MANCHESTER 1
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Somewhere up there
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AF7
Have you ever been to Montenegro? No such place as Porto Montenegro AFAIK.
Tivat is for the Montenegro coast although currently visitors would just fly to Dubrovnik (Croatia) and rent a car - not far and a nice drive too.
The stand out place is Kotor. Many others would go to Budva which used to be nice before the grim low-cost Russian tourist industry got hold of it and poured concrete all over it. Sveti Stefan just south of here remains an iconic image / location though.
The rest of this small country is beautiful and well worth exploring by car - the clue is in the name (Black Mountains).
Recommend
Great little addition for MAN - but wasn't it previously served seasonally in the days of Yugoslavia?
Have you ever been to Montenegro? No such place as Porto Montenegro AFAIK.Tivat is for the Montenegro coast although currently visitors would just fly to Dubrovnik (Croatia) and rent a car - not far and a nice drive too.
The stand out place is Kotor. Many others would go to Budva which used to be nice before the grim low-cost Russian tourist industry got hold of it and poured concrete all over it. Sveti Stefan just south of here remains an iconic image / location though.
The rest of this small country is beautiful and well worth exploring by car - the clue is in the name (Black Mountains).
Recommend
Great little addition for MAN - but wasn't it previously served seasonally in the days of Yugoslavia?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 952
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: manchester
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
new stats:
http://www.caa.co.uk/uploadedFiles/C...Statistics.pdf
MAN up to 23.02 million with a 6.3% growth in month which is ahead of background growth of 5.5% based on available airport data. 4% growth in movements so numbers carried per movement is continuing to go up.
STN growth now slowing to a mere 7% in month with 13.4% rolling. STN will go past MAN next year at current rates as they are at 22.37 million now.
Gatwick has gone past the 40 million mark on one runway which shows what can be achieved! Not sure if they had already surpassed this figure last month?
LHR likely to surpass 75 million this year.
Liverpool grew 19.1% in month!
http://www.caa.co.uk/uploadedFiles/C...Statistics.pdf
MAN up to 23.02 million with a 6.3% growth in month which is ahead of background growth of 5.5% based on available airport data. 4% growth in movements so numbers carried per movement is continuing to go up.
STN growth now slowing to a mere 7% in month with 13.4% rolling. STN will go past MAN next year at current rates as they are at 22.37 million now.
Gatwick has gone past the 40 million mark on one runway which shows what can be achieved! Not sure if they had already surpassed this figure last month?
LHR likely to surpass 75 million this year.
Liverpool grew 19.1% in month!
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do think STN will overtake MAN in the Dec-Feb stats, however, with higher growth planned at MAN than STN next summer, I expect March to be very close, but then April onwards MAN overtake STN yet again.
As an outside prediction, I foresee 25.2m at least for S16 at MAN.
As an outside prediction, I foresee 25.2m at least for S16 at MAN.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAN on the brink of Premier League promotion
25 Million pax will be a stretch in 2016 calendar year, although not altogether fanciful. Looks like we'll finish 2015 around 23.1M so 25 would require some fairly aggressive growth in the year ahead. 2017, without a doubt.
MAN has lain within the 15-25mppa bracket for the past two decades. When it passes 25mppa which it will soon, it moves into the premier league in terms of volume as defined by ICAO/IATA/ACI, and will be measured against some of the giants of the industry with respect to things such as customer satisfaction, and punctuality. It is a telling tale of MAN's near unique characteristics, in Europe at least, when you look at the other airports with this sort of volume. They are almost exclusively capital/principal city airports which are either the hub base for their nation's flag carrier, or in countries such as Germany where there is no dominant city, an airport where there are international services flown by the flag carrier (i.e. MUC/DUS/BCN). MAN exists in a nation utterly dominated by its capital and is used by the UK flag carrier only to link into its capital city hub. DUB fights well above its weight when you look at the size of catchment but it is an EU capital with a flag carrier hub.
MAN remains a fascinating airport, home to almost no airline yet important to many. If its wannabe hub ambitions are derided by some, they must concede that it is the ultimate Super Spoke, getting to be on the 'must go there' list of an increasing number of world airlines. How many airports mix so many heavies with so many turboprops, so many market segments, flag carriers from around the world? 200+ destinations (more than LHR it is claimed). Still substantially in public hands but operating as a fiercely commercial entity with no national government funding, never has had. Compare that to the Billions of Euros invested by national governments at MUC and BCN over recent years, maybe DUS too. You can moan about T1 at MAN but it has cost the taxpayer nowt. The £1 Billion redevelopment and expansion of T2 will cost the taxpayer, let me see, oh yes, nowt!
As we contemplate pouring £Billions into our supposed only UK hub, you have to say that MAN has been and continues to be fantastic value for money for the UK, and putting a fair slice of its profit back into the local taxpayers pockets. Let's get this straight, the case for Heathrow is about the South-East, I don't use Heathrow unless I'm going to a meeting there, I don't need to. It is just one choice out of many, and not a particularly attractive one if I need to change planes. Claiming R3 is about the UK as a whole is a smokescreen north of the Midlands, 'cos with this kind of MAN about the house, we don't need it. Goodnight!
MAN has lain within the 15-25mppa bracket for the past two decades. When it passes 25mppa which it will soon, it moves into the premier league in terms of volume as defined by ICAO/IATA/ACI, and will be measured against some of the giants of the industry with respect to things such as customer satisfaction, and punctuality. It is a telling tale of MAN's near unique characteristics, in Europe at least, when you look at the other airports with this sort of volume. They are almost exclusively capital/principal city airports which are either the hub base for their nation's flag carrier, or in countries such as Germany where there is no dominant city, an airport where there are international services flown by the flag carrier (i.e. MUC/DUS/BCN). MAN exists in a nation utterly dominated by its capital and is used by the UK flag carrier only to link into its capital city hub. DUB fights well above its weight when you look at the size of catchment but it is an EU capital with a flag carrier hub.
MAN remains a fascinating airport, home to almost no airline yet important to many. If its wannabe hub ambitions are derided by some, they must concede that it is the ultimate Super Spoke, getting to be on the 'must go there' list of an increasing number of world airlines. How many airports mix so many heavies with so many turboprops, so many market segments, flag carriers from around the world? 200+ destinations (more than LHR it is claimed). Still substantially in public hands but operating as a fiercely commercial entity with no national government funding, never has had. Compare that to the Billions of Euros invested by national governments at MUC and BCN over recent years, maybe DUS too. You can moan about T1 at MAN but it has cost the taxpayer nowt. The £1 Billion redevelopment and expansion of T2 will cost the taxpayer, let me see, oh yes, nowt!
As we contemplate pouring £Billions into our supposed only UK hub, you have to say that MAN has been and continues to be fantastic value for money for the UK, and putting a fair slice of its profit back into the local taxpayers pockets. Let's get this straight, the case for Heathrow is about the South-East, I don't use Heathrow unless I'm going to a meeting there, I don't need to. It is just one choice out of many, and not a particularly attractive one if I need to change planes. Claiming R3 is about the UK as a whole is a smokescreen north of the Midlands, 'cos with this kind of MAN about the house, we don't need it. Goodnight!
Last edited by roverman; 16th Dec 2015 at 23:44. Reason: details.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excellent comments Roverman.
All the more infuriating that when the Transport Minister made his Heathrow statement last week he referenced the contribution after Birmingham and Edinburgh but above Newcastle.
Whoopee doo !
Subliminal ? well maybe !
... but to me it provides an insight into where our stock in trade is at Government level, with some ministers at least!
All the more infuriating that when the Transport Minister made his Heathrow statement last week he referenced the contribution after Birmingham and Edinburgh but above Newcastle.
Whoopee doo !
Subliminal ? well maybe !
... but to me it provides an insight into where our stock in trade is at Government level, with some ministers at least!
Last edited by Bagso; 17th Dec 2015 at 07:00.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 2 DME
Age: 54
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alphabetical? Well maybe!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks, Bagso.
I think I contradicted myself by saying that MAN was excellent value for money when in fact it has not cost any money, not since 1938, anyway.
The UK flag carrier has around 3% of the slots at MAN.
I think I contradicted myself by saying that MAN was excellent value for money when in fact it has not cost any money, not since 1938, anyway.
The UK flag carrier has around 3% of the slots at MAN.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 2 DME
Age: 54
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think I contradicted myself by saying that MAN was excellent value for money when in fact it has not cost any money, not since 1938, anyway.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
November Provisional CAA Stats:
Don't forget that the overall UK increase of 5.5% is heavily influenced by LHR with only 2% growth but which accounts for nearly 1/3 of total pax. Without getting into the argument as to which is more important - the actual number of extra pax or the percentage - for the record, LGW was up 7%, and LTN a massive 23.7%, whereas LBA was down 3.3% and EMA 0.6%. Some large variations in performance.
I think it's fair to say that MAN's underlying growth was possibly 2% higher than the actual figure of 6.3%. Strikes and cancellations meant that FRA & MUC combined were down 10,500 pax. Due to other events, PAR was down 3,300 and SSH down over 18,000. Pax to LHR with the loss of Little Red fell by nearly 19,000. Of course, we don't know how many of the pax affected still flew from MAN to other destinations and how many didn't travel at all or from/to other airports. Or for that matter, whether without those events (excl LHR) there would have been increases rather than nil growth.
On short haul, there were impressive gains to OSL, ARN, CPH, AMS, DUB and several Italian destinations.
Will comment on long haul separately.
MAN up to 23.02 million with a 6.3% growth in month which is ahead of background growth of 5.5% based on available airport data.
I think it's fair to say that MAN's underlying growth was possibly 2% higher than the actual figure of 6.3%. Strikes and cancellations meant that FRA & MUC combined were down 10,500 pax. Due to other events, PAR was down 3,300 and SSH down over 18,000. Pax to LHR with the loss of Little Red fell by nearly 19,000. Of course, we don't know how many of the pax affected still flew from MAN to other destinations and how many didn't travel at all or from/to other airports. Or for that matter, whether without those events (excl LHR) there would have been increases rather than nil growth.
On short haul, there were impressive gains to OSL, ARN, CPH, AMS, DUB and several Italian destinations.
Will comment on long haul separately.
Last edited by MANFOD; 17th Dec 2015 at 08:44. Reason: More details
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What, so the roads, rail and tram links to the airport where ALL privately financed, at no cost to the taxpayer,
So if you're wondering whether MAN is bleeding the taxpayer dry, the answer has to be a resounding NO. If you're looking to criticise MAN by this measure, you will have to cite every other UK airport first.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it Panto season.....?
I think you will find the total spend on infastructure in the regions (including in and around Manchester Airport) compared to the total spend in London could well be described as bordering on the totally abysmal !!!
Whilst we might fawn around the ankles of those in the treasury who have seen fit to offer some "very limited" support to the airport tram link and the additional rail platform, rest assured we are being led up the proverbial garden path with this bollocksology.
In London they are having a banquet in terms of infastructure spend whilst the rest of the country including Manchester dines out on crumbs.
In the Home Counties any form of spend is in the Billions.
In the North it's Millions.
A billion isn't 10 times more or a 100 times more it's a 1000 !
Think about that, next time the MEN salivates over a Minister announcing a fabulous £200m spend in the N West.
.....it sounds impressive. It isn't it's pathetic !
I think you will find the total spend on infastructure in the regions (including in and around Manchester Airport) compared to the total spend in London could well be described as bordering on the totally abysmal !!!
Whilst we might fawn around the ankles of those in the treasury who have seen fit to offer some "very limited" support to the airport tram link and the additional rail platform, rest assured we are being led up the proverbial garden path with this bollocksology.
In London they are having a banquet in terms of infastructure spend whilst the rest of the country including Manchester dines out on crumbs.
In the Home Counties any form of spend is in the Billions.
In the North it's Millions.
A billion isn't 10 times more or a 100 times more it's a 1000 !
Think about that, next time the MEN salivates over a Minister announcing a fabulous £200m spend in the N West.
.....it sounds impressive. It isn't it's pathetic !
Last edited by Bagso; 17th Dec 2015 at 13:12.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the replies. To repeat, MAN is just about unique amongst those European airports which are in or are about to enter the premier 25mppa+ range. All the others are one or all of the following:
1. A capital city airport, or principal city airport where the capital is not dominant.
2. Has benefitted from funding of core infrastructure by central government at some stage
3. Is the main base hub of the national flag carrier, or has a significant number of slots held by the national flag carrier.
MAN has none of the above characteristics and is therefore unique amongst this league of airports. Have a look at the list on the link below. The only other exception I can find is Palma Majorca (PMI) which has a similar volume to MAN but exists for one reason alone: massive inbound leisure travel, having a very small catchment of its own.
Edit: Actually I think PMI ticks item No. 2 in my list of characteristics and so MAN really is unique.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...orts_in_Europe
1. A capital city airport, or principal city airport where the capital is not dominant.
2. Has benefitted from funding of core infrastructure by central government at some stage
3. Is the main base hub of the national flag carrier, or has a significant number of slots held by the national flag carrier.
MAN has none of the above characteristics and is therefore unique amongst this league of airports. Have a look at the list on the link below. The only other exception I can find is Palma Majorca (PMI) which has a similar volume to MAN but exists for one reason alone: massive inbound leisure travel, having a very small catchment of its own.
Edit: Actually I think PMI ticks item No. 2 in my list of characteristics and so MAN really is unique.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...orts_in_Europe
Last edited by roverman; 17th Dec 2015 at 16:20. Reason: addendum
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Somewhere up there
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Using your criteria Roverman, MAN has a lot to be proud of. Whilst not disagreeing with any of the above, using the Premier League football analogy would imply a top 20 position.
However, MAN may even struggle to hold on to its 22nd spot as it will be overtaken by STN and I believe has already been overtaken by DUB. BRU too is expanding its offering vigorously. Granted the link is to 2014 stats.
The grey matter might be deceiving me but I'm sure I remember that back in the day MAN was at number 11 or so.
We've not kept growing at the same rate as others.
I suppose it's worth saying too, that a quantitative comparison is not the be all. On a qualitative comparison MAN is a poor relation. Nothing I've seen (admittedly limited) so far of the TP looks like it will mark a shift in the long standing MAN tradition of 'lobbing a cheap extension on to the gable end'.....although 'cheap' is getting more expensive!
However, MAN may even struggle to hold on to its 22nd spot as it will be overtaken by STN and I believe has already been overtaken by DUB. BRU too is expanding its offering vigorously. Granted the link is to 2014 stats.
The grey matter might be deceiving me but I'm sure I remember that back in the day MAN was at number 11 or so.
We've not kept growing at the same rate as others.
I suppose it's worth saying too, that a quantitative comparison is not the be all. On a qualitative comparison MAN is a poor relation. Nothing I've seen (admittedly limited) so far of the TP looks like it will mark a shift in the long standing MAN tradition of 'lobbing a cheap extension on to the gable end'.....although 'cheap' is getting more expensive!
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London, UK & Europe
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The grey matter might be deceiving me but I'm sure I remember that back in the day MAN was at number 11 or so.
We've not kept growing at the same rate as others.
We've not kept growing at the same rate as others.
It will only fall from 22 to 24 busiest this year possibly 25 if DUS has an exceptional Nov/Dec set of figures but unlikely.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All Names Taken, thanks for your comments and I agree with most of them.
What I am pointing out is that MAN is the only non-capital/principal city airport in Europe which has achieved this volume without receiving major state aid and without the patronage of a flag carrier. Period. When you're a capital city airport the government will step in to make sure that the facilities present a fitting gateway to the country. When you are the flag carrier's home base they will stump up the fees to pay for top class facilities and drive volumes through hub connecting. MAN has neither of those privileges and its volume is made up of a lot of small to medium sized operations, no really large ones and no flag carrier base like all the other airports in its throughput range,
Lots of full service airlines serve MAN with one, two, or three flights a day. They want to be here but their limited operations don't pay the level of fees required to fund the top class facilities they enjoy at their hub bases. The UK government doesn't subsidise and so you get what can be afforded. To take one of your examples - STN is lo-co dominated, nothing like the diversity of MAN, traffic which had little choice of where else to go in London, a capital city airport which benefitted from massive state funding of infrastructure in the 1980s/90s. That laid the basis for its throughput today.
MAN is unique, out on its own, and so unfair to compare on service levels.
What I am pointing out is that MAN is the only non-capital/principal city airport in Europe which has achieved this volume without receiving major state aid and without the patronage of a flag carrier. Period. When you're a capital city airport the government will step in to make sure that the facilities present a fitting gateway to the country. When you are the flag carrier's home base they will stump up the fees to pay for top class facilities and drive volumes through hub connecting. MAN has neither of those privileges and its volume is made up of a lot of small to medium sized operations, no really large ones and no flag carrier base like all the other airports in its throughput range,
Lots of full service airlines serve MAN with one, two, or three flights a day. They want to be here but their limited operations don't pay the level of fees required to fund the top class facilities they enjoy at their hub bases. The UK government doesn't subsidise and so you get what can be afforded. To take one of your examples - STN is lo-co dominated, nothing like the diversity of MAN, traffic which had little choice of where else to go in London, a capital city airport which benefitted from massive state funding of infrastructure in the 1980s/90s. That laid the basis for its throughput today.
MAN is unique, out on its own, and so unfair to compare on service levels.
Last edited by roverman; 17th Dec 2015 at 23:42.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All I can see here is "excuses" been made for poor service levels (if you feel they are poor). Some of the reasons been used are wildly inaccurate in terms of passenger numbers compared to European airports. Its only a league table no big deal.