MANCHESTER 1
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another consequence of the Airports Commission’s analysis is that growth at regional airports would have to be restricted to allow expanded capacity at Heathrow"
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...rts-commission
Are we really that dim up here that we would not only allow a possible £12billion taxpayer spend on Heathrow? but at sametime allow some Whitehall xxxxhead suggest we will also need to dismantle your long haul network.
...well you know where you can stick that !
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...rts-commission
Are we really that dim up here that we would not only allow a possible £12billion taxpayer spend on Heathrow? but at sametime allow some Whitehall xxxxhead suggest we will also need to dismantle your long haul network.
...well you know where you can stick that !
Last edited by Bagso; 8th Aug 2016 at 18:16.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AA Chicago down-gauged.
AA MAN-ORD is now down-gauged to B767 for the rest of the summer, ACL interim report has confirmed. Disappointing but at least it may now run as I believe the Dreamliner was shared with a Far East route and delays with that often impacted on MAN.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: manchester
Age: 74
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please tell me I am not having flashbacks.
This morning I swear I saw a DC10 / MD11 climbing out of Manchester. I could not see any logo or tell what colour it was as the aircraft was too far away.
It brought back bad memories of long hours and lost weekends fettling Continental and B.A. jets many moons ago.
This morning I swear I saw a DC10 / MD11 climbing out of Manchester. I could not see any logo or tell what colour it was as the aircraft was too far away.
It brought back bad memories of long hours and lost weekends fettling Continental and B.A. jets many moons ago.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kerry Eire
Age: 76
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bagso,it isn't a case of being dim, it's a case of the government will do what the hell it wants. Manchester suffered from this attitude prior to deregulation when BEA/BOAC/BA went crying to government whenever any airline applied for a route ex Manchester which was thought likely to impact on their monopoly. The saga of the SABENA and Aer Lingus fifth freedom rights may be half a century or so old but the Londoncentric mentality is alive and kicking in every level of the government and civil service and Brexit will only make this even more so.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kerry Eire
Age: 76
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please tell me I am not having flashbacks.
This morning I swear I saw a DC10 / MD11 climbing out of Manchester. I could not see any logo or tell what colour it was as the aircraft was too far away.
It brought back bad memories of long hours and lost weekends fettling Continental and B.A. jets many moons ago.
This morning I swear I saw a DC10 / MD11 climbing out of Manchester. I could not see any logo or tell what colour it was as the aircraft was too far away.
It brought back bad memories of long hours and lost weekends fettling Continental and B.A. jets many moons ago.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Philbky is right. Your aircraft was MD11F D-ALCC departing as GEC8203 MAN-FRA. A regular freight run.
I once told an airline to stick its planes where the sun don't shine. Well, MAN needed the extra traffic! OK ... getting that coat. :-(
...well you know when you can stick that !
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bagso read it again, that's not what it says at all. You guys need to lose the chippy mentality here. MAN is getting world class new terminal facilities and US pre-clearance, no one relevent in the industry cares what HMG did with Sabena at MAN when 707s were all the rage anymore than SAS or KLM DC8s out of PIK would have become based A330s today only if BOAC hadn't objected. They would have gone anyway!
The "London centric" attitude was to protect the UK flag carrier interests at a UK airport, my geography isn't perfect chaps but even in days of monochrome, MAN was still in the UK and they were protecting British interests and jobs, something we should perhaps do more of. Do you seriously imagine BOAC would still be allowed to have flown long haul from BRU and harm SABENA? No, of course not.
Leave Heathrow to itself, bagso is actually going out of his way to build an anti-northern narrative that's not even on their radar. If Gatwick doesn't threaten them, and much to GIP's annoyance it doesn't, MAN barely registers. The whole BA operation could stop serving MAN-LHR tomorrow and it wouldn't dent plans for a third runway. Can we not celebrate all the positive things without banging on about the grass being greener elsewhere?
The "London centric" attitude was to protect the UK flag carrier interests at a UK airport, my geography isn't perfect chaps but even in days of monochrome, MAN was still in the UK and they were protecting British interests and jobs, something we should perhaps do more of. Do you seriously imagine BOAC would still be allowed to have flown long haul from BRU and harm SABENA? No, of course not.
Leave Heathrow to itself, bagso is actually going out of his way to build an anti-northern narrative that's not even on their radar. If Gatwick doesn't threaten them, and much to GIP's annoyance it doesn't, MAN barely registers. The whole BA operation could stop serving MAN-LHR tomorrow and it wouldn't dent plans for a third runway. Can we not celebrate all the positive things without banging on about the grass being greener elsewhere?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suggest you yourself re read the article skip.
When and if there is a recognition from Whitehall and the Treasury that there is life outside the M25 I will gladly remove "that chip".
For the time being it remains firmly in place !
Just out of curiosity if this were in your back yard and the same article suggested emissions around Heathrow were so bad we should possibly consider regional expansion, clearly at a "potential " cost to Heathrow would one be quite so circumspect meekly accepting that view
Or would one be screaming blue murder?
I suspect the latter.
When and if there is a recognition from Whitehall and the Treasury that there is life outside the M25 I will gladly remove "that chip".
For the time being it remains firmly in place !
Just out of curiosity if this were in your back yard and the same article suggested emissions around Heathrow were so bad we should possibly consider regional expansion, clearly at a "potential " cost to Heathrow would one be quite so circumspect meekly accepting that view
Or would one be screaming blue murder?
I suspect the latter.
Last edited by Bagso; 8th Aug 2016 at 18:49.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kerry Eire
Age: 76
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bagso read it again, that's not what it says at all. You guys need to lose the chippy mentality here. MAN is getting world class new terminal facilities and US pre-clearance, no one relevent in the industry cares what HMG did with Sabena at MAN when 707s were all the rage anymore than SAS or KLM DC8s out of PIK would have become based A330s today only if BOAC hadn't objected. They would have gone anyway!
The "London centric" attitude was to protect the UK flag carrier interests at a UK airport, my geography isn't perfect chaps but even in days of monochrome, MAN was still in the UK and they were protecting British interests and jobs, something we should perhaps do more of. Do you seriously imagine BOAC would still be allowed to have flown long haul from BRU and harm SABENA? No, of course not.
Leave Heathrow to itself, bagso is actually going out of his way to build an anti-northern narrative that's not even on their radar. If Gatwick doesn't threaten them, and much to GIP's annoyance it doesn't, MAN barely registers. The whole BA operation could stop serving MAN-LHR tomorrow and it wouldn't dent plans for a third runway. Can we not celebrate all the positive things without banging on about the grass being greener elsewhere?
The "London centric" attitude was to protect the UK flag carrier interests at a UK airport, my geography isn't perfect chaps but even in days of monochrome, MAN was still in the UK and they were protecting British interests and jobs, something we should perhaps do more of. Do you seriously imagine BOAC would still be allowed to have flown long haul from BRU and harm SABENA? No, of course not.
Leave Heathrow to itself, bagso is actually going out of his way to build an anti-northern narrative that's not even on their radar. If Gatwick doesn't threaten them, and much to GIP's annoyance it doesn't, MAN barely registers. The whole BA operation could stop serving MAN-LHR tomorrow and it wouldn't dent plans for a third runway. Can we not celebrate all the positive things without banging on about the grass being greener elsewhere?
If going back between forty and fifty years ago is too much for you and you are naive enough to believe history doesn't repeat itself, consider this. May says she wants one nation. Thatcher made out she had the interests of the whole of the UK at heart.
In 1982/3 the Airport Authority, the Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the Under Secretary of State for Transport and various civil servants held a series of meetings, primarily to make a case for a change in the way Manchester Airport was treated in regard to the persistent blocking of route applications through objections by BA and to include Manchester as a player in a number of upcoming bilateral negotiations.
Initially it was implicit that there was no interest on the government side in helping Manchester. It was stated explicitly in the final meeting when we (yes, I was there, you were not) were told there was no room for a major airport in the UK outside of the Home Counties. As Gil Thompson said "that's us told then".
He, of course went on to defy the odds and laid the basis of the airport of today, starting with the fight to get the AA service to ORD.
Now thirty odd years ago may still be too much for you so let's come forward to today. I suggest you read, understand and inwardly digest the following and then, if you can justify it, repeat what you said about Bagso.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/dat...h-east-england
This is not just a Manchester problem, nor an air services problem. It is a major problem for the UK as a unit and with a Cabinet dominated by Home Counties MPs, the rest of the country needs to sit up, take notice and work together to not only divide the wealth more evenly but to share the services and benefits as well.
PS re the SABENA service, they pioneered Manchester to New York when BOAC said therre wasn't a market, placed the 707 on the route when BOAC said it wouldn't work from MAN and , when BOAC had followed on their coat tails at every stage, got the fifth freedom rights removed as SABENA were stealing "their" market!
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airport City
As per my stern warning from 4 days ago that a few people need to wake up and quick !
China warns of 'crucial juncture' over Hinkley delay - BBC News
Wilst some may not appreciate a star appearing from the East with a red hue they are the only show in town re £1bn investment re Airport City.
So pleased Westminster will step in and replace Beijing if push comes to shove.
"What do you mean Ms May ....there's no money "
As per my stern warning from 4 days ago that a few people need to wake up and quick !
China warns of 'crucial juncture' over Hinkley delay - BBC News
Wilst some may not appreciate a star appearing from the East with a red hue they are the only show in town re £1bn investment re Airport City.
So pleased Westminster will step in and replace Beijing if push comes to shove.
"What do you mean Ms May ....there's no money "
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Manchester Airport is no saint when it comes to protecting market share in the 1970s using the regulatory channels available.
In 1978, Manchester Airport, together with British Airways, successfully blocked route applications from both Air Anglia and British Midland to operate services from Liverpool to Amsterdam and Paris. A whiff of hypocrisy I think.
In 1978, Manchester Airport, together with British Airways, successfully blocked route applications from both Air Anglia and British Midland to operate services from Liverpool to Amsterdam and Paris. A whiff of hypocrisy I think.
Last edited by Ametyst1; 8th Aug 2016 at 22:20.
The prevailing mentality on this thread - that MAN can do no wrong, any airline / terminal / public transport / local economic development at MAN must be sung from the rooftops (regardless of its relevance to your average PPruner) whilst any prospect of development elsewhere is a heinous sleight against the Manchester area - is becoming extremely tiresome. Anyone disagreeing with this doctrine seems to be flamed by the regular posters.
I have my own views on all of the above but in the hope of restoring some semblance of balanced debate to this thread, will refrain from expressing them. Is there a hope of any balance being displayed by any of the other regular posters?
I have my own views on all of the above but in the hope of restoring some semblance of balanced debate to this thread, will refrain from expressing them. Is there a hope of any balance being displayed by any of the other regular posters?
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The prevailing mentality on this thread - that MAN can do no wrong, any airline / terminal / public transport / local economic development at MAN must be sung from the rooftops (regardless of its relevance to your average PPruner) whilst any prospect of development elsewhere is a heinous sleight against the Manchester area - is becoming extremely tiresome.
Skipness laments that NW observers have little to fret about because MAN is getting new world-class airport terminal facilities in the form of the TP. But here is the point: that world-class facility is entirely financed by MAG itself, and MAG will be wholly responsible for paying back those commercial loans from its future business revenues. Conversely, corresponding projects proposed for airports in the SE require multiple billions in public funding to make them possible. The numbers quoted are staggering. That is the issue, and it is one which does deserve widespread publicity. Five decades of decorous silence have left us upstart provincials with Victorian rail infrastructure served by Pacer rail-buses and no major road link between large cities such as Sheffield and Manchester. So I disagree with you. We're quite right to bang the table on this.
But where I do agree with you is that this is not an issue limited to Manchester and the NW. The time has come for all the regions of the UK to demand more equitable distribution of public investment for infrastructure priorities. Surely you don't propose that we should just sit back and meekly accept a 6:1 per head (or worse) distribution in favour of London versus the rest? I'm sorry to tell you that I for one will continue to express my views on this national scandal for as long as it remains unresolved as a public issue.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kerry Eire
Age: 76
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air Anglia was formed in 1970. I am certainly not saying Manchester Airport has been squeaky clean but it is a matter of record going back to the early 1950s that it faced obstacles at almost every turn. Unlike Heathrow, which has lost money in the past and now pays corporate and private shareholders from its profits, it returned profits for four decades into local authority coffers and continues to do so. It is a major income generator for the region, apart from the Group's own profits, a major direct and indirect employer and a key gateway serving the UK's third most visited city. Other regional airports have their own very valid reasons for existing and being allowed to develop.
According to Demographia, the world census of urban conurbation's 2016 figures, London has 10.35 million people in an area of 671 sq miles. With an area of 243 sq miles the population of Greater Manchester is 2.66 million. If the square mileage around Manchester is increased to 670 the population rises to 7.25 million and this does not include any part of the West Midlands south of Stoke.
Greater Manchester's 243 square miles has the 178th largest population of any urban area in the world, equal to Tampa/St Petersburg in the USA, according to Demographia. The reaction of the citizens of Tampa would be interesting to observe if it was suggested that it would be best served by Miami, which is only 40-45 minutes aircraft time away gate to gate.
If London needs a third runway at LHR or a second at Gatwick, then so be it, but not at the expense of any other part of the country and the finance should be generated by local means. Manchester financed the £172 million for its second runway from retained profits.
However with a Londoncentric press headlining nonsense such as this: The UK hasn't had a new runway in 60 years - that could soon change - Telegraph when reporting on the story, the chances are every chance to twist the story in favour of boosting Heathrow will be taken.
According to Demographia, the world census of urban conurbation's 2016 figures, London has 10.35 million people in an area of 671 sq miles. With an area of 243 sq miles the population of Greater Manchester is 2.66 million. If the square mileage around Manchester is increased to 670 the population rises to 7.25 million and this does not include any part of the West Midlands south of Stoke.
Greater Manchester's 243 square miles has the 178th largest population of any urban area in the world, equal to Tampa/St Petersburg in the USA, according to Demographia. The reaction of the citizens of Tampa would be interesting to observe if it was suggested that it would be best served by Miami, which is only 40-45 minutes aircraft time away gate to gate.
If London needs a third runway at LHR or a second at Gatwick, then so be it, but not at the expense of any other part of the country and the finance should be generated by local means. Manchester financed the £172 million for its second runway from retained profits.
However with a Londoncentric press headlining nonsense such as this: The UK hasn't had a new runway in 60 years - that could soon change - Telegraph when reporting on the story, the chances are every chance to twist the story in favour of boosting Heathrow will be taken.
EK Cargo
Will the all A380 schedule for EK make a dent in the cargo figures at MAN?
Is it realistic to expect to see EK Cargo flights or will it simply now be trucked south / North to 777 services?
Is it realistic to expect to see EK Cargo flights or will it simply now be trucked south / North to 777 services?
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kerry Eire
Age: 76
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It depends how the figures are calculated. If all cargo that passes through the airport is counted, the answer is no. If the amount of freight that flies in and out is counted, then there is a likely decrease.