MANCHESTER 1
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 41
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And another oversight in failing to acknowledge the glaring inadequacies of the LHR transfer experience.
So having gotten that out of the way, might be worth addressing why so many people keep doing it. That's your hard/soft product combo, T3 MAN on a 1988 build B763 fails on both counts. Nothing wrong with being a local supporter, it's not meant as a put down as many can debate well.
MAN is competing with LHR, so unless the product is half way decent, people can and do choose other options. Remember what a huge hit AA took when BMI came onto MAN-ORD?
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: North, UK
Age: 66
Posts: 931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is no secret that we will soon (next year sometime) hear of plans to deal with the inadequate T1 & T3 so one can say that deficiency will be addressed. What however would you suggest we do about AA choosing to use older aircraft on MAN routes.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: U.K.
Posts: 1,776
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a genuine querie MOD. The subject seems to be about MAN and it's AA service. Why is it a thread drift? It's directly related to MAN and particularly the constraints of and felt by the terminals at Manchester Airport.
I'm genuinely confused by the thread drift comment and what is actually allowed to be discussed on the Manchester forum.
I'm genuinely confused by the thread drift comment and what is actually allowed to be discussed on the Manchester forum.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: England
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but let's not forget that "most" pax couldn't really care less if they have to be bussed to an aircraft.
Moving on to another subject, and apologies if it has been mentioned already, it appears the plans for CX (yield permitting
) is to 'share' stand 206 with SQ when they can. The idea is for CX to come in and unload, then get towed remote while SQ arrives and departs before CX gets towed back to load. If CX is delayed much inbound then that could prove problematic.
Last edited by MANFlyer; 25th Nov 2014 at 20:04.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While the experience of being bussed to/from an aircraft is needlessly unpleasant in most cases, let's not forget that walking 20 minutes to baggage reclaim, particularly if one has a small child or more, isn't great, either.
My method of choice is the mobile lounge: no slopes or steps to manage, no crowded, dark passageways, no weather.
My method of choice is the mobile lounge: no slopes or steps to manage, no crowded, dark passageways, no weather.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 57
Posts: 3,262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...a terminal built for Dash 8s and Embraers.
I was hoping the events of the last week were down to the Mod being on their period and things would settle down for the rest of the month.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: U.K.
Posts: 1,776
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've had extensive experience of both legacy and low cost both as a pax and with work and hear very few complaints of being 'bussed'. Occasionally the organisation of the buses has come in for criticism but the actual process of getting on a bus (the poor souls) rarely in my experience, attracts many complaints.
Of course, many on these forums believe that full service is the holy grail and that it is the LCC's should settle for less. Those truly in the know will tell you that LCC's are often every bit demanding in their stipulations than their legacy counterparts. Their requirements may differ sometimes but nevertheless they are demanding.
Of course, many on these forums believe that full service is the holy grail and that it is the LCC's should settle for less. Those truly in the know will tell you that LCC's are often every bit demanding in their stipulations than their legacy counterparts. Their requirements may differ sometimes but nevertheless they are demanding.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 57
Posts: 3,262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've had extensive experience of both legacy and low cost both as a pax and with work and hear very few complaints of being 'bussed'.
It always causes a groan when it is announced that the flight has arrived on a remote stand. Always. Passengers hate it.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread content
Sorry guys, but I'm with the MODs here, something like 17 of the last 31 posts have been about bussing pax to the aircraft.
It can happen anywhere, ORD, HKG Ive been bussed the world over- which I prefer, to waiting 30-40 minutes for a gate, which also happens all over the world.
Get over it guys & print some news or something interesting.
It can happen anywhere, ORD, HKG Ive been bussed the world over- which I prefer, to waiting 30-40 minutes for a gate, which also happens all over the world.
Get over it guys & print some news or something interesting.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The original comments focused on whether MAN, an airport, were doing the right thing by AA, an airline, if pax on their routes to ORD & JFK were bused between T1 & T3 and issues it raised for MAN in terms of capacity. Now what's the title of this thread and forum?
To be fair, it has got diverted, or broadened rather by arguments as to whether or not passengers, in particular J class pax, are sufficiently bothered to prefer to fly via LHR with BA. However, perhaps this particular debate has run its course.
Well, an announcement about Hainan is certainly overdue if it's definitely happening. We also await confirmation of EZY's rumoured additional routes and there are expectations of further news from Ryanair. It could be a very good summer in 2015 but if so, let's hope MAN's infrastructure doesn't creak too loudly.
To be fair, it has got diverted, or broadened rather by arguments as to whether or not passengers, in particular J class pax, are sufficiently bothered to prefer to fly via LHR with BA. However, perhaps this particular debate has run its course.
Well, an announcement about Hainan is certainly overdue if it's definitely happening. We also await confirmation of EZY's rumoured additional routes and there are expectations of further news from Ryanair. It could be a very good summer in 2015 but if so, let's hope MAN's infrastructure doesn't creak too loudly.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North West UK
Age: 68
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T3
Whilst risking the wrath of the Mods, I think a number of posters here are missing the point. Blue riband customers (ie AA long haul) are being denied the best service (direct to air bridge) to accommodate Ryanair. That may be in the interests of the Airport's bottom line, but it is contrary to accepted service standards (ie the best service to your best customers). In this case, it suggests that the Airport ranks Ryanair more highly than AA. In turn, that tends to rank sunshine routes above business.....no issue for the Airport, but perhaps to the detriment of the North West.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,947
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be fair, it has got diverted, or broadened rather by arguments as to whether or not passengers, in particular J class pax, are sufficiently bothered to prefer to fly via LHR with BA. However, perhaps this particular debate has run its course.
Whilst risking the wrath of the Mods, I think a number of posters here are missing the point. Blue riband customers (ie AA long haul) are being denied the best service (direct to air bridge) to accommodate Ryanair. That may be in the interests of the Airport's bottom line, but it is contrary to accepted service standards (ie the best service to your best customers). In this case, it suggests that the Airport ranks Ryanair more highly than AA. In turn, that tends to rank sunshine routes above business.....no issue for the Airport, but perhaps to the detriment of the North West.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Perils of Ranking MAG's 'Best Customers'
Strictly speaking, Ryanair actually IS a more important customer for Manchester Airport than American Airlines. Their Summer 2015 programme is already set at 205 departures per week, and this total could yet rise further from that level. Over coming years, the hope exists that RYR will continue to expand significantly at MAN. Add in Ryanair's importance to MAG as a whole, and the difference becomes a chasm. Ryanair is huge at STN, and remains a key customer at EMA and BOH. American is limited to a modest presence at MAN only.
American Airlines is not unappreciated - far from it - but prior to the US Airways merger they had done little to expand their MAN presence. This Winter, their route suspensions are the longest in years. MAN-ORD capacity provision is at a low ebb. And as Skipness points out, the equipment they use ex-MAN is inferior to that used at competing airports. Meanwhile, their tie-up with AWE has brought, yes … the withdrawal of the MAN-CLT Summer schedule. Now, these commercial decisions are no doubt justifiable. But, considering all this, looking at things dispassionately (as successful businesses must), is it right to unthinkingly 'rank' AAL as more precious to MAN/MAG than RYR just because they serve three US destinations?
Business travellers visit cities such as MAD, EIN, Brussels (CRL), DUB and all the others too. Don't disregard the importance of EU connectivity to businesses in Manchester and the wider region. And Ryanair itself has become extremely important to both MAN and the region's travelling public. A slightly half-hearted AAL, welcome and appreciated as they may be, have no inherent right to preferential treatment at the expense of RYR.
American Airlines is not unappreciated - far from it - but prior to the US Airways merger they had done little to expand their MAN presence. This Winter, their route suspensions are the longest in years. MAN-ORD capacity provision is at a low ebb. And as Skipness points out, the equipment they use ex-MAN is inferior to that used at competing airports. Meanwhile, their tie-up with AWE has brought, yes … the withdrawal of the MAN-CLT Summer schedule. Now, these commercial decisions are no doubt justifiable. But, considering all this, looking at things dispassionately (as successful businesses must), is it right to unthinkingly 'rank' AAL as more precious to MAN/MAG than RYR just because they serve three US destinations?
Business travellers visit cities such as MAD, EIN, Brussels (CRL), DUB and all the others too. Don't disregard the importance of EU connectivity to businesses in Manchester and the wider region. And Ryanair itself has become extremely important to both MAN and the region's travelling public. A slightly half-hearted AAL, welcome and appreciated as they may be, have no inherent right to preferential treatment at the expense of RYR.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Confirmed that Qatar Airways back to 14 weekly from february.
Randomly its an addition with new times and flight number (QR25/26) rather than expansion into existing times/numbers.
Intention to go 3 daily?
Randomly its an addition with new times and flight number (QR25/26) rather than expansion into existing times/numbers.
Intention to go 3 daily?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The QR25/26 arrival/departure time at 1800/1930 is a relatively quiet time in T2 as well. So good use of terminal capacity, and should be a breeze for the customers (no bussing for them 
)
)
