Plymouth City Airport protected til 2021!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(Was the combinabtion with NQY actually something to do with Fuel Load? )
WOWBOY,
The combination with NQY was, originally, due to an airframe equipment shortage due to a tightening of purse strings and then, clearly, beancounters being allowed to call the shots rather than clear and sound commercial sense.
Brymon's maintenance approvals and ratings were DHC (De Havilland Canada) for DHC products, initially the DHC6, then the DHC7 and finally the DHC8, when ASW took over they merely took over the existing maintenance approvals.
The optimum sized airaft for PLH's catchment area would be between 18 and 36 seats but the next available upgrade from the 19/20 seater DHC6 came the 50 seater DHC7 hence services became combined, the original DHC8 was a 36 seater but by then a combined 50 seater market had been recognised, the beancounters loved it, 2 pilots are cheaper than 4 pilots to employ, 2 engines are cheaper than 4 engines to maintain etc. etc. etc. and over the course of some 30 years the beancounters successfully p1ssed off so many punters that, apparently, both the airline and the airport became unviable.
Besides the original 36 Seater DHC8 DHC didn't make an optimum product to, seperately, serve PLH and NQY, at a point in time Brymon, or ASW, could have opted to replace their DHC products with Dorniers, ATR's, BAe Jetstreams or whatever but that's where the beancounters would have come in, the larger the aircraft the cheaper per seat it is to operate, why would we want to trade in our 50 seaters for lesser equipments? ..... Because, just perhaps, it's what the punters want or they ain't travelling with your airline!
I made a comment on pPrune some years ago regarding beancounters (accountants) ruining the industry and others spoke up, flaming me, in support of the beancounters however an airline needs to provide what the public are prepared to travel on, this takes commercial knowledge, customer relations etc. to establish and it won't, and never shall, be established by a beancounter sitting behind his/her abacus!
WOWBOY,
The combination with NQY was, originally, due to an airframe equipment shortage due to a tightening of purse strings and then, clearly, beancounters being allowed to call the shots rather than clear and sound commercial sense.
Brymon's maintenance approvals and ratings were DHC (De Havilland Canada) for DHC products, initially the DHC6, then the DHC7 and finally the DHC8, when ASW took over they merely took over the existing maintenance approvals.
The optimum sized airaft for PLH's catchment area would be between 18 and 36 seats but the next available upgrade from the 19/20 seater DHC6 came the 50 seater DHC7 hence services became combined, the original DHC8 was a 36 seater but by then a combined 50 seater market had been recognised, the beancounters loved it, 2 pilots are cheaper than 4 pilots to employ, 2 engines are cheaper than 4 engines to maintain etc. etc. etc. and over the course of some 30 years the beancounters successfully p1ssed off so many punters that, apparently, both the airline and the airport became unviable.
Besides the original 36 Seater DHC8 DHC didn't make an optimum product to, seperately, serve PLH and NQY, at a point in time Brymon, or ASW, could have opted to replace their DHC products with Dorniers, ATR's, BAe Jetstreams or whatever but that's where the beancounters would have come in, the larger the aircraft the cheaper per seat it is to operate, why would we want to trade in our 50 seaters for lesser equipments? ..... Because, just perhaps, it's what the punters want or they ain't travelling with your airline!
I made a comment on pPrune some years ago regarding beancounters (accountants) ruining the industry and others spoke up, flaming me, in support of the beancounters however an airline needs to provide what the public are prepared to travel on, this takes commercial knowledge, customer relations etc. to establish and it won't, and never shall, be established by a beancounter sitting behind his/her abacus!
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it won't, and never shall, be established by a beancounter sitting behind his/her abacus!
Would they not have fare data showing that the double dip option meant significantly lower yields?
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They even built a runway specifically for the DHC8.
PLH's original tarmac runnways were 06/24 & 12/30, 06/24 couldn't be extended and on the 12/30 heading they couldn't extend enough to accommodate DHC8's thus they realigned building runway 13/31.
Watched a Caravelle do a touch and go on the old, half tarmac half grass, runway 30 one day ... that was an interesting sight to see
PLH's original tarmac runnways were 06/24 & 12/30, 06/24 couldn't be extended and on the 12/30 heading they couldn't extend enough to accommodate DHC8's thus they realigned building runway 13/31.
Watched a Caravelle do a touch and go on the old, half tarmac half grass, runway 30 one day ... that was an interesting sight to see
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Plymouth
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A little update on PLH.....
The council sent the signatures and 400+ letters to Downing Street. And a surprising response to the petition is that a transport minister is coming down to talk speciffically about and to visit the airport in January 2013. I assume this can only be good news. They wouldn't waste effort getting down here if it was a flat out no get stuffed kinda response. Fingers crossed for this one
The council sent the signatures and 400+ letters to Downing Street. And a surprising response to the petition is that a transport minister is coming down to talk speciffically about and to visit the airport in January 2013. I assume this can only be good news. They wouldn't waste effort getting down here if it was a flat out no get stuffed kinda response. Fingers crossed for this one
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to talk and not until next January?
Yep, they're really taking this seriously, surely the sooner the airport may re-open, before people begin to forget there ever was an airport and/or they lose faith of any re-opening, the better, the minister is really pulling his finger out for this one!
"They wouldn't waste effort getting down here"
Mmmm, has it never been heard of for MP's to milk and/or fiddle their expenses!
Yep, they're really taking this seriously, surely the sooner the airport may re-open, before people begin to forget there ever was an airport and/or they lose faith of any re-opening, the better, the minister is really pulling his finger out for this one!
"They wouldn't waste effort getting down here"
Mmmm, has it never been heard of for MP's to milk and/or fiddle their expenses!
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Regrettably far from 50°N
Posts: 917
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably why he said 'effort' and not 'money'.
The people of Plymouth will take a little while to forget their airport. Even if it were to reopen in five years time, they would still have an inkling that it had existed and local press hype (repeated front pages on the Herald etc.) would probably be such that they certainly wouldn't be able to avoid knowing about the reopening.
So we shall see. But it certainly hasn't been too long since it closed to reopen it.
The people of Plymouth will take a little while to forget their airport. Even if it were to reopen in five years time, they would still have an inkling that it had existed and local press hype (repeated front pages on the Herald etc.) would probably be such that they certainly wouldn't be able to avoid knowing about the reopening.
So we shall see. But it certainly hasn't been too long since it closed to reopen it.
Whilst I was waiting for the Akro Chariot to be serviced I thought I'd take a stroll around the perimeter. I wish I hadn't, I knew I shouldn't, but I couldn't help it and now I know I'm just going to have to RANT!
I stood on the rather uninspiringly named "Runway Road" and looked down the length of the shorter runway. The "development" done here is nothing but spiteful damage and is shocking to behold. The road bisects the runway with housing developments at either end. The tallest of the buildings in each case is smack on the centreline. I know the developer was expected to provide a new access road to the terminal; but right across the airfield!
The government, local and central, has made it clear that no public money is available, fair enough. However if a private enterprise is willing to invest then where's the problem? I think it's today that we "celebrate" 50 years since the erroneous Beeching report was produced. Revisionists have pointed out that the aim then was to promote journeys by private means. However that was then, today we all know it is entirely the opposite and all forms of public/mass transport should be positively encouraged. And yet here I am staring down the disused runway of a perfectly viable airport.
There is currently an impasse between freeholders, leaseholders and aspirant operators. The crux of the problem appears to be an "Armageddon" clause written into the existing lease agreement. For those involved in this secretive agreement the truth will prevail and then......, it's belts off trousers down and by George it's going to smart!
Nurse?, Nurse! Quickly, bring me my TABLETS!
I stood on the rather uninspiringly named "Runway Road" and looked down the length of the shorter runway. The "development" done here is nothing but spiteful damage and is shocking to behold. The road bisects the runway with housing developments at either end. The tallest of the buildings in each case is smack on the centreline. I know the developer was expected to provide a new access road to the terminal; but right across the airfield!
The government, local and central, has made it clear that no public money is available, fair enough. However if a private enterprise is willing to invest then where's the problem? I think it's today that we "celebrate" 50 years since the erroneous Beeching report was produced. Revisionists have pointed out that the aim then was to promote journeys by private means. However that was then, today we all know it is entirely the opposite and all forms of public/mass transport should be positively encouraged. And yet here I am staring down the disused runway of a perfectly viable airport.
There is currently an impasse between freeholders, leaseholders and aspirant operators. The crux of the problem appears to be an "Armageddon" clause written into the existing lease agreement. For those involved in this secretive agreement the truth will prevail and then......, it's belts off trousers down and by George it's going to smart!
Nurse?, Nurse! Quickly, bring me my TABLETS!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Plymouth
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PLH is still alive just sleeping :)
There is often much misconception, especially here in plymouth that the aiport has gone or is being built on.
But found this picture taken this week that shows its still there, looking a sad state
. I have faith it will reopen, the opinion is slowly changing in favour of "plymouth needs its airport" and the longer SHH are left with it, more likely they are to sell up. As they are refusing to sell as an airport .
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...7152403&type=1
But found this picture taken this week that shows its still there, looking a sad state
. I have faith it will reopen, the opinion is slowly changing in favour of "plymouth needs its airport" and the longer SHH are left with it, more likely they are to sell up. As they are refusing to sell as an airport .https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...7152403&type=1
Last edited by WOWBOY; 12th May 2013 at 11:37.
With the railway line at Dawlish closed for at least a month and quite possibly longer, how feasible is it to set up a temporary air service between Plymouth and maybe Luton or Gatwick, at least until trains are running normally ?
I'm aware that Govt cannot normally tell the private sector what to do and there are multiple legal risk of getting too deeply involved, but Govt often has all sorts of reserve powers for emergencies. Presumably the CAA can do things on a temporary basis it wouldn't do normally if there is political desire at a very high level.
I'm aware that Govt cannot normally tell the private sector what to do and there are multiple legal risk of getting too deeply involved, but Govt often has all sorts of reserve powers for emergencies. Presumably the CAA can do things on a temporary basis it wouldn't do normally if there is political desire at a very high level.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Dorchester
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would be a good idea, but I thought they had stripped the airport of it's facilities i.e. control tower functions, runway lights, nav equipment, unless they can source temporary equipment?
Airport
As a regular user of the airport(when it was open!)from 1978 up I always enjoyed the service it provided to get me to work.Now I am retired I come to plymouth less often only to see family.This entails leaving heathrow either to Reading and the train and last time my wife and I stood all the way(it was friday),as a pensioner I find this inexscusable by the rail company on safety grounds.Going by coach now takes almost five hours !Returning to london ,if you leave before 0900 you pay premium prices and going by coach then you must use the "red eye"special to get there early!Please ,please open the airport again!!!
a
All trains have "priority seats" that must be vacated for people who need to sit down. Did you try finding one of those?
nd last time my wife and I stood all the way(it was friday),as a pensioner
FGW issue a priority seat card too so you can show that
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although all the ATC equipment is still in place exactly a per the day it shut. There is no way it could open up on a temporary basis because of the work involved in getting the CAA regulations and approvals and not to mention getting staff and training them. So that is a non starter.
