SOUTHEND 5
wethersfield
I also welcome you to PPRuNe and agree with much of what you say in your first post here.
The Flybe arrivals from INV, BHD and EDI that you describe as "scheduled diversions" need to be added to the BA EMB170 and 190 so it isn't really fair to say that "only a measly 2 diverts were accepted". So in reality five additional commercial arrivals were accepted. The situation with stands is that two of the terminal stands are out of service, Nos 5 and 9, and although these are used for parking ground equipment I believe they were originally withdrawn due to subsidence of the surfaces and that this has not been rectified. Stand 16 is the other you mention, this accommodating the winter ops equipment and being very remote from the terminal.
So how many diversions should SEN be able to accept during such an evening period? With three based A319/A320 and two ATR72s it's probably reasonable to safeguard five terminal stands as there is a fair chance that evening diversions may overnight at SEN. That would leave three terminal stands free although I believe on the evening in question there was a 'spare' A319/320 on stand 2. In addition there are, potentially, stands 12 to 15 extending along the front of the old terminal from which pax can be bussed to the new terminal. The BA EMB190 seems to have parked on stand 13 or 14 that evening and I believe a Biggin Hill diversion may have been on stand 12. Stands 17 to 21 comprise the north apron but I understand that due to lighting and other matters these would not be considered for diversionary arrivals - apart from the fact that freight aircraft and the Jota fleet use those stands. Under the current 'arrangements' the five diversions accepted doesn't seem too bad.
For the future I think they need to do the following:
1) Put stands 5 and 9 back into use -it's simply ridiculous, as you say, that these are not available for the use for which they were intended. Surely the money is there to repair their load bearing surfaces.
2) As the likelihood of weather diversions is fairly predictable, avoid having out of service aircraft on any terminal stand at those times - move them onto the north apron.
3) Obtain an EMB towbar, either by purchase or on loan from BA (who did apparently say they would send one down at some stage). The 190 cannot park at the required 45 degree angle on a terminal stand due to its length. Again, as you say, a ridiculous situation exists at the moment.
4) Move overnighting diversions onto the north apron if space there allows in order to free up terminal stands.
5) Make as much use of stands 12 to 15 as is possible at the time taking to account bizjet activity, which would have priority to the area fronting the executive terminal (stands 12 to 15).
Just as airports have a snowplan and low-vis ops procedures then SEN should have a defined 'diversion plan' and it seems to me that currently it's all done on the hoof. To miss out on virtually free revenue by sticking to the current arrangements seems perverse and non commercial.
I also welcome you to PPRuNe and agree with much of what you say in your first post here.
The Flybe arrivals from INV, BHD and EDI that you describe as "scheduled diversions" need to be added to the BA EMB170 and 190 so it isn't really fair to say that "only a measly 2 diverts were accepted". So in reality five additional commercial arrivals were accepted. The situation with stands is that two of the terminal stands are out of service, Nos 5 and 9, and although these are used for parking ground equipment I believe they were originally withdrawn due to subsidence of the surfaces and that this has not been rectified. Stand 16 is the other you mention, this accommodating the winter ops equipment and being very remote from the terminal.
So how many diversions should SEN be able to accept during such an evening period? With three based A319/A320 and two ATR72s it's probably reasonable to safeguard five terminal stands as there is a fair chance that evening diversions may overnight at SEN. That would leave three terminal stands free although I believe on the evening in question there was a 'spare' A319/320 on stand 2. In addition there are, potentially, stands 12 to 15 extending along the front of the old terminal from which pax can be bussed to the new terminal. The BA EMB190 seems to have parked on stand 13 or 14 that evening and I believe a Biggin Hill diversion may have been on stand 12. Stands 17 to 21 comprise the north apron but I understand that due to lighting and other matters these would not be considered for diversionary arrivals - apart from the fact that freight aircraft and the Jota fleet use those stands. Under the current 'arrangements' the five diversions accepted doesn't seem too bad.
For the future I think they need to do the following:
1) Put stands 5 and 9 back into use -it's simply ridiculous, as you say, that these are not available for the use for which they were intended. Surely the money is there to repair their load bearing surfaces.
2) As the likelihood of weather diversions is fairly predictable, avoid having out of service aircraft on any terminal stand at those times - move them onto the north apron.
3) Obtain an EMB towbar, either by purchase or on loan from BA (who did apparently say they would send one down at some stage). The 190 cannot park at the required 45 degree angle on a terminal stand due to its length. Again, as you say, a ridiculous situation exists at the moment.
4) Move overnighting diversions onto the north apron if space there allows in order to free up terminal stands.
5) Make as much use of stands 12 to 15 as is possible at the time taking to account bizjet activity, which would have priority to the area fronting the executive terminal (stands 12 to 15).
Just as airports have a snowplan and low-vis ops procedures then SEN should have a defined 'diversion plan' and it seems to me that currently it's all done on the hoof. To miss out on virtually free revenue by sticking to the current arrangements seems perverse and non commercial.
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: essex
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the welcome messages and allowing me to join your fine group - i have been watching this site daily for the last 3 years or so.
Apologies for not correctly paragraphing my message - i hit the send button before i could do so.
I agree with Expressflights comments which are always very interesting and i am preparing a Facebook message to LSA on this matter and hope they take note of the comments. They have done in the past.
I separated the 3 FLYBE diversions from the 2 EMB "live" diversions from LCY as LSA were aware of these 3 earlier in the day and therefore made provision for them.
Today's modern technology allows me to use my PC to monitor local movements on FR24 as well having my trusted Signal R535 scanner by my side for Thames Radar and LSA freqs. This proved very useful for me on Wednesday.
Hopefully our concerns will be rectified in the near future
Apologies for not correctly paragraphing my message - i hit the send button before i could do so.
I agree with Expressflights comments which are always very interesting and i am preparing a Facebook message to LSA on this matter and hope they take note of the comments. They have done in the past.
I separated the 3 FLYBE diversions from the 2 EMB "live" diversions from LCY as LSA were aware of these 3 earlier in the day and therefore made provision for them.
Today's modern technology allows me to use my PC to monitor local movements on FR24 as well having my trusted Signal R535 scanner by my side for Thames Radar and LSA freqs. This proved very useful for me on Wednesday.
Hopefully our concerns will be rectified in the near future
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: England
Posts: 762
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airports don't base their business model and spending on providing facilities for diversions, but on their own core schedules as they come first. If a couple of stands are out of use but don't affect the core operation then it's not an issue.
Airport's able to accept diversions should have a plan in place to deal with the situation and operators who state alternate diversion airfields should ensure that the required facilities and handling at that airfield are available.
Airport's able to accept diversions should have a plan in place to deal with the situation and operators who state alternate diversion airfields should ensure that the required facilities and handling at that airfield are available.
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Peterborough
Age: 61
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diversions
This whole conversation confuses me somewhat. Let's go back an eon and cut to the chase, Southend used to attract B Cal 1-11's and Britannia 737's not to mention McAlpine 125's by the shed load and Fordair, Gulf 1's and 1-11's (so thats LTN, LGW,STN ) Even remember a BA 737 (though it was a Transavia one on lease so the jockey may have known SEN for some reason). That apart, the powers that be just are not pushing what is to offer, I don't live in Southend any more, but my family told me about the number of LCY traffic just orbiting overhead last week. The simple question is, if they didn't go somewhere else, why did they not just drop out of the hold into SEN? I won't ask about possible management limitations as if this is the case then, hey ho.... I want to be positive but.......... And the pilots know the airport is there so what is stopping them (and in a previous life I would have recommended be they civilian or military,to point an aircraft to a strip of visible runway if weather conditions dictated it). The airfield has never been so capable of accepting diversionary traffic and to lose it is just unacceptable. If I offend anyone with this post I apologise but it's just wrong.
Last edited by Neile1; 3rd Nov 2014 at 23:08.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Essex
Posts: 800
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dublin
It is a shame that the Dublin route has been cut back so drastically, but I don't think that the Stobart Air schedules have been released yet so it may still go up in frequency. Should know any day now.
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: essex
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
diversions
Fully agree with your comments neile 1. Sure many of us on this site remember the airport taking many diversions in the past, when the facilities available were much smaller.
I sent a detailed Facebook message to LSA yesterday with suggestions on improving the capacity for handling diverts, but so far nothing has appeared on the site even after re-sending some hours later...
Today I am posting it in letter form to the MD there as well to hopefully ensure a positive response. Every LCY diversion lost is much needed money blown away.
Winter schedules now kicking in and today only 4 easyJet services on the board. Times are getting hard.
I sent a detailed Facebook message to LSA yesterday with suggestions on improving the capacity for handling diverts, but so far nothing has appeared on the site even after re-sending some hours later...
Today I am posting it in letter form to the MD there as well to hopefully ensure a positive response. Every LCY diversion lost is much needed money blown away.
Winter schedules now kicking in and today only 4 easyJet services on the board. Times are getting hard.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Outer London
Age: 43
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is most of the am flights op by BE that are going, so no more US connections most days. Mon, Tue, Thu, Fri pm op by Stobart, Mon & Fri am and Sun evening by BE. No flight on Wed or Sat.
Maastricht is going to 2x weekly Fri & Sun
The Sat flight to Antwerp has also gone.
Maastricht is going to 2x weekly Fri & Sun
The Sat flight to Antwerp has also gone.
Last edited by AirportPlanner1; 4th Nov 2014 at 07:14.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diversionary Traffic
The fact is years ago we used to wedge them in whatever way we could. 146's in the back of the light park behind a load of Cessna's. Double and triple park on stands, park in between stands, in taxiways. Whole North and terminal apron racked and stacked. I am afraid in todays regulated world we have lost the ability to think outside the box and if it doesn't fit on line on the stand or in a published position then there's not room for it. Unlike today we used to have the ability to call just about anyone we knew to come in and deal with diversions. Finnish a night shift in the control tower and spend another 6 hours handling a mornings diversions on the ramp that type of thing. I must admit we didn't have regulars like easyjet to look after and we could keep taking aeroplanes until it was just plain stupid. Happy times!
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Location: davenport IA
Age: 69
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ezy position flt
Is that empty replace Easyjet aircraft from Nice for faro route this morning ? The flight U29004,NCE-SEN The reg number is G-EZBW
the flight no is a positioning flt. easy use numbers like you have here. so yes that could be what it was for.
the flight no is a positioning flt. easy use numbers like you have here. so yes that could be what it was for.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Between the flower pots
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can have spare stands doing nothing but the staffing levels available will reflect expected movements. With next to no movements there will be next to no staff available to handle diversions.
As an outsider just looking in Southend seems to be going the same way as Sheffield and Robin Hood Airport. Great start but then things start to take a turn for the worse. The Dublin route is a good example. If the route was making a profit and there was demand for more flights that also need to make a profit then there would not be a cut back.
When an airport starts an airline to boast numbers then it is clear things are not as they should be.
As an outsider just looking in Southend seems to be going the same way as Sheffield and Robin Hood Airport. Great start but then things start to take a turn for the worse. The Dublin route is a good example. If the route was making a profit and there was demand for more flights that also need to make a profit then there would not be a cut back.
When an airport starts an airline to boast numbers then it is clear things are not as they should be.
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: essex
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There will always be staff on hand catering for scheduled arrivals throughout the day and evenings albeit at a reduced level for the winter schedules.
The main problem is lack of operational stands (not staff) - 2 or 3 of the 10 new stands are out of action with most of the other stands being used for based EZY /Flybe - Stobart aircraft. If all of the gates are open, and additional overspill stands used in front of the old terminal with pax bussed to the new terminal, considerably more diverts can be handled using the existing staff that would be available in between handling scheduled arrivals. Towing empty diverts from the stands to the remote Northern apron after disembarking pax would create more stand use also.
Last Wednesday only 2 diverts directly from LCY could be handled, in addition to 3 earlier re-scheduled FLYBE domestic services normally into LCY. These 3 all re-loaded outward pax after bussing from LCY. The rest of the diverts mostly ended up at LGW as STN were refusing them.
i am sure the Southend management recognise the benefits in handling more valuable revenue diverts, whenever available, and will be looking at how this can be achieved right now ahead of the usual winter weather problems.
i don't share your concerns on Southends's future - it has an excellent location and terminal transit with a good rail connection to London only yards away. With the talk of future increased air travel and the on-going saga of additional runway capacity in the south east dragging on, it has a good future for airlines operating suitable types for the runway available. Certainly Stobart will be doing all they can to get their return on the £ 120million investment as fast as possible over the coming few years
The main problem is lack of operational stands (not staff) - 2 or 3 of the 10 new stands are out of action with most of the other stands being used for based EZY /Flybe - Stobart aircraft. If all of the gates are open, and additional overspill stands used in front of the old terminal with pax bussed to the new terminal, considerably more diverts can be handled using the existing staff that would be available in between handling scheduled arrivals. Towing empty diverts from the stands to the remote Northern apron after disembarking pax would create more stand use also.
Last Wednesday only 2 diverts directly from LCY could be handled, in addition to 3 earlier re-scheduled FLYBE domestic services normally into LCY. These 3 all re-loaded outward pax after bussing from LCY. The rest of the diverts mostly ended up at LGW as STN were refusing them.
i am sure the Southend management recognise the benefits in handling more valuable revenue diverts, whenever available, and will be looking at how this can be achieved right now ahead of the usual winter weather problems.
i don't share your concerns on Southends's future - it has an excellent location and terminal transit with a good rail connection to London only yards away. With the talk of future increased air travel and the on-going saga of additional runway capacity in the south east dragging on, it has a good future for airlines operating suitable types for the runway available. Certainly Stobart will be doing all they can to get their return on the £ 120million investment as fast as possible over the coming few years