Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Airlines, Airports & Routes
Reload this Page >

Former RAF Church Fenton

Wikiposts
Search
Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

Former RAF Church Fenton

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11th Jan 2015, 14:19
  #61 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Another RYR this time from Malta goes around at the airport everyone from ringway loves.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 14:34
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I feel its quite difficult to peruse and respond to this thread, as I find Leeds Approach quite overly defensive against any counter arguments.


It seems you are deliberately trying to set this debate up to be one sided, and speaking to any opposing views as if they are stupid, which, is not what sensible debts is about in my opinion.
LAX_LHR is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 14:55
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Clarty Waters, UK
Age: 58
Posts: 950
Received 60 Likes on 31 Posts
Originally Posted by LEEDS APPROACH
........it is a million miles from the best idea for Yorkshire (now that church fenton is in the equation).
Ermmm....since when was Church Fenton "in the equation"? I can only think of one person who takes the idea seriously.......
Andy_S is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 14:56
  #64 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by LAX_LHR
I feel its quite difficult to peruse and respond to this thread, as I find Leeds Approach quite overly defensive against any counter arguments.


It seems you are deliberately trying to set this debate up to be one sided, and speaking to any opposing views as if they are stupid, which, is not what sensible debts is about in my opinion.
Please do respond. I am not defensive about anything and have absolutely no axe to grind. I cant apologise if everything I am saying just happens to be bang on the money can I? The debate is one sided because there is only one right answer; MAN is taking passengers from an area with a population of a small country simply because the airport in that region is very poorly connected and located and in aviation terms wholly insufficient. The ship has not sailed and I really hope Mr Makin gets church fenton started and doesn't let the politicians put him off. Will leave it for a bit now.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 15:44
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: North, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 936
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Do you believe that the North of England could sustain two Intercontinental airports or do you see Yorkshire International supplanting Manchester?

It does in part read that your business plan is the above, please correct me if I am wrong.

I would also comment that I am not convinced that Church Fenton would be easier for me from Calderdale than Manchester.

Having worked at Leeds/Bradford for a few years I am well aware of the pitfalls but it serves a need and is now doing it pretty well.
pwalhx is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 16:33
  #66 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by pwalhx
Do you believe that the North of England could sustain two Intercontinental airports or do you see Yorkshire International supplanting Manchester?

It does in part read that your business plan is the above, please correct me if I am wrong.

I would also comment that I am not convinced that Church Fenton would be easier for me from Calderdale than Manchester.

Having worked at Leeds/Bradford for a few years I am well aware of the pitfalls but it serves a need and is now doing it pretty well.
I did say I'd leave it but you know me..

I have always stated that MAN would never be overtaken by an airport in Yorkshire. The population of the North West is 7 million ish but there is need for a suitable airport in Yorkshire, just as in Scotland there is a decent airport at Glasgow and Edinburgh. The population of Yorkshire is much more than these two cities combined. Yeadon does serve a need but absolutely nowhere near well enough. MAN does 22 million passengers and Yeadon a shade over 3. That is utterly ridiculous when you compare the comparative sizes of the two conurbations either side of the pennines. This is purely down to Yeadon's location and airfield failings. To find out the relative distance and times of getting from Halifax to MAN and Tadcaster using car and train put it into google. Tadcaster is good equivalent to church fenton assuming the B road is upgraded. Or you could just put Halifax to church fenton but be aware this time will reduce with an upgraded connection to church fenton.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 16:54
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Usually in a bar!
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Regardless of the population of Yorkshire it simply wouldn't be able to make a "proper airport" work. The usual holiday destinations and cities yes but that is because airlines can make money from that type of destination with small to mid sized aircraft. The airlines have chosen Manchester to serve many more short/mid and long haul destinations because they know its the most accessible and will generate profit.
I think there are many on here that have no clue as to how airlines work and assume having a bit of tarmac equals the belief we deserve lots of flights.
Homo Simpson is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 16:54
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newcastle NI
Posts: 824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Leeds Approach, last month you were banging on about building a rail link to LBA without any serious consideration about how or who would fund it, this month its Church Fenton !!!

I think we all agree that if we were to expand LBA to reach the potential that its natural catchment area should/could provide, then we wouldn't start from Yeadon and Yeadon will probably never go beyond 5 million passengers a year with its current restrictions, its not really an international airport at all and the passenger facities are frankly a joke, i waited for 15 minutes in the polly tunnels open to the elements at 2c between Xmas and New year and despite only hand luggage it took 40 minutes to get landslide from getting off the aircraft! from what i could see there was just one Ryanair aircraft ahead and maybe the tail end of the BA shuttle and i doubt that would have more than 50 passengers.

Everything at LBA is done on the cheap apart from the £2 rip off for kiss & fly drop off, the Jet2 tent check in area, the Arrows taxi payment portacabin in front of the terminal, it all smacks of minimal investment, a poor mans EMA if you like.

So yes a brand new airport East of the city with good rail and road links would be ideal, a great idea that won't happen any time soon, in the meantime some investment in the passenger experience at LBA would be a good place to start.
Facelookbovvered is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 16:57
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,816
Received 201 Likes on 93 Posts
The Glasgow/Edinburgh situation is a good analogy, though perhaps not in the way that you mean.

The independent existence of those two airports within 40 miles of each other is an accident of history. No sane person believes that Scotland needs this unnecessary duplication and there has been talk for the last 50 years or more of a single Central Scotland Airport.

But that would mean starting with a clean sheet of paper, which isn't going to happen in Scotland, nor in Yorkshire.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 17:37
  #70 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
The Glasgow/Edinburgh situation is a good analogy, though perhaps not in the way that you mean.

The independent existence of those two airports within 40 miles of each other is an accident of history. No sane person believes that Scotland needs this unnecessary duplication and there has been talk for the last 50 years or more of a single Central Scotland Airport.

But that would mean starting with a clean sheet of paper, which isn't going to happen in Scotland, nor in Yorkshire.
That 'accident' as you describe it has a more accurate term. It is called 'market forces'. When a region has enough people they will demand certain amenities and services. That is why your airport for Scotland has never been built. People in Glasgow are not particularly interested in travelling to Edinburgh and vice versa. More importantly though Yorkshire has a population more than the entire country of Scotland. There is absolutely not a shred of doubt in my mind that an established and connected airport at cf combined with the gradual run down of Yeadon would result in one of the UK's busiest airports. People keep saying show me the figures.. The figures are simple ; 5.3 million people and growing.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 18:25
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Or per the CAA 3,314,395 passengers in 2013. So where are the 2 million extra passengers then?
Ringwayman is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 18:40
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Usually in a bar!
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think L A is failing to grasp how airlines work. It does not mean that Leeds as it is can't deliver more flights and passengers but it won't ever and nor would CF be a big player. Airlines will look at many factors before deciding to operate a service but just having a certain population does not equal flights all over the globe. Big airports offer a critical mass of passengers and the airlines whilst able to offer certain destinations from smaller airports use that critical mass. That is why so many are centred at Manchester or on a much bigger scale Heathrow.
Some airlines will clearly make money from Leeds and some will want to try new routes but to think that they would be qeuing up to get into CF if it opened is folly.
If the logic of we have a big population therefore we can easily turn that into passengers was right then Leeds would already be offering a lot more short haul into Europe, despite its drawbacks. It isn't because there clearly isn't enough demand to make money for a lot of airlines to operate there. For many it's better to have the flights from one big airport that can draw on a huge catchment.
Homo Simpson is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 18:43
  #73 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ringwayman
Or per the CAA 3,314,395 passengers in 2013. So where are the 2 million extra passengers then?
Going to other more accessible fit for purpose airports which is what I've been banging on about for the last 20 posts! Not that population of an area equates to airport passenger numbers anyway or there'd be 22 million people living in Manchester. What population shows is the potential of an airport IF its placed in the right location and IF it is easily and quickly accessible and IF it has good airfield characteristics. Which one of those does Yeadon have? That is why the figure is a paltry 3.3 million. Hence my wish for church fenton developing to properly serve the people of Yorkshire.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 18:46
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Leeds
Age: 63
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The idea of Church Fenton has been played with before; at a time when public money might have been forthcoming for aviation schemes: it didn't happen then and it won't happen now.

Many millions would be needed to convert some concrete strips into a fully functioning public transport airfield, this is before the improvements to road/rail access issues are considered.

I cannot see any commercial organisation coming up with this money for what would be a hell of a gamble. If public money is needed, North Yorkshire (in whose area it lies) won't even subsidise evening and Sunday bus services, let alone some major aviation project. Sheffield and it's region can't be expected to pay for something which will clearly be viewed as being of major benefit to Leeds, nor will Bradford, Halifax etc. as it is located on the 'wrong' side of Leeds.
I agree that Yeadon is always going to be second best, and an airport to the south of Leeds, built during the 60s/70s near to the motorways would have been brilliant, but we are where we are, and the answer is to make the best of what there is.
BKS Air Transport is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 18:49
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,816
Received 201 Likes on 93 Posts
Originally Posted by LEEDS APPROACH
Hence my wish for church fenton developing to properly serve the people of Yorkshire.
Fair enough. Nothing wrong with thinking wishfully.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 18:52
  #76 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Homo Simpson
I think L A is failing to grasp how airlines work. It does not mean that Leeds as it is can't deliver more flights and passengers but it won't ever and nor would CF be a big player. Airlines will look at many factors before deciding to operate a service but just having a certain population does not equal flights all over the globe. Big airports offer a critical mass of passengers and the airlines whilst able to offer certain destinations from smaller airports use that critical mass. That is why so many are centred at Manchester or on a much bigger scale Heathrow.
Some airlines will clearly make money from Leeds and some will want to try new routes but to think that they would be qeuing up to get into CF if it opened is folly.
If the logic of we have a big population therefore we can easily turn that into passengers was right then Leeds would already be offering a lot more short haul into Europe, despite its drawbacks. It isn't because there clearly isn't enough demand to make money for a lot of airlines to operate there. For many it's better to have the flights from one big airport that can draw on a huge catchment.
No I completely disagree with you. The reason that people are not using yeadon is because they live on the two main arteries ie the M62 and the trans pennine express (or south of it)and getting to MAN is infinitely less hastle (even for some people who live in Leeds). It is a motorway world. This has been found in every study ever done. Ease and speed of getting to the airport is king. We'll have to agree to disagree.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 18:56
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Going to other more accessible fit for purpose airports which is what I've been banging on about for the last 20 posts!
But shown NO EVIDENCE of who is funding your proposed vanity project or how much it will cost. The councils won't do it. The airlines won't finance it. Perhaps you've go multiple millions of pounds and will fund it. Then you've provided NO EVIDENCE of airlines that have stated that they are not starting LBA due facilities but would start at Vanity International
Ringwayman is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 18:58
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Leeds
Age: 63
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In the past, the lack of the M60 and a railway station was never a barrier to MAN developing.
BKS Air Transport is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 19:00
  #79 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by BKS Air Transport
The idea of Church Fenton has been played with before; at a time when public money might have been forthcoming for aviation schemes: it didn't happen then and it won't happen now.

Many millions would be needed to convert some concrete strips into a fully functioning public transport airfield, this is before the improvements to road/rail access issues are considered.

I cannot see any commercial organisation coming up with this money for what would be a hell of a gamble. If public money is needed, North Yorkshire (in whose area it lies) won't even subsidise evening and Sunday bus services, let alone some major aviation project. Sheffield and it's region can't be expected to pay for something which will clearly be viewed as being of major benefit to Leeds, nor will Bradford, Halifax etc. as it is located on the 'wrong' side of Leeds.
I agree that Yeadon is always going to be second best, and an airport to the south of Leeds, built during the 60s/70s near to the motorways would have been brilliant, but we are where we are, and the answer is to make the best of what there is.
As I said in a previous post if this massive opportunity is missed it will be down to politics. I am more optimistic because if someone is willing to upgrade finningley that serves urban Lincolnshire then some clued up businessman will at the very least get the tiny pea sized snowball rolling at the top of a pretty steep Yorkshire hill.
LEEDS APPROACH is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2015, 19:06
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Perhaps you could help us here. How much money was spent of sorting out Finningley to make it fit for civil use, and what was it spent on?

Found out the figure: £80 million from the Telegraph.

Note this paragraph:

"David Ryall, the managing director, said: "We are aiming to become the 'airport of choice' east of the Pennines for passengers and airlines alike. We hope to achieve that goal within the next five years, if not sooner."

I think it is safe to say they wanted to be the big Yorkshire Airport. But airlines have voted with their feet.
Ringwayman is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.