can draw on a map with easily defined boundaries. This is very far removed from the reality.
For example, the catchment area for a MAN-DUB service is very different from that for a MAN-SIN service. A customer who would happily travel from the North East to board a MAN-SIN flight would rarely consider doing so for a MAN-DUB journey. I'm sure the reasoning for that is quite obvious to readers on here so I won't elaborate. But it is a truth that every route/service has a catchment area unique to itself due to all manner of influencing factors. There can be no one-size-fits-all definition of an airport catchment area.
Additionally, catchment area is not purely a geographic phenomenon drawing customers to their closest departure airport. There is also an 'economic catchment area'. Some customers will travel further than others to secure a lower-priced flight or one which offers them loyalty rewards. Two next-door neighbours can both make perfectly logical decisions to book flights to the same destination from different departure airports. One may prioritise price, the other elapsed journey time. Neither is mistaken in their choice.
Using my own situation as an illustration of this principle I will use an example quoted above. I would not contemplate booking LPL-Zadar as I consider the departure point too inconvenient for my own needs. However, now that I know MAN-Zadar is likely to be offered I'm actively checking my available summer travel dates. The fact that the two departure airports are 30 miles apart does not mean that their attraction is equal to any one customer with unique circumstances (and every customer is unique). I value time and travel convenience very highly; I recognise that others hold different priorities. That is what makes the catchment area unique to each individual route and service. No airline will know the actual demand until they try a route in practice. They can only make a forecast (guess!).
Another factor often misunderstood is that many customers use a thought process beyond the obvious. In my own case, my start point is not: "I wish to visit Zadar". It is actually: "I wish to visit an interesting short-break destination which is new to me and conveniently available from the departure airport down the road at an attractive price". MAN offers a selection of options which fit these criteria at any given time and I make my travel choice from that list. Now that Zadar is an option, I may choose it over Gdansk or Tallinn (for example).
Always factor in that airport catchment areas are a profoundly complex topic which can be analysed right down to the preferences of each individual customer. Airline professionals are well aware that switching route resources around comes with consequences attached in both markets affected. Something we often see with Ryanair is a tendency to 'freshen up' its destination choices from time to time. For example, I visited Tours with them (from MAN) last summer. Very nice too. But having visited that city I'm now looking for somewhere different. If Zadar has become available it is a strong candidate for my next booking. Meanwhile, someone elsewhere who has already visited Zadar may be delighted if the chance to easily visit Tours is put before them. It is very smart to keep updating the 'menu' of short-break destinations offered even if the based fleet and overall number of weekly departures remains unchanged. (Note: I'm not suggesting that is the case with Ryanair @ MAN this summer. I await their final fleet deployment plans with interest).
Catchment areas. Darned complex subject! Don't be tempted to over-simplify!
For example, the catchment area for a MAN-DUB service is very different from that for a MAN-SIN service. A customer who would happily travel from the North East to board a MAN-SIN flight would rarely consider doing so for a MAN-DUB journey. I'm sure the reasoning for that is quite obvious to readers on here so I won't elaborate. But it is a truth that every route/service has a catchment area unique to itself due to all manner of influencing factors. There can be no one-size-fits-all definition of an airport catchment area.
Additionally, catchment area is not purely a geographic phenomenon drawing customers to their closest departure airport. There is also an 'economic catchment area'. Some customers will travel further than others to secure a lower-priced flight or one which offers them loyalty rewards. Two next-door neighbours can both make perfectly logical decisions to book flights to the same destination from different departure airports. One may prioritise price, the other elapsed journey time. Neither is mistaken in their choice.
Using my own situation as an illustration of this principle I will use an example quoted above. I would not contemplate booking LPL-Zadar as I consider the departure point too inconvenient for my own needs. However, now that I know MAN-Zadar is likely to be offered I'm actively checking my available summer travel dates. The fact that the two departure airports are 30 miles apart does not mean that their attraction is equal to any one customer with unique circumstances (and every customer is unique). I value time and travel convenience very highly; I recognise that others hold different priorities. That is what makes the catchment area unique to each individual route and service. No airline will know the actual demand until they try a route in practice. They can only make a forecast (guess!).
Another factor often misunderstood is that many customers use a thought process beyond the obvious. In my own case, my start point is not: "I wish to visit Zadar". It is actually: "I wish to visit an interesting short-break destination which is new to me and conveniently available from the departure airport down the road at an attractive price". MAN offers a selection of options which fit these criteria at any given time and I make my travel choice from that list. Now that Zadar is an option, I may choose it over Gdansk or Tallinn (for example).
Always factor in that airport catchment areas are a profoundly complex topic which can be analysed right down to the preferences of each individual customer. Airline professionals are well aware that switching route resources around comes with consequences attached in both markets affected. Something we often see with Ryanair is a tendency to 'freshen up' its destination choices from time to time. For example, I visited Tours with them (from MAN) last summer. Very nice too. But having visited that city I'm now looking for somewhere different. If Zadar has become available it is a strong candidate for my next booking. Meanwhile, someone elsewhere who has already visited Zadar may be delighted if the chance to easily visit Tours is put before them. It is very smart to keep updating the 'menu' of short-break destinations offered even if the based fleet and overall number of weekly departures remains unchanged. (Note: I'm not suggesting that is the case with Ryanair @ MAN this summer. I await their final fleet deployment plans with interest).
Catchment areas. Darned complex subject! Don't be tempted to over-simplify!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airport Capacity
As an aviation enthusiast, I would love to see many more aircraft at Manchester. As a realist can the airport handle many more long haul arrivals at peak times? T2 currently is packed early mornings with the arrival of United, Virgin, Singapore etc and the stands occupied by the Monarch and Thomson aircraft. Last week the US airways 330 was waiting for about 15 mins for a Thomson 737 to get off stand. If we get any more long haul arrivals early morning where will they go? Is it likely the airport will reduce the car parking at the end of T2?
I know we have two other terminals but they are pretty much full as well. Also as a general question can the airbridges on T3 handle aircraft of 747/777 size? I know they can handle up to 767.
I know we have two other terminals but they are pretty much full as well. Also as a general question can the airbridges on T3 handle aircraft of 747/777 size? I know they can handle up to 767.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also as a general question can the airbridges on T3 handle aircraft of 747/777 size? I know they can handle up to 767
BA used to run a B747-400 to ISB from MAN, and while not quite B777 size, bmi ran 3xA330 for a few years ex T3.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The A332 thrice daily was ex T1, A330 gates on T3 are 44 and 55. The BA B744s used to use 44, nowadays with the loco usage, some of the airbridges have been taken away off the 50s. Can 54 take an A330? BA used 49 for the B767 to JFK from memory. Also US Airways are moving to T3 soon as they merge with AA.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The bmi flights definitely ran from T3 as well. I have very very distinct memories of the BD A330 parked on the 50's stand that was viewable from the T1 car park on multiple occasions.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: London
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Images and own 20/20 (if only) number one eyeball observations.
Stand 44 Capable of taking a 744
Stand 49 Capable of taking a 330/763
Stand 54 Capable of taking a 763/330
Stand 55 Capable of taking a 744 if 54 not occupied or 333 otherwise.
So just enough for the US/AA operations given 2 75W 1 330 and 1 763 scheduled
Understand (read somewhere else) US will use 44 for Philadelphia 333 with 49 for Charlotte 753 and AA as now on 54 and 55.
Also (and might be remembering wrongly) didn't Emirates briefly operate into T3 with a 77W ?
Stand 44 Capable of taking a 744
Stand 49 Capable of taking a 330/763
Stand 54 Capable of taking a 763/330
Stand 55 Capable of taking a 744 if 54 not occupied or 333 otherwise.
So just enough for the US/AA operations given 2 75W 1 330 and 1 763 scheduled
Understand (read somewhere else) US will use 44 for Philadelphia 333 with 49 for Charlotte 753 and AA as now on 54 and 55.
Also (and might be remembering wrongly) didn't Emirates briefly operate into T3 with a 77W ?