MANCHESTER 1
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Leeds
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It might not be much of a problem but the general preference is to arrive at the 'front door' particularly from a large a/c or long haul. Generally the more contact gates the better but MAG has other ideas with a gradual removal and/or poor maintenance standards of the existing, and little net gain following installation of new infrastructure at Terminal 2.
Should mean as a minimum that all long haul and full service airlines have access to such a stand.
If the plan is to adapt T3 to be the low cost terminal, it remains to be seen what they do. My understanding is that LoCos prefer non contact stands in part because it allows blading from both ends of the aircraft. If T3 is eventually expanded to allow this it would be a decent outcome.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Somewhere up there
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For people who have paid for a premium ticket - bussing is completely unacceptable and dishonest. Here's why.
One of the great benefits of the premium ticket is getting off the plane quickly, arriving further up the Border queue and on to your destination, hopefully dry and not windblown and disheveled.
With a bus you get wet and windblown and get to spend extra time on the bus by virtue of being first off. As more and more people get crammed in you get pushed and shoved further away from the door and the people who get on last get off first and gain the benefits that the premium passenger has paid for but not received.
Also whilst on the subject of bussing....how is that you are breaking the law by not wearing a seatbelt whilst taxying carefully in the aircraft and whilst seated and yet when you are careering round bends on the same apron stood up on a bus, safety comes a distant second to expediency and cost? I've seen a couple of nasty falls in such circumstances.
Not saying this is a Manchester thing - most airports are guilty.
One of the great benefits of the premium ticket is getting off the plane quickly, arriving further up the Border queue and on to your destination, hopefully dry and not windblown and disheveled.
With a bus you get wet and windblown and get to spend extra time on the bus by virtue of being first off. As more and more people get crammed in you get pushed and shoved further away from the door and the people who get on last get off first and gain the benefits that the premium passenger has paid for but not received.
Also whilst on the subject of bussing....how is that you are breaking the law by not wearing a seatbelt whilst taxying carefully in the aircraft and whilst seated and yet when you are careering round bends on the same apron stood up on a bus, safety comes a distant second to expediency and cost? I've seen a couple of nasty falls in such circumstances.
Not saying this is a Manchester thing - most airports are guilty.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 58
Posts: 897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: MCT
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It might not be much of a problem but the general preference is to arrive at the 'front door' particularly from a large a/c or long haul. Generally the more contact gates the better but MAG has other ideas with a gradual removal and/or poor maintenance standards of the existing, and little net gain following installation of new infrastructure at Terminal 2.
Well Dave 59, you do seem to have a downer on MAN. Can you substantiate
MAG has other ideas with a gradual removal and/or poor maintenance standards of the existing
As Dobbo Dobbo has said the contact stands will eventually increase with the TP. And as others have explained earlier, having a contact stand available for every flight in the peak even if you have room means that a huge increase in costs, not only to build it but to run it when it would lie empty most of the time. There is no business case for it and the airlines don't want it.
AFAIK the pain of going remote is regularly discussed and agreed by the airport and airlines and is shared out as equally as possible. At least this means that the agents and airlines can plan for a remote arrival / departure
Originally Posted by dave59 View Post
Well if they (and MAG) are so hard up let's have some provided by Transport for Greater Manchester, by way of a welcome to the city/region.
Well if they (and MAG) are so hard up let's have some provided by Transport for Greater Manchester, by way of a welcome to the city/region.
I agree that it is unacceptable for passengers to have to stand out in the rain however and the agents should supply separate buses for premium passengers - Emirates do it at Dubai and other places where they are bussed. Probably all comes down to cost again...
Last edited by Suzeman; 16th Jun 2016 at 11:20.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
Age: 63
Posts: 1,257
Received 150 Likes
on
93 Posts
Suzeman
Totally agree with your comments on Bussing. EK premium class separate Bus and of you go on the lap of DXB depending on stand although the stairs are not covered so you do get fried on daylight flights, and even occasionally wet ! While discussing EK I hope they do not change the lounge at Manchester too much when everything gets moved about, as I personally think it is one of the better ones on their network.
Regards
Mr Mac
Totally agree with your comments on Bussing. EK premium class separate Bus and of you go on the lap of DXB depending on stand although the stairs are not covered so you do get fried on daylight flights, and even occasionally wet ! While discussing EK I hope they do not change the lounge at Manchester too much when everything gets moved about, as I personally think it is one of the better ones on their network.
Regards
Mr Mac
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Dave 59, you do seem to have a downer on MAN. Can you substantiate
As Dobbo Dobbo has said the contact stands will eventually increase with the TP. And as others have explained earlier, having a contact stand available for every flight in the peak even if you have room means that a huge increase in costs, not only to build it but to run it when it would lie empty most of the time. There is no business case for it and the airlines don't want it.
MAG are not responsible for the ground equipment; that is for the handling agents to decide
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: UK
Age: 61
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably a silly question but can MAG specify minimum equipment standards for handling agents, ie re covered stairs etc. If they could it would seem to be worthwhile both in terms of health and safety as well as providing a better passenger experience in particular as bussing increases during construction work for the TP.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: stockport
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sure when our new terminal terminals are built they will be excellent and provide great bars, shops and facilities that suit our customers. Lots of folk only travel once a year and probably don't care if they are bussed or not to the aircraft. Recently we travelled through CUN and from the arrival at the gate to getting to the taxi rank took 2:45 hrs. No steps were involved
Cheers Sam
Cheers Sam
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The last few posted exemplify my original point on this.
Do we have to have the piers ?
Unless they contain lounges or masses of retail therefore providing income I cannot see the point.
Yes a nice to have but not if that means diverting potential traffic to other airports.
The area that Manchester covers is not that large considering it shifts 25m but we don't want one design problem to cause another and restrict overall capacity.
Do we have to have the piers ?
Unless they contain lounges or masses of retail therefore providing income I cannot see the point.
Yes a nice to have but not if that means diverting potential traffic to other airports.
The area that Manchester covers is not that large considering it shifts 25m but we don't want one design problem to cause another and restrict overall capacity.
Last edited by Bagso; 17th Jun 2016 at 05:58.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Business backing key to Northern Powerhouse - Manchester Evening News
......except of course when it's another MEN reporter (London based?) suggesting we ignore say Manchester Airport, and all troop off to Heathrow.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co....north-11478560
With MAG reps at this event I'm suprised they let the MEN peddle this propoganda to the audience without a robust response.
That said I'm even more suprised the MEN saw fit to place it as a banner headline.
......except of course when it's another MEN reporter (London based?) suggesting we ignore say Manchester Airport, and all troop off to Heathrow.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co....north-11478560
With MAG reps at this event I'm suprised they let the MEN peddle this propoganda to the audience without a robust response.
That said I'm even more suprised the MEN saw fit to place it as a banner headline.
Last edited by Bagso; 17th Jun 2016 at 06:12.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With MAG reps at this event I'm suprised they let the MEN peddle this propoganda to the audience without a robust response.
That said I'm even more suprised the MEN saw fit to place it as a banner headline.
That said I'm even more suprised the MEN saw fit to place it as a banner headline.
Ken O'Toole has responded and Business Desk have reported it. Can anyone read the full article as I can only see the initial bit?
Manchester Airport boss hits back at Heathrow third runway claims | TheBusinessDesk.com
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hit the link in @manairportPRESS and it by-passes the register text
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Leeds
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hit the link in @manairportPRESS and it by-passes the register text
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is a ludicrous assertion to make based on a weak argument. I wonder if LHR feel that they are loosing the debate?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.thebusinessdesk.com/mobi....ay-claims.html
Excellent response from KO !
PR Marketing have really upped the anti since my criticism 2 years back.
I take it all back.
Excellent response from KO !
PR Marketing have really upped the anti since my criticism 2 years back.
I take it all back.
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Leeds
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly - the debate is supposedly around aviation capacity for and in the South East. The North does not come into that debate.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly - the debate is supposedly around aviation capacity for and in the South East. The North does not come into that debate.
They're not 100% linked of course but they're not disconnected entirely, they can't be. This is why the likes of INV, LPL and LBA et al are so keen on LHR whereas MAN which competes on a different level and is not. It's not a regional thing in parts, it's a commercial business thing. #capitalism !
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Leeds
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed, but the argument that extra capacity in the south east needs to be justified by creating more traffic from the rest of the UK is a complete non-starter.
As you say, it is simply a commercial argument.
As you say, it is simply a commercial argument.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hainan Airlines have just taken up large office space in central Manchester on a 5 year lease. Expected to move to airport city thereafter.
-----------------
Monarch announced 1 weekly Turin and continuation of TLV at 2 weekly for the winter.
-----------------
Korean Cargo likely to start 2 weekly Tue/Fri with B77F from Sept.
------------------
Easyjet to announce 2 winter routes from Manchester in next few weeks.
--------------------
DHL to resume Leipzig flights with A300F sept-Nov as xmas relief flights.
--------------------
Tunisair to resume 2 weekly Tunis flights as TU8950/8951 from 3rd July to 28 August with A320.
--------------------
Cobalt start 2 weekly LCA on 7th July Thu/Sun. Rises to 4 weekly from 15th Sept with addition of Mon/Fri flights.
---------------------
Aeroflot to run 2 A330-300 flights in July taking Manchester United on their pre season tour.
----------------------
US pre clearance at Manchester expected to get signed off by Congress in March for a 2018/2019 opening.
-----------------
Monarch announced 1 weekly Turin and continuation of TLV at 2 weekly for the winter.
-----------------
Korean Cargo likely to start 2 weekly Tue/Fri with B77F from Sept.
------------------
Easyjet to announce 2 winter routes from Manchester in next few weeks.
--------------------
DHL to resume Leipzig flights with A300F sept-Nov as xmas relief flights.
--------------------
Tunisair to resume 2 weekly Tunis flights as TU8950/8951 from 3rd July to 28 August with A320.
--------------------
Cobalt start 2 weekly LCA on 7th July Thu/Sun. Rises to 4 weekly from 15th Sept with addition of Mon/Fri flights.
---------------------
Aeroflot to run 2 A330-300 flights in July taking Manchester United on their pre season tour.
----------------------
US pre clearance at Manchester expected to get signed off by Congress in March for a 2018/2019 opening.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Somewhere up there
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said Dobbo!
Colossal amounts of public funding towards infrastructure in London is draining away economic prospects in the rest of the country.
If London Heathrow - a commercial business owned by private capital wants to expand that's fine with me - but I don't want my taxes paying for it, particularly when it disadvantages places much closer and more convenient like MAN.
Colossal amounts of public funding towards infrastructure in London is draining away economic prospects in the rest of the country.
If London Heathrow - a commercial business owned by private capital wants to expand that's fine with me - but I don't want my taxes paying for it, particularly when it disadvantages places much closer and more convenient like MAN.