MANCHESTER 1
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Already showing on the Apron Map. Stands 50,72,217,218,219,247 & 249 to be brought back into use in Spring.
I seem to recall 251 and 253 were also a/c stands on that centre island or am I mistaken? Anyway, good to have those other remotes back plus stand 50.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Stafford
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
72 was if I remember correctly used for equipment and not brought back into use when 73 74 85 and 86 were. I have an old Stand map from 2007 which shows stand 251 next to 249 but no 253
Chinapattern
It is showing on it`s way on FR24, however the Pakistan CAA have said it must
do a route proving flight first which I am told it is doing and is AP-BMI and is
due this evening with no pax
Ian
It is showing on it`s way on FR24, however the Pakistan CAA have said it must
do a route proving flight first which I am told it is doing and is AP-BMI and is
due this evening with no pax
Ian
Last edited by chaps1954; 15th Mar 2016 at 15:30.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Somewhere up there
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gate 18
Can anyone explain to me the purpose or benefits of removing the airbridge from Stand 18?
As it is, an arrival on to this Stand is about as good an arrival experience as one can get at a UK airport. You literally can be off the plane and into a taxi in less than 3 minutes with the aid of a gentle slope to speed you along.
No doubt in the time honoured tradition of airports and airlines - any good experience must be eliminated as soon as possible and made worse. We can't have SLF thinking that they get a good experience can we? What will they expect next? And after all people will put up with anything these days won't they? (How about paying extra for Speedy Boarding and get to stand on freezing cold stairs for longer than those who have not, as an unrelated example).
So now an arrival (and boarding) at Gate 18 means the usual soaking and having your hair blown into a curly whip in the swirling gale. Another step back. To hell with progress.
I now await the $hit-storm from MAN/MAG apologists/fanboys who will tell me I should be grateful that I get to use such an amazing facility or that the airbridge is being taken out of use 'due to customer feedback' or some other mealy-mouthed CR/PR nonsense that companies dole out these days.
Can anyone explain to me the purpose or benefits of removing the airbridge from Stand 18?
As it is, an arrival on to this Stand is about as good an arrival experience as one can get at a UK airport. You literally can be off the plane and into a taxi in less than 3 minutes with the aid of a gentle slope to speed you along.
No doubt in the time honoured tradition of airports and airlines - any good experience must be eliminated as soon as possible and made worse. We can't have SLF thinking that they get a good experience can we? What will they expect next? And after all people will put up with anything these days won't they? (How about paying extra for Speedy Boarding and get to stand on freezing cold stairs for longer than those who have not, as an unrelated example).
So now an arrival (and boarding) at Gate 18 means the usual soaking and having your hair blown into a curly whip in the swirling gale. Another step back. To hell with progress.
I now await the $hit-storm from MAN/MAG apologists/fanboys who will tell me I should be grateful that I get to use such an amazing facility or that the airbridge is being taken out of use 'due to customer feedback' or some other mealy-mouthed CR/PR nonsense that companies dole out these days.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Home away from home
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seeing as the new max width is 29m that sounds to me like Dash 8 use, which don't use airbridges anyway.
The only one on that stand using an airbridge seems to be the BA and they'll now have to go on different stands as they're too wide to fit on 18 once reconfigured.
The only one on that stand using an airbridge seems to be the BA and they'll now have to go on different stands as they're too wide to fit on 18 once reconfigured.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: U.K
Posts: 782
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stand 18
The airport wish to make stand 17 larger to accommodate a larger 'Dash/Embraer E75' sized aircraft, which in turn, means stand 18 will become smaller.
The only advantage I can see in the airport doing this is to allow St17 to be used as a 'Night stopping' stand. Although, this now means BA will be restricted primarily to Stand 41/Gate 141 which is quite possibly the worst stand/gate combination in the entire airport for both staff and passengers alike.
The airport wish to make stand 17 larger to accommodate a larger 'Dash/Embraer E75' sized aircraft, which in turn, means stand 18 will become smaller.
The only advantage I can see in the airport doing this is to allow St17 to be used as a 'Night stopping' stand. Although, this now means BA will be restricted primarily to Stand 41/Gate 141 which is quite possibly the worst stand/gate combination in the entire airport for both staff and passengers alike.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Manchester is going to be short of stands for the next 10 years or so
Do you believe that MAG intends to demolish the T1 site to leave some of the most valuable real estate on the complex undeveloped? I certainly don't. But I find it entirely plausible that the planned replacement T1/T3 structure is still in its infancy on the drawing board. The construction team has plenty to be going on with for now in the form of the T2 redevelopment. But ten years is a long time. Incremental planning applications will follow when the time is right. Conditions in the global economy will heavily influence the timescale ... low oil prices and goldilocks feelgood conditions won't last indefinitely. But if the demand is there, MAG will make provision to accommodate it.
Shed I perhaps didn`t word it well as there will be plenty of remote parking
but actually on terminal parking will be reduced for a while with bussing to stand
quite common
Ian
but actually on terminal parking will be reduced for a while with bussing to stand
quite common
Ian
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I understand the position and this was set out in the Planning Statement there will be at the end of the TP a net increase of 1 stand. This has been confirmed more or less by posts here and elsewhere.
That I find worrying because as we all know there is a lack of stands now at certain times and therefore in 1 never mind 10 years I would have thought or things being well you would need considerably more than 1.
Yes as Sheds says the way it has been done so far means things are underway and hopefully the airfield and the enlarged terminal will be better for all. However there is no guarantee there will be further improvements or more stands. I really think MAN need to find more stand space sooner rather than later otherwise expansion will stall.
That I find worrying because as we all know there is a lack of stands now at certain times and therefore in 1 never mind 10 years I would have thought or things being well you would need considerably more than 1.
Yes as Sheds says the way it has been done so far means things are underway and hopefully the airfield and the enlarged terminal will be better for all. However there is no guarantee there will be further improvements or more stands. I really think MAN need to find more stand space sooner rather than later otherwise expansion will stall.
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Leeds
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Viscount
I think the statement in the planning docs that there is an increase in one stand also includes the unusued stands that are currently being used as a car park but that MAN currently has permission to use as aircraft parking stands.
As shed has already pointed out the TP is likely to have subsequent further naming applications. Quite what that may include I am not sure.
I think the statement in the planning docs that there is an increase in one stand also includes the unusued stands that are currently being used as a car park but that MAN currently has permission to use as aircraft parking stands.
As shed has already pointed out the TP is likely to have subsequent further naming applications. Quite what that may include I am not sure.
The other thing is a lot of stands may well be splitable as they are now depending on aircraft using stand i:e 1 A380 or 2 B737. I think we are just going to have wait and see as they are not going to pump all this money in for no expansion
Ian
Ian
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The whole of the carpark to the west of the terminal -staff west etc has permission for use as apron and has for many years. They have chosen not to use them as there is more money in car parking and there have been distractions such as Airport City which in my view is a damp suib and has resulted until recently in a huge loss of car parking.
To get the planning through MAN have made it clear this is not expansion but transition to improve the terminal experience and to start to make the airfield more efficient. As a result a net increase of one stand when you consider all those on and around pier C will be lost, as will many on the "cargo apron" and those currently remote off T2. What is not clear is if the net increase of 1 takes account of the loss of stands on Pier A which will be needed to create a dualled taxiway opposite T3.
We know from MAN that the TP only increases the stands by about 1. What the exact figure is is not clear because there will be changes as things go forward. However any great increase in stands over and above those in place now plus say 1 will need more planning permissions for expansion. There is no guarantee if and when this will happen but there is one thing for certain there will be huge opposition
To get the planning through MAN have made it clear this is not expansion but transition to improve the terminal experience and to start to make the airfield more efficient. As a result a net increase of one stand when you consider all those on and around pier C will be lost, as will many on the "cargo apron" and those currently remote off T2. What is not clear is if the net increase of 1 takes account of the loss of stands on Pier A which will be needed to create a dualled taxiway opposite T3.
We know from MAN that the TP only increases the stands by about 1. What the exact figure is is not clear because there will be changes as things go forward. However any great increase in stands over and above those in place now plus say 1 will need more planning permissions for expansion. There is no guarantee if and when this will happen but there is one thing for certain there will be huge opposition