Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

MANCHESTER 1

Old 9th Feb 2016, 09:37
  #4161 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Opinion: Ken O'Toole - Manchester Evening News

Some positive comments but no detail. Shanghai ?

Not sure about Bangkok. ...... unless it's a 2 a week charter.
Bagso is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2016, 10:51
  #4162 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,067
KEN O'TOOLE

Yes, after mentioning 25 long haul routes that could be viable, he said:

"These include more American destinations, India and other parts of the Far East, such as Bangkok".

I don't suppose we should read too much into it but I was surprised there was no reference to 'other Chinese cities'.

Bangkok at one time was the most popular onward destination for Emirates. Although this may have changed, I'm sure there is potential for a direct service. Unfortunately, TG, despite rumours over the years about starting a MAN flight, are not in the best of shape. If it is in the top few of unserved routes, it would be useful to know the current hubs that are being used to reach Bangkok. A new non-stop service usually stimulates further demand but we wouldn't want it to eat too much into an existing carrier's transfer pax.
MANFOD is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2016, 12:09
  #4163 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 41
Not Just Emirates, who have 6 flights per day to Bangkok, Qatar and Etihad have 4 each and Oman has 2
MAN2SIN2BKK2FRA is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2016, 12:42
  #4164 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 39
trains again

Reports today of a possible new rail link to MAN from Chester/Shropshire.

That would obviously be welcome, but for Shropshire residents it will be another factor to consider when deciding whether to fly from MAN or BHX.

Although MAN has more direct destinations, for many journeys (eg by EK) there are virtually identical departure times and prices.

The journey time to the airport by train (or indeed by road) is also very similar.

How then to choose? I would suggest that the decision may often come down to how user friendly the airport feels.

My own feeling is that going from either MAN or BHX with a change at an efficient modern hub is infinitely preferable to battling with all the uncertainties that flying from LHR involves.

Between MAN and BHX I am influenced by
- the transfer from the station to the terminal (BHX slightly better)
- how crowded are check in and departure lounges (MAN varies with terminal but can be depressing, BHX OK)
- wifi access (appalling and disgraceful at BHX which is shamed by most 3rd world airports)
- delays at immigration (unpredictable and no clear winner)
- an inexpensive hotel room within walking distance of the terminal for 0600 departures (BHX wins hands down)

Do others share my views? - because there are many "grey areas" around the country where the choice of departure airport may be influenced by similar factors which are at least partly under the control of the airport's management.
golf yankee one one is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2016, 12:44
  #4165 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 607
Ryanair fom 1st November Nuremburg - Manchester (daily).

Just announced new base at Nuremburg with 1 based aircraft.

Don't think we've had Nuremburg on our boards before unless it was one of the defunct German regional airlines back in the 90s.
Betablockeruk is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2016, 13:37
  #4166 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,067
Ryanair fom 1st November Nuremburg - Manchester (daily).
Good news.

Only other flights loaded so far for next winter appear to be for Spain.
Madrid showing as daily (as currently) and Barcelona as 9 x weekly with 2 flights Friday and Monday which I think is an increase from daily.

Hopefully for Germany, Bremen and Stuttgart are still to be loaded although the Nuremberg daily flights are showing.

Last edited by MANFOD; 9th Feb 2016 at 15:12.
MANFOD is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2016, 13:58
  #4167 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Yes agreed , certainly enough traffic.

My observation was more about who would execute Thai would be highly unlikely so unless BA come riding over the horizon that would just leave the charter airlines, OR as outside shot Norwegian?
Bagso is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2016, 14:06
  #4168 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 73
Posts: 798
And don't forget the AA 787 flight from June to October.
That'll make a nice change!
KelvinD is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2016, 20:30
  #4169 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Somewhere up there
Posts: 354
Bangkok?
Surely the only likely carriers would be TCX - even that is unlikely as the deal with Condor divvies up east bound traffic to them.
Thomson? Much more likely on the 787 but 2 per week - tops.
Bangkok is a leisure route basically so 'cheap' will win the day - TG would get toasted by the MEB3 if they came anywhere near.

Trouble is when you as a CEO say you have x number of destinations and then start listing the glamourous sounding ones you end up disappointing folk when they find out that the reality is that (let's say) Boston is twice a week and probably not going to run in Winter either. I do however appreciate that the CEO's job involves talking the place up.

On that thought - I wonder how many year round daily (or more) destinations MAN has?
I believe this would be a much more telling statistic than '210 destinations' which is almost meaningless.

And.. great news about Nurmberg and at daily too. Not convinced it's new. Wasn't this served in the 90s by some propliner outfit???
All names taken is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2016, 22:00
  #4170 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,928
House of Commons Debate re Regional Airports.

I've not read the full Hansard text yet Bagso but I was somewhat surprised when the MP who had got the debate, Catherine McKinnell, after mentioning her local airport, Newcastle, then very quickly started to emphasise the need to expand Heathrow.
Not surprising when you think about it: it is of vital importance for the different areas of the UK to be linked to the national hub. To be realistic, there are some countries/cities that will only ever be able to support flights to one UK airport and that airport is Heathrow.

It wasn't just my reaction as later I see that Sir Alan Hazelhurst, a great supporter of Manchester Airport, commented:

"I was a little worried that her speech was becoming slightly political. She sounded somewhat like a cheerleader for Heathrow,"
Many MPs up and down the country are supportive of Heathrow expansion.

A good illustration of this was a question from Tanya Mathias (Con. Twickenham) at prime minister's questions in January. She was seeking assurances that Heathrow expansion would be prohibited. It was accompanied by lots of groans and heckling and many MPs sat there stony-faced. There was not a single "hear hear".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO4F4uQ9k8E

Regretably ministers only listen to the vocal minority who oppose it, to the detriment of the UK as a whole.

But Sir Alan and the Wythenshawe & Sale East MP, Mike Kane, certainly did their bit for MAN and good to read that the Minister had some positive words for MAN too.

Now to scan the rest of the report!

Whether anything will come of the debate is another matter and it's a pity Davies seemed to be rather dismissive of long haul flights from the regions.
No one is dismissive, if the carriers can make money they will happen (except where there are restrictive bi-lateral agreements, in which case government negotiations have to take place (e.g. UK and China over flights to/from Ringway), and a happy Chinese new year to one and all.





Bit of a puff piece in the MEN last night.

At least Airport City may be building some momentum albeit in the press if not actually on the ground.

Have they started building on North side ?

As you know I am evangelical about Mancunia but this seems to be painfully slow ?

And also......
Yes, just like Heathrow expansion, clearly we need to get on with the developing the "Northern powerhouse".
Fairdealfrank is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2016, 06:06
  #4171 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
FDF

I'm not sure any of us in The Mancunian Republic actually resent another runway at Heathrow!

Our only objection is the eyewatering and skewed amounts of taxpayers money involved to complete the infastructure that would be necessary to support an efficient operation !

....and lo nd behold the "apparent" requirement to underwwite the private finance of the actual building of the runway/terminals itself!

On that basis they can take a hike. ......
Bagso is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2016, 07:53
  #4172 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: warrington,England
Posts: 43
Hi all

Why was the emirates this morning parked on pier C?

Thanks
mufc4evr is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2016, 10:20
  #4173 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 607
Ryanair new base at Hamburg Airport from 1st November with 2 based aircraft 7 new routes to Brussels, Dublin, Gran Canaria, London Stansted, Manchester, Milan Bergamo and Sofia, as well as a new winter service to Palma

There you go!
Betablockeruk is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2016, 10:29
  #4174 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London, UK & Europe
Posts: 2
Also daily Berlin

Something tells me Easyjet won't be pleased with this and Hamburg.
j636 is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2016, 10:56
  #4175 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 1,826
I flew with easyjet to Hamburg 31st Jan the flight was nearly full 148pax
Fly the route a few times a year and the flight was always busy.
Let's hope this brings the price down a little as easyjet were getting expensive on the route
HH6702 is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2016, 11:28
  #4176 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sheffield
Age: 48
Posts: 84
Jet 2 - Summer 2016

It looks like Jet 2 have released further flights for the Summer 2016 season, it now appears that they will operate 216 x weekly services for the Summer peak (up 42 x weekly services on last year) with Palma now due to operate 26 x weekly flights. The latest increases, as well as Palma, show extra flights to Arrecife, Faro, Funchal, Heraklion, Ibiza, Mahon and Zante.
Currently there are no further reductions showing on the Turkish Routes (8 x weekly spread over Antalya, Bodrum and Dalaman) although Media Reports are indicating a slump in bookings, so further changes could still be a possibility.
David Sharpe is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2016, 11:41
  #4177 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,928
FDF

I'm not sure any of us in The Mancunian Republic actually resent another runway at Heathrow!

Our only objection is the eyewatering and skewed amounts of taxpayers money involved to complete the infastructure that would be necessary to support an efficient operation !

....and lo nd behold the "apparent" requirement to underwwite the private finance of the actual building of the runway/terminals itself!

On that basis they can take a hike. ......
Is the "Mancunian Republic" the consequence of "devo-Manc"? Bagso, you write as if you are its president, or its monarch using the royal "we".

"We are amused", highly, which is a shame because you are making a serious point.

Actually no one knows how much taxpayers' money is involved, but most of it will be required either way as it is public transport related and will provide many benefits beyond those solely related to aviation and that includes motorway widening/junction improvement.

The tunnel and road diversion issues are expansion related but these are not "eyewatering" amounts.

Consider the amount of public money wasted on the many commissions, enquiries and reviews on the subject of aviation expansion/capacity issues over the decades, with the recommendations of all being routinely ignored.

Consider the amount of taxpayers' money wasted generally (it's always easy to waste other peoples' money).

Consider the billions sent to Brussels annually to be squandered elsewhere by a racket that cannot has been unable to have its books audited for 20 years.

Could continue, but don't want to bore readers further.

When all this is taken into account, tunnel and road diversion issues for Heathrow expansion becomes a drop in the ocean.

Hope this helps.
Fairdealfrank is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2016, 12:00
  #4178 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Actually FDF how about this idea in terms of Heathrow, maybe we could garner support on each of the other airport threads ?

Given the extraordinary cost of this project compared to other infrastructure projects which would normally be funded by central government, how about the airport owners or local chambers who are supportive of this idea in Liverpool, Humberside, Plymouth, Exeter, Newcastle , Teeside etc etc all provide or indeed divert from other local projects the 1 X 20 billion pounds required themselves ?

By my reckoning the number of airports who want the connectivity is about 20. They are clearly very supportive (albeit as long as somebody else puts up the cash).

Clearly they are cognisant of the undoubted benefits that will accrue to them based on the extra runway. But 20+ billion would underwrite the cost of the runway by those stakeholders who have a clear interest and they could guarantee to cover the cost.

The ROI is 100% safe is it not.

Based on this criteria they should have no problem with funding this given the unbelievable level of benefits that will start to trickle in once the runway is completed in 15 years.

PS I have excluded Manchester from the list as their contribution of 1billion is being spent on a brand new terminal.

Last edited by Bagso; 11th Feb 2016 at 07:33.
Bagso is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2016, 12:50
  #4179 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,067
Jet 2 - Summer 2016

It looks like Jet 2 have released further flights for the Summer 2016 season, it now appears that they will operate 216 x weekly services for the Summer peak (up 42 x weekly services on last year)
I'd heard they were basing an extra 2 a/c, but that (an extra 42 flights) would represent an increase of just under 25% on the number of flights. Even if, heaven forbid, all 8 Turkish services were pulled, it would still be 20% up. Another factor is that by dropping the long sectors to Egypt, it may enable an a/c to squeeze in 2 extra returns to the nearer destinations in Europe.

Whether it amounts to the same percentage in seats available will depend on the mix of 737s/757s

Last edited by MANFOD; 10th Feb 2016 at 14:05.
MANFOD is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2016, 14:00
  #4180 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 54
Posts: 845
Originally Posted by j636 View Post
Something tells me Easyjet won't be pleased with this and Hamburg.
The Hamburg one will be interesting as Lufthansa/Eurowings are supposed to be transitioning their CRJ900 fleet out in favour of A320s. If they stick with their current schedule that would give us 3 A320s and a 738 outbound every day, which is a big step up in seats from 1 A320 and 2 CR9s, so there is a chance something will give. The Ryanair flight is first out in a morning while the EZY flights are a mix of lunchtime and evening. Unfortunately I can see Eurowings blinking first on one or both of their flights.
Curious Pax is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.