MANCHESTER 1

[LAX_LHR]

There are new remotes being built where staff west is currently, and between pier B and where one of the new finger piers will be situated. Also plans for some on the current AVP in the future.

[Betablockeruk]

If you don't ask.....

@manairport: Congrats to the #AllBlacks for winning #Rwc2015, I think @FlyAirNZ should launch a new route to @manairport to celebrate... #FlyManchester

[Bagso]

Do we have any clues on how the Austrian, Iberia have been doing ?

[chaps1954]

Bit difficult to tell at present as figures only go to end of September
a week into schedule from memory for Austrian but it does show as being up 99%
so I would guess quite well not looked at Iberia as not as easy

Ian

[LAX_LHR]

Iberia will go daily from 30th March so must be reasonably happy with performance after a shaky start.

[Betablockeruk]

Airfield ops pushing out the no diversion notam even more liberally than usual.

Nothing allowed until tomorrow at 1200

[MANFOD]

Good game - remove the notam when the fog is expected to have lifted elsewhere and at MAN. No doubt other airfields will be happy to accommodate any diversions, their own weather permitting.

[LAX_LHR]

Expect this to be in place all winter Beterblocker, been told that management groups at MAN are not even entertaining the idea of mass diversions this winter, it'll be up to BHX to cash in as per usual.

[MANFOD]

We don't expect mass diversions these days, but to simply slap on that notam, irrespective of type of a/c, passenger or freight is a cop out in my view.

[PPRuNeUser0176]

Could be wrong but there has been times when MAN say no diverts and they have accepted some FR diverts and possibly EI as well dispite been full allegedly!

[LAX_LHR]

I know we go through this every year, but, it does make you wonder what BHX has done to get it so right but MAN seemingly get it so wrong.

BHX has a similar airline portfolio, similar handling agent setup and similar stand to based aircraft ratio to Manchester, albeit on a slightly smaller scale.

They seem to be able to mop up 10-15 diversions without even breaking a sweat, yet, Manchester doesn't even try.

At MAN, stands can't be an issue at this time, it's a slightly quieter time, and the based aircraft don't start arriving for another 4-5 hours, more than enough time to turn a splash n dash. As said, BHX must have similar staffing level ratios to MAN, so, why are they able to accept diverts but MAN not? Are the MAN guys that overworked?

I know diverts are not the be all and end all, but, some positive business can come from diverts. Look at Kenyan, MAN accepted a diverted B737 on delivery a few years ago, and got every new B737 going to Kenyan since that day due to the fact Kenyan were impressed with the service received.

I understand you can't accept them all, but, come on guys, at least try. I cannot believe for one second that MAN couldn't possibly handle at least 1-2 A320 sixpzed aircraft, to which several have had to divert tonight.

Poor show, again, but, it's happened the past 3? Winters, so why am I surprised this time around.

[eggc]

I was at BHX yesterday late evening LAX, it was absolutely empty. Much much more space than MAN has available, despite MAN's larger size, and having seen MAN lately I can understand why MAN can't and BHX can. That said, it's lost business and I am certain a/c can be relocated / parked better to free up space, just seems there is no will to do so for whatever reason.

[MANFOD]

just seems there is no will to do so for whatever reason.

Sad to say, that is certainly the impression that is given. MAN offers explanations about not wanting to disrupt their own operations, stand availability, or handling agents unable to cope with extra unplanned traffic and the risk of passengers being kept on board diverted a/c for hours, but it's so very different to the 'can do' attitude of 20, 30, and 40 years ago. Too much aversion to risk some might suggest.

LAX is right. Why not let ATC know what limited diverts we could take - even if it's only 4 narrow body or 2 wide body, and if necessary on a strict fuel and go basis? Even then, the airport argue 'but a flight may divert in with the intention of a quick refuel and depart, but they may not get a slot back to LHR or wherever, and the crew may then go out of hours'. The perception often is that they look for reasons for not accepting diversions and it does contrast with the approach of some other airports.

Diversions are not the airport's bread and butter, we know that, and they can be an inconvenience, but so can a lot of things in life.

[The96er]

BA did ask if MAN could accept an A380 divert this morning - the airport did say yes, although the a/c managed to get into LHR in the end.

[Fairdealfrank]

LHR will accommodate all the services it needs to regional China regardless of whether R3 is built or not. In the event of runway capacity scarcity, you can be certain that expendable short-haul frequencies will be sacrificed to make way. That is the way it has always worked in this industry, at LHR and elsewhere.

Certainly was the case. At present new routes to/from LHR have been predominantly shorthaul, especially on BA. Things change, nothing is set in stone.

But actively promoting the myth that LHR will be turning away priority long-haul opportunities serves the vested interests who want R3 approved at all costs. Of course, the gutsy solution would be to permit increased night-flying by quieter new-generation widebodies. But the politicians are too wimpish to consider that.

No, apart from 0430-0600, when 16 landings are permitted to accomodate longhaul arrivals from Asia and South America, there is no need for all night flying.

The "gutsy solution" would be for the government to "grow a pair" and approve LHR expansion now.

Frank, can I quote you some words from Hainan that state "Shenzen, Xa'in, Chongqing and Wuhan as possible links from Manchester".

They the cities you mean that can never be served from anywhere but LHR ?

Slighly related, Hainan are currently busy setting up a UK HQ, at MAN.

Obviously not "never", but clearly not in the short to medium term. Not convinced that all of those 4 cities would be linked with LHR in the short to medium term either.

No, I didn't. BA can swap short-haul and long-haul slots around in-house, but LHR has a very active second-hand slot-trading market used by other carriers to accommodate lucrative opportunities.

The secondary slot market is a restraint of trade as it excludes all but the richest carriers from access to LHR. Yet another good reason for a third rwy there as the secondary slot market there would be eliminated.

[LAX_LHR]

But on the other end of the scale, BA citiflyer asked MAN to take a single E190. MAN, and airport of 23m pax, 40,000 staff and hundreds of stands, said no. It didn't have the facilities to handle a licckle E-jet.

BHX, an aiport of 10m pax, around half the stands MAN has and less staff meanwhile, takes in 2 B777's and about 15 Euro flights.

Says it all.

[Ringwayman]

I wonder if this Notam will be dropped if/when all other airports approach the 'no room at the inn' moment and there is available space or perhaps some pilots may mischeviously 'accidentally' declare emergencies as the fog is going to be pretty much widespread tonight. And to cover themselves just put word out in the media beforehand that there may be delays in handling this unexpected extra traffic to avoid bad press.

[The96er]

But on the other end of the scale, BA citiflyer asked MAN to take a single E190. MAN, and airport of 23m pax, 40,000 staff and hundreds of stands, said no. It didn't have the facilities to handle a licckle E-jet.

Not today they didn't !

[Betablockeruk]

Maybe this will ruffle feathers

@Paul_Kehoe: Team @bhx_official working extra hard tonight - UK blanket fog causing diversions into #BHX

[MANFOD]

Well he's right. The 5 main London airports are foggy (no problems for Cat3 except holding delays) plus Southend, while Bristol is 50m met vis. EMA, LPL and LBA are foggy but workable and MAN is just above Cat2 limits at present. Our problems at certain times get worse when the RVR fluctuates from 300m or greater to below 300m if it happens to coincide with an influx of flybe arrivals who have to break off their approach, leaving even longer gaps than those MAN is subject to in LVPs.